The old signs of the times

I would ask the Bishop how his church's vision of religious freedom has worked out for women in the last fourteen hundred years.

What incredible nonsense. No one is forcing anyone to be a member of the Catholic Church or any other church. If you can't accept what it teaches then you shouldn't be a part of it. The bishops are simply being faithful to their calling to carry on the work of Christ through the only institution He founded: the Catholic Church. Its early growth was fueled by its appeal to women for teaching the revolutionary doctrine of gender equality in the eyes of God. And the progress of women in society continues to be greatest in those societies where the culture has a Christian foundation. Politically correct drivel continues to be the standard in our alleged institutions of higher learning where historical deconstruction continues at a furious pace.

Father Jerry .... To you I say AMEN. We need more of you in positions of power in
the Catholic church. If we did, members would not be leaving the church in droves -
as they have been for years.

The Roman Catholic church does not tell you what to do.
I mearly points the way and lets you decide what is right or wrong.
Jesus was the founder of the true church, sorry your so wrong about that.
some of your facts are a little out of wack !

What do you call all the instruction He have to His apostles, a walk in the park.
He gave to Peter the keys, in other words He put him in charge, when He said "upon this rock I will build my church". There has never been a break from that day until the present. It is true some
things do change, but the church is true and everlasting. What happened to "faith".? God promised to make all things right, that includes His One, Holy, Catholic, Apostilic church. People are human, there have been mistakes made, but I promise
you the Roman Catholic Church will never end and it's doctines will always be true and now I ask you do you know the difference between mortal and venial sin? If you do why are you bashing the Roman Catholic Church !

Sorry to say, but there are quite a few who are ignorant confused or wrong.
You may want to give that a little more thought !

Oh, Jerry. I see that you’re still trying to justify your claim that the Church really is not the Church at all. The claim that from what I understand essentially is: There is no Church and there’s this idea of “church” being this invisible (whatever feels right for you) kind-of church.

I’m not going to even bother arguing your initial posting because it’s the opinion of myself and others (Catholic and Protestant) that you have a very misguided view on Ecclesiology. I've reviewed your website many times and you neglect to list specific events, historical dates, and incidents to these of the “political and sociologic factors” when the Church apparently became this body of men preying on the faithful, pursing a false agenda for whatever reason that you also neglect to identify. However, if you have published these historical dates and events on your website – I stand corrected and please link me to them.

Religious freedom means all religions, not just yours. There is no war on Christmas, seeing as it is a Pagan holiday anyway that was just called something else to convert Pagans to the Catholic Church. Just because some people don't believe in your god, does not make them evil. I have seen far more sins committed by people of faith than those without.

By the way Jerry, something else that really bothers me and many other downriver people I have the privilage of knowing is the way you call your church "Blessed John Paul XXll", the belated Pope of the "Roman Catholic Church", also using the word catholic in referring to "your"church, and calling yourself Father as if you were a priest, all wrapped up in one it sounds as if your trying to confuse people into believing you are in some way connected to the Roman Catholic Church only yours is a better way.

also saying Mass, I did not know that you were ordained.

That is a bunch of mumble, jumble if you ask me, I don't buy it!!!

You do not ask to be called "Father" but that is the way you address yourself.

I am a local pastor in Wyandotte serving First Presbyterian Church of Wyandotte. I have known Jerry Brohl and worked with him for the last five years. I have never ddressed Jerry as father nor have I felt any need to. Jerry is about as down to earth and non pretentious as they come. His driving passion in life is to serve the needs of people in the name of Jesus Christ our Lord. He is not interested in titles, power, or prestige from everything I have seen. All he wants is to hear God say to him 'Well done good and faithful servant' and love people through service. Keep up the good work Jerry.

Sorry Arthur,
I have known Jerry for the past 51 years and I still say his views and ideas are off the track.

Sharon,
I checked out your Facebook page. Would you be Sharon (King) from St. Joseph's parish? If so, we don't really KNOW one another at all, do we?
Jerry, COSF

The COSF after my last name stands for the Contemporary Order of St. Francis, a religious order of which I am a member. It has nothing to do with an educational degree.

I’m not exactly sure what your view is, Jerry. According to your website it seems to be a free for all. That’s why I said that I believe you have this “idea of ‘church’ being this invisible (whatever feels right for you) kind-of church.” Or, if it feels right – it’s ok. That is not what Scripture says at all. The God I worship gave us nonnegotiable laws to obey and then perfected them in the New Testament. In fact, that’s the reason why Jesus died. He died because he was perfecting the Law.

I don’t just read any piece of literature on the history of the Church. I’m way too skeptical to make that mistake. Why? There are demonic forces in this world that use people who are willing to cooperate with that evil to deceive others. What better way to deceive others and get them to question the Church by writing some junk through ignorance or competence. I’ve came across so many ridiculous articles/books (and I’m only 22 years old) that twist and skew things about the Church. Some are worse than others, but nevertheless, it’s all based on a lie from the beginning.

I don’t exactly know what you’re referring to when you said: “Even a cursory reading of any decent history of the Catholic church will show how human the church became from the 4th century on when the emperor and the pope allied themselves with one another.” What emperor? Constantine? Human? What are you talking about?

I don’t see how the fact that the pope is a monarch plays into your argument. If anything, you should be thankful that the Papal States were gifted to the Church. It gave Christendom security, whereas before, the Church spent its first three centuries as an unofficial organization, unable to hold or transfer property in times of persecution. As an absolute power, the Church was able to make allies in Europe for protection. As the ages went on, the Church grew into a powerhouse. If it wasn’t for the protection of the Papal States, it would have been so much more difficult to spread the Gospel while resulting in the success Christianity is today by going out to all the nations and proclaiming the Good News. To even suggest that the Church obtained great wealth only to pursue to a demonic agenda is treasonous. That is so wrong.

You cannot suggest that the Church is made up of only people. The pope, bishops, priests, sisters, brothers, monks, the faithful, etc., are not “the Church.” The Church is the organization itself founded by Christ through the Apostles (Apostolic Succession), blessed by the Holy Spirit, and not a mere mystical union of souls. As such, it resembles other societies. Like them, it has its code of rules, its executive officers, and its ceremonial observances. Yet, it differs from them more than it resembles them: for it is a supernatural society. Just because an official may make a statement or does something wrong doesn’t mean it was done or said in continuity with the Tradition of the Church. In other words, there is a difference between an official statement and a statement made by an official.

The fact that there were children of clergy isn’t surprising, is it? Now, there may or may not have been mistresses or illegitimate children of these clergy, but again, were their actions the official position of the universal Church? Is it the official teaching of the Church that there had been clergy and religious molesting children in their parishes? Does that make all clergy and religious molesters? Does that disprove the doctrines of the Roman Catholic Church? I don’t think so. Don’t you think that it is possible that even the clergy can cooperate with evil? I don’t recall ever being taught that all clergy and religious are perfect and you made this point to me here.

It’s very curious to me that you list all these vices of some of the clergy and then say, “While the leaders of the church have been sinful, we should not be scandalized or surprised. They are human after all. As human as the rest of us. We do hold them to a higher standard and, I believe, rightly so. They present themselves as teachers, spiritual guides, and guardians of the faith.” Ok, so, what was the point of mentioning it in the first place?

I think that you still have a lot of explaining to do. You presented this in a very poor way and I don’t understand how you expect me or anyone else to give you any credibility or continue the argument when you didn't exactly respond to my initial comment to begin with.

I simply asked for citations to back up the profession of your faith and your accusations against the Church. You gave me your personal opinions. I'm all about historical facts and dates here. I understand and I'm sorry if I come off as a jerk. I really don't mean to at all. Being that I'm defending myself over the internet probably doesn't help the fact either. I only get on the defensive when someone is trying to present the Church as something that it isn't. This has been going on for so long in history and it's just extremely annoying. I can't imagine why you have made the decisions you have made: to rise up against the Church and deceive others at the same time. My guess is not willing to be obedient, or just ignorant. Jerry, I pray that one day you decide to return to the fold that the saints believed of old and finally come to revoke these erroneous beliefs for the Church never closes her arms to those who wish to return to her. Please, please, please come back.

Mark,
You have chosen to accept absolutely and unconditionally the faith of the pope and his hierarchy. I have no quarrel with that. If that's where your informed conscience has led you then that's where you need to be.
I was raised in the Cathlic faith of my parents. As an adolescent, I began to do some independent thinking about a faith I had never taken personally but only experienced as that of my parents.
I was fortunate enough to live during Vatican II. This was a time in my life when I was trying to make spiritual sense out of what I was thinking and feeling. The documents that came out of that council were inspiring to me and gave me a direction which I am trying to be faithful to today 50 yrs later. Those documents are the "back up" to what I believe.
I do not think you are a "jerk". It's just that we are at very different stages of our spiritual development.
I am not against the church. Nor have I ever knowingly or intentionally deceived anyone about who I am and what I believe.
The direction set by John Paul II and continued by Benedict XVI caused a crisis of conscience for me. I had to decide whether to conform to their vision of the church and the faith or follow my own informed conscience which resulted from years of study, experience, reason, and prayer.
I hope the day will come when the church will open her arms to real diversity and make a place for ALL persons of faith and good will which is what I believe Jesus had in mind.

Jerry, I honestly cannot understand how you can essentially say: If that’s where you led yourself, then that’s where you need to be. Would you say the same thing to a Catholic becoming an atheist?

I consider myself fortunate not to be alive during the immediate aftermath of the Second Vatican Council. I’ve heard the horror stories from people of your generation and older who were stunned by the instant change in the Liturgy where on Sunday the sanctuary was filled with statues, candles, etc. The following Sunday they came back, everything was in the dumpster, Father became a talk show host, and good luck finding the tabernacle. Nobody was prepared for that. I couldn’t even imagine that feeling. Our Lady of Mt. Carmel is fortunately one of the few parishes around where there wasn’t such a dramatic shift right after. In fact, I heard from my grandma that Mt. Carmel was one of the last parishes to offer the Latin Mass. Cardinal Dearden had to force Fr. Juchniewicz to totally stop singing the Mass. Can you imagine that? Forced to stop having a Mass??

However, these drastic changes in practices (most especially in the Liturgy) came from many misinterpretations from the local ordinaries. That has become more and more evident as time goes on. Some ordinaries of course cooperated with evil to even deceive their own flocks to pursue some personal agenda contrary to the Church’s. We’ve sadly seen the effects of all these factors from the last 50 years: dramatic decreases in clergy/religious, the faithful, parishes, schools, seminaries, etc. Interestingly enough, it may come as a surprise to you that there is a strong rapidly growing movement in the Church today comprised of orthodox Catholic’s, lay and religious and they are people my age. A great example of one of these movements is in Ann Arbor – The Dominican Sisters of Mary, Mother of the Eucharist. It’s a new religious order. And that’s just one! There are about 150 sisters and I believe the median age of them all is 26. Whereas the religious orders of sisters: IHM’s, Sisters of St. Joseph, etc., got “caught up” in making so many radical changes to the point of not being able to identify themselves as Catholic anymore are dying off. The median age of those orders are like 80 or 90. They’re not getting vocations anymore. This is terrific evidence that the “revolt” following VCII proved only to be a disaster. Now my generation has to clean up the mess.

So, my question now is: By reading the Constitutions, Documents, and teaching instructions from Rome following VCII, how did it lead you away from the Church? I have also read Constitutions, Documents, and teaching instructions and nowhere does it say to follow my own will. If I’m wrong, please cite that for me. That seems rather backwards from my point of view. Shouldn’t we learn to have obedience and humility, rather than following our own will and “feelings” as you put it, and rather accept the gift of the Council in love and obedience to Christ and His Church? For goodness sake, your community is named after Bl. John XXIII. I don’t think Good Pope John would find this very appealing.

Actually, Mark, Vatican II kept me in the church. It was when John Paul II and Benedict started rolling back its teachings that I could no longer conscientiously remain. They co-opted Vatican II and are shamelessly re-writing its purposes and intentions. If there was recourse within the church to meaningfully challenge them, I would still be on the inside. Reform from within the Roman church is impossible.
By the way, I am being obedient and humble to the church as I see it. It is not easy to be an independent Catholic. It's much easier to go along with the power structure than oppose it.
You disparage "will and feelings". But they, along with intellect and conscience, are gifts from God that establish our nature and constitute His creating us in His own image and likeness. Those things make us like Him. They are what have caused me to be where I am in faith.