Cleansing Fire

Defending Truth and Tradition in the Roman Catholic Church


Fr. Spilly continues to bite his thumb at Church teaching

November 25th, 2011, Promulgated by benanderson

Perhaps Fr. Spilly would be interested in Romanorum Coetibus.

again, this link from Fr Z: So why don’t liberal Catholics leave the Church?

Better question – why are liberal priests permitted to do and say as they please? Where is the sense of order in our diocese? I wonder if the topic of renegade priests came up (or will come up) in Bishop Clark’s Ad Limina visit.

And a reminder that the idea women’s ordination is a done deal.


Wherefore, in order that all doubt may be removed regarding a matter of great importance, a matter which pertains to the Church’s divine constitution itself, in virtue of my ministry of confirming the brethren (cf. Lk 22:32) I declare that the Church has no authority whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on women and that this judgment is to be definitively held by all the Church’s faithful.

more from Jimmy Akin here.



11 Responses to “Fr. Spilly continues to bite his thumb at Church teaching”

  1. avatar LizaJane says:

    It’s amazing how people can say they disagree with most of the fundamentals of a current establishment and insist that they are still in full union with the establishment.

    Look, if I claimed myself to be vegan (I consume meat and dairy on an almost daily basis) these people would be down my throat!!!

  2. avatar Sassy says:

    And this will strengthen the church how? I feel it’s unorthodox teachings like his that have led to the weakening of the Church. What he proposes will take down the whole institution. Or is this what he wants?

  3. avatar JLo says:

    This is just so disheartening to all of us, that a priest, and one with a parish to father, is allowed to speak and write the things this priest does!!! He should be sent away for a long, long retreat and some solid mentoring… the man needs help!! If he does not then believe what Holy Mother Church teaches, the man should be laicized or at least retired from public ministry of ANY kind, because, plainly, he is not Catholic. His choice, certainly, but he cannot be just anything he wants, say and work for and teach anything he wants to and still be part of Catholic ministry. This is just so dishonest, and so very damaging, especially to the children in his care… they are being cheated out of authentic Catholic teachings!

    WHERE IS THE BISHOP? This stuff Fr. Spilly espouses is so very contrary to Catholic beliefs and must not be allowed! Every person in this priest’s parish should personally contact Fr. Spilly and tell him they object to his teaching things contrary to the Faith. If he persists, every person should contact the bishop with their concerns. If Fr. Spilly still persists in his bogus teachings, every envelope should be withheld and every parishioner should stand in the aisles in protest when the man speaks. His soul, theirs, and their children’s are at stake.

    If the people of St. Elizabeth Ann Seton do not act to stop these heresies from being spoken in their church and taught to their children, they are sheep mindlessly led to slaughter; and with all the avenues we have today for information, no one will be able to plead ignorance before the Lord… we all have a responsibility to know our Faith! Speak up, people of EAS! Your souls depend upon your standing up for the Faith, for He Who is Truth. Be a member of the Fellowship of the Unashamed who Christ will recognize when He comes… and He will come to all of us and to each of us.


  4. avatar Richard Thomas says:

    Fr. spilly is the poster boy for the bishop. He could never suppress someone who proclaims things he believes. Everything the bishop has done dovetails into what Fr. Spilly has spoken.

    JLo, People have complained to the bishop for years. He has basically tole them to “kiss off”.

    Yes, you are right. He will have to answer for what he has taught. And for giving scandal to these “Little ones”, it would be better if a millstone were tied around his neck and he were thrown into the sea.

    Pray for him, the bishop, and all heretetical priests and nuns. Pray for all the religious and the ordained.

  5. avatar Diane Harris says:

    “What do you think?” the Reverend Spilly, heir apparent to Reverend Charles Curran, asks in his recent bulletin letter. I’ll say what I think by re-writing his little bulletin article, dangled in front of the faithful as bait for hell, as focus for division or, in Christ’s end-times warnings: “so as to lead astray, if possible, even the elect.” Matthew 24:24.

    The Re-Write: “One of the ways in which the Church can be involved in these issues is by being faithful to the role which Christ handed over to Peter: to bind on earth and have it bound in heaven, and to loose on earth and have it loosed in heaven. The Church should provide (and does) wisdom and encouragement on these issues to true believers, who are doing their best to live obediently to the Catholic Faith. Unfortunately, today’s Church is crippled by people like Fr. Spilly 1) who think and/or act like he knows better than the Pope, 2) who seems to reject the teaching of the Church under whose mantle he purports to lead and be responsible for souls, and/or 3) who searches for an alternative to living faithfully and responsibly within the “institutional structure” to which he sought entry as priest. Quite frankly, he ought to leave if he can’t be faithful to the Church’s teachings, rather than leading an innocent flock to destruction. It is people like Fr. Spilly, and those who encourage, permit, wink at, or refuse to discipline him, who have become “stumbling blocks” to the Church’s own members, and yes – also to society—by demeaning and profaning the sacred, by questioning over and over what has already been given as Truth.

    Fr. Spilly is correct about one thing: “With the recent sexual abuse crisis that has plagued the Church (yes, capital C please) here and throughout the world, we know there is something dysfunctional.” What is dysfunctional is whiners like Fr. Spilly and his ilk in Call to Action who advocate that which repeatedly and horrifically undermines the Church. He is living in a dark corner of failed wishes of their personal views of Vatican II. He touts a 1990 ad in the ultra-liberal NY Times signed by a measley 4500 people who call themselves Catholics? 0.01% of US Catholics signed something more than 20 years ago? Big Deal. In what age is Fr. Spilly really living now?

    Yes, there should be reform. And it is people like Fr. Spilly who need to be warned, disciplined, penitent and reformed, or else removed from active ministry. The same goes for bishops who let supposed priests get so far out of control, and go off and even receive awards for their missteps, creating a culture of scandal. Yes, there should be reform, and it should begin with Fr. Spilly.

    Pope John Paul II settled the question once and for all about women not entering the priesthood and a diocese of priestesses is not going to change that reality. Ideas about voting on what should be a sin, sexual or not, is not going to change what is actually a sin. If married men want to be priests, there are plenty of opportunities in the Eastern Rites of the Church, or elsewhere. Why lump it in with what is a sin? Fr. Spilly should not link what is merely administrative or permitted or even encouraged (e.g. transparent finance, due process, dialogue) with what is sinful (reinventing sexual sin definitions, encouraging scandal or dissent, or even potential sacrilege to Holy Orders). Such linkage only confuses or even cloaks the actuality of sin.

    There are valid reasons to improve financial reporting, not the least of which is that finance is an easy measure of whether or not a leader can be trusted. Nothing is stopping Fr. Spilly from making his parish a model of dialogue to build up the Body of Christ, and of financial responsibility and reporting, is there? But to lump it all under his opening salvo regarding sexual abuse is false reasoning and illogical. There are indeed valid reasons to improve dialogue, but it starts in the pulpit with the ordained either espousing the teaching of the church, (the whole teaching and nothing but the teaching) or getting out of the sanctuary. There are too many priests and bishops (and gratuitous organizations like Call to Action or Fortunate Families) undermining Catholic teaching, or raising needless doubts. The argument, for example, that pedophilia and child abuse (which is mostly of boys) doesn’t have its roots in homosexuality, or that homosexuality is normal when the Church calls it ‘objectively disordered’, doesn’t make sense.

    You want dialogue, Fr. Spilly? Then lets talk about the immediate removal from the priesthood of all homosexual activist priests, and maybe of all homosexual priests as well, especially if they hid their orientation before ordination. And let’s stop using “women’s rights” in the pulpit as a smokescreen for other issues like gay priests, which are far more divisive to the priesthood, who taint the vocation of good holy men, and who pollute the seminaries so good candidates don’t even want to be associated with a priestly vocation. THAT, Fr. Spilly, is what is dysfunctional. And any priest who would foment dissent to Church teaching among his own parishioners, while ignoring what is most relevant, has trapped his own soul. Such dissent from Church teaching, to use your own words in reverse, is NOT “needed in our Church today.”

    Academic freedom? Not in a Catholic university, not to teach against Catholic principles. Isn’t that why Fr. Curran was stripped of his faculty to teach in a Catholic school and had to go to one that is Methodist? How then, is he promoted to speak to the people in the pews at Transfiguration Parish? Academic freedom to undermine Church teaching can only have a goal of destroying the souls of the young and unformed. It should not be allowed in universities, and especially not in local parishes.

    The Conclusion: Go someplace else to redesign the teachings of a 2000 year old church. Or repent, and be faithful to the vows of your ordination day. You asked what I think? This is what I think: “we should explore in dialogue: how the Church can purify itself of the elements of division that have entered, such as through your words and actions.” As Pope Paul VI said: The smoke of Satan has entered the Church. And the cries from the pulpit and in local church bulletins to undermine Church teaching further, in order to accommodate one’s own personal opinions, seem like the shriek of demons from the shadowy recesses who will not settle for anything less than feeding on souls. But that is just my opinion, which you seemed to want to hear. Thank you for asking.

    Diane Harris

    Readers: If you agree with all, any part or want to send your own comments on Fr. Spilly’s words, you might want send copies and/or write to:

    His Eminence
    Mauro Cardinal Piacenza
    Prefect, Congregation for the Clergy
    Piazzo Pio XII 3 00193

  6. avatar Ben Anderson says:

    excellent, Diane!

  7. avatar Richard Thomas says:


    I wonder if people like Fr. Spilly only get their courage when they are surrounded by like minded people. Are they as brave when they are alone? And they are also very brave when they control the agenda, the discussion and when they can regulate who talks, who asks questions etc. I wonder that if a huge number of people. who support the Majesterium, attend one of these meetings, what would transpire? Probably a much different outcome than what the dissenters has planned.

    Logic always brings out the stupidity of those relying on ideology.

  8. avatar Mary-Kathleen says:

    I like this quote of Fr. Ray Blake’s of Brighton, England for the Fr. Spilly’s of this world:
    “In a social milieu that encourages the expression of a variety of opinions on every question that arises, it is important to recognize dissent for what it is, and not to mistake it for a mature contribution to a balanced and wide-ranging debate. It is the truth revealed through Scripture and Tradition and articulated by the Church’s Magisterium that sets us free. ”

    found in Fr. Z’s blog

  9. avatar Diane Harris says:

    Good point, Richard. I don’t know how it is with Fr. Spilly or other parishes, but I can say that under Fr. Ring in Our Lady of the Lakes there was generally either no discussion or very manipulated discussion. At some point I’ll post examples ranging from parishioners told they were not allowed to discuss items which they themselves had identified for concern, to Karen Rinefierd’s very manipulated “forums” on pastoral planning in which people were told they couldn’t criticize her proposed configurations, they could only add value to the proposals…..and more, much more. So very much to cover; so little cyberspace to do it.

  10. avatar Richard Thomas says:


    The proof in the pudding would be if a sizeable number of people, loyal to the majesterium, attended the meeting and refuted everything stated contrary to the heretic’s statements. How would they be received. I can’t but would people be interested in goint there. It’s a big treck….Only a thought.

  11. avatar Gretchen says:

    Diane, when our parish leadership presented its ‘Strategic Way Rollout’ plans (June 2010) for the future, we were also not allowed to criticize the plan. Our option was to say what we liked about the program.

    It was frustrating, to say the least, especially when it was a complete surprise to the vast majority of parishioners who had no idea what was being planned on their behalf.

    And you made me laugh when you said, “So very much to cover; so little cyberspace to do it.” The story of my life. 🙂

    Gretchen from SOP

Leave a Reply

Log in | Register

You must be logged in to post a comment.

-Return to main page-