REVTHREEVS21
838K
11:01
SEDEVACANTISM DISMANTLED IN FOUR STEPS! SEDEVACANTISM DISMANTLED IN FOUR STEPS!!!!!!!!More
SEDEVACANTISM DISMANTLED IN FOUR STEPS!
SEDEVACANTISM DISMANTLED IN FOUR STEPS!!!!!!!!
kfarley
The retarded Koala returns.
kfarley
That is very harsh coming from a koala! I don't know how to take that-who can be mad at a koala bear even when they're lashing out at you? Thank you my little furry friend! I promise I'll visit you at the zoo this weekend and if possible bring those little koala doughnuts you enjoyed so much the last time. I'm sorry to have spoiled your day and I feel guilty because when you upset a koala bear there …More
That is very harsh coming from a koala! I don't know how to take that-who can be mad at a koala bear even when they're lashing out at you? Thank you my little furry friend! I promise I'll visit you at the zoo this weekend and if possible bring those little koala doughnuts you enjoyed so much the last time. I'm sorry to have spoiled your day and I feel guilty because when you upset a koala bear there is not much pleasure you can gain from the experience.
7 more comments from kfarley
kfarley
I'm at work now. I already told you that Mr. koala. I think short-term memory is possibly non-existent in you. I've noticed this pattern in your non-cognitive brain functioning.
kfarley
Weaver I can't be sure where you'll go after death. You are sedevacantist which is a very bad thing but hell may have a basic IQ standard and since you did not recognize a symbol of the Blessed Trinity the demons may find you too stupid to torment.
kfarley
Don't feel bad Weaver, koala bears have never been mentioned as one of the more intelligent beasts. You did not understand a picture of the Holy Trinity and you probably do not understand much of anything and that is why sedevacantism and you are a perfect fit!
kfarley
Weaver my "gay flying pigeons" symbol as you call it is The Father, The Son & The Holy Spirit-3 doves and the sun meaning 1 God. The Blessed Trinity. Sedevacantists like you are a sorry lot. Do you understand the picture now oh brilliant one?
kfarley
Weaver you are truly retarded. I think I'll ask Doina to get a poll function going on Gloria tv to vote like on American Idol. We could ask everyone on Gloria to vote yes if you think the koala bear named Weaver is severely retarded. Weaver I think the massive voting in favor of this proposition might completely shut this website down! Do you not realize how stupid you are? I cannot get into the …More
Weaver you are truly retarded. I think I'll ask Doina to get a poll function going on Gloria tv to vote like on American Idol. We could ask everyone on Gloria to vote yes if you think the koala bear named Weaver is severely retarded. Weaver I think the massive voting in favor of this proposition might completely shut this website down! Do you not realize how stupid you are? I cannot get into the mind of a pscho/retard but describe what it is like as best you can.
kfarley
Weaver even your choice of a koala picture was a stupid one. Trady is as stupid as you are but at least he had enough sense to use a knight on horseback for his Gloria photo-you use a koala bear! Making arguments as a koala bear is never a good selling point.
kfarley
Weaver you are truly a pawn of satan! It just goes to show how satan uses sedevacantists-he needs to use people who are low-functioning-that is the tragedy Weaver-it's idiots like you satan can fool easily.
REVTHREEVS21
WEAVER, how does it feel to be a pawn of the devil...lol...I will post this again...read it and WEEP! A Letter from a Devil on the Assisi Event
(in the style of Screwtape Letters)
A Letter from a Devil on Assisi: Traditionalist Misunderstandings

Dear Sneakylick,
I am very happy that you took my advice. Your patient is now leaning toward Radical Traditionalism. And I know what will make him cross …More
WEAVER, how does it feel to be a pawn of the devil...lol...I will post this again...read it and WEEP! A Letter from a Devil on the Assisi Event
(in the style of Screwtape Letters)

A Letter from a Devil on Assisi: Traditionalist Misunderstandings

Dear Sneakylick,
I am very happy that you took my advice. Your patient is now leaning toward Radical Traditionalism. And I know what will make him cross that line! One word: Assisi. When someone hears that word, they usually think of that stupid hippy Francis. "Make me a channel of your peace." Yuck! But we can redefine Assisi. You see, the Enemy's Vicar has done something which is very controversial. He invited unbelievers to pray with him! This sickens me. This is why.
You see, the 20th century was our century. We made countries fight each other in almost every decade. We got people to think of man as an object, instead of a subject. We got people to think that man was a mere production of economy. We also got people to think that if you are a certain race, religion, or culture, you are not a person. Not only that, we got them to persecute them! We murdered millions and millions and millions of people. Everywhere you go, there were condemnations. We hate Jews! We hate Blacks! We hate Catholics! I loved it! If not, they were also troubled because they had little money because of the depression. We made man depressed! They had no more hope!
The Enemy's Church knew this. She knew that that man wanted hope. To do this, she had to change her approach on teaching doctrines. She didn't want to follow the "Spirit of the Age" of condemnation. Instead, she wanted to teach truth against the false philosophies, to show that her doctrines are better than the false ones. When I made a person teach false humanism, she striked back teaching authentic humanism: that the perfection of man is life with the Enemy.
She also found a way to evangelize: ecumenism. She prefers to dialogue with other religions. You see, I made people have an "open mind." This means that they hate anything which sounds close-minded. In other words, they are close-minded when it comes to close-mindedness. So when the Enemy taught that His Son is the Only way, people rejected it because it did not feel right and not very open minded. We got people of hating Catholic doctrines such as existence of hell, that the Catholic Church is the only true Church, and so on. In fact, I made them hate Catholic doctrine so much, that they don't even want to hear it.
The Enemy's Church then made a new strategy. She knows that they don't like to hear those things, so she will present something which both parties agree on and work from there. For example, that ArchIdiot Fulton J. Sheen said that the only way to convert Muslims is through Our Lady of Fatima. He said,
"In any apologetic endeavor, it is always best to start with that which people already accept. Because the Moslems have a devotion to Mary, our missionaries should be satisfied merely to expand and to develop that devotion, with the full realization that Our Blessed Lady will carry the Moslems the rest of the way to her Divine Son." (The World's First Love, page 204)
This is what the Enemy's Church did at Assisi. That old charismatic idiot John Paul wanted to have a dialogue. He invited them to pray. Why? Because he wanted to soften their prejudice and dialogue is needed for it. At the same time, he will sneak in the Gospel. Of course, the Church does not condemn this, but your patient doesn't know that. Reginald Garrigou-Lagrange once said,
"It might be expedient for such to associate commonly with pagans and Jews in order to forward the work of their conversion, at least negatively, by softening of prejudice." (The Theological Virtues: Volume One On Faith, B Herder Book Co [1965], page 417)
But don't let your patient see this! Don't even let him try to see the rationale for this event. Make him the judge. Make him condemn the Pope! This is what we want! He doesn't know that communicating with unbelievers isn't necessarily evil, but they should be cautious of it. And if a doubt were to arise about the sufficiency of reason, the bishop should have the decisive last word (ibid). But he doesn't know that. He lives in a country where professors have to be refuted. He has a "debate" mentality. Every error must be refuted. Make him think that the only approach of evangelization is, "Go to Jesus Christ or go to hell!" And if they hear someone saying otherwise, he will refute it. Even though this is not in itself wrong, the Church prefers not to do this. However, make your patient think that the "debate" mentality is the only approach of evangelization. But most of all, never make him read what John Paul preached at the Assisi event itself! Don't make him read things like:
"...I profess here anew my conviction, shared by all Christians, that in Jesus Christ, as Savior of all, true peace is to be found, 'peace to those who are far off and peace to those who are near'" (Cf. Eph 2.17).
and
"His birth was greeted by the angels' song: Glory to God in the highest and peace among men with whom He is pleased" (Cf. Lk 2:14). He preached love among all, even among foes, proclaimed blessed those who work for peace (Cf. Mt 5:9), and through His death and resurrection He brought about reconciliation between heaven and earth (Cf. Col.1:20). To use an expression of Paul the Apostle, 'He is our peace.'" (Eph.2:14).
If he does read it, make him critique it! Make him say, "But look! It doesn't say Jesus is the ONLY peace! This implies that there can be other ways of achieving peace without Jesus!" Of course, it does not imply that at all, but who cares about truth! By condemning the Pope's teaching, he is condemning Paul's teaching and he doesn't even know it! John Paul is only restating what Paul preached.
But you can make your patient say things like, "But it doesn't say enough! It doesn't say, if you don't convert, you will go to hell!" You see, the Pope could have done that, but didn't. If he said something like that dialogue will be lost and we might have won their soul. But the Pope hates us. He doesn't want them to lose their souls to us. So he says only enough truth that is sufficient for them to hear. They believe in peace, and the Pope says Jesus Christ is the true peace. This might make them re-think their views of Catholicism. This might make them think that Catholicism isn't just condemnation and hell, but also a good and peaceful religion. But your patient doesn't know this. And don't let him know! Don't let him see the rationale for doing it!
Also, when the Pope wanted to have a dialogue, he permitted them to pray according to their own religion. Of course, if a person has religious freedom in any land, he should have religious freedom on the Church's home turf as well. John Paul permitted them to pray so that they can have a dialogue and he can preach the truth. This is because prayer itself is not wrong. No one knows or can control what a pagan for example, will pray to. If he pray to the false god, the Enemy might answer if it pleases Him.
This is the big distinction which you cannot afford to let your patient know. John Paul did not say, "pray to your false god." If he did, then he would be preaching falsehood. He invited him to pray, which again, isn't wrong. But your patient doesn't know that and don't let him. Instead, since he is theologically ignorant, make him condemn it. Make him say things like, "Look! He didn't stop them from praying to their false gods!" But if the Pope did do this, all dialogue will be ended and we could have won their souls. However, that old man didn't. He permitted it so that they can have a dialogue.
One final thing. You can make him disagree with Assisi, but your main goal is to make him condemn it publicly. You see, Cardinal Biffi disagreed with John Paul, but he did not publicly dissent from the Pope by writing articles in newspapers, websites, or blogs. What you want him to do is be unlike Cardinal Biffi.
Make him condemn it. After this, his soul is closer to our Father here below.
Your Uncle, Water Strider, senior devil
kfarley
I have to admit Weaver that personally you are so stupid that it is the koala bear picture that actually generates only the slightest reason for me to answer you-I have to pretend I'm actually talking to a retarded koala bear to even make this conversation remotely bearable.
REVTHREEVS21
WEAVER: HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHA, YOUR NOT A CATHOLIC WEAVER, YOUR AN ANTI-CATHOLIC PROTESTANT IDIOT. LOOK AT WHAT YOUR DOING...I TOTALLY LOVE YOU....MEET BOTH MY SWORDS, YOU LOSER....the Pope Kissing the Koran....your a pawn of the Devil, Weaver. YOUR WEAK! YOUR A SPIRITUAL CHILD....THE DEVIL, PRAYS ON WEAK, INDIVIDUALS LIKE YOU!
A Letter from a Devil on the Assisi Event
(in the style of Screwtape …
More
WEAVER: HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHA, YOUR NOT A CATHOLIC WEAVER, YOUR AN ANTI-CATHOLIC PROTESTANT IDIOT. LOOK AT WHAT YOUR DOING...I TOTALLY LOVE YOU....MEET BOTH MY SWORDS, YOU LOSER....the Pope Kissing the Koran....your a pawn of the Devil, Weaver. YOUR WEAK! YOUR A SPIRITUAL CHILD....THE DEVIL, PRAYS ON WEAK, INDIVIDUALS LIKE YOU!
A Letter from a Devil on the Assisi Event
(in the style of Screwtape Letters)

A Letter from a Devil on Assisi: Traditionalist Misunderstandings

Dear Sneakylick,
I am very happy that you took my advice. Your patient is now leaning toward Radical Traditionalism. And I know what will make him cross that line! One word: Assisi. When someone hears that word, they usually think of that stupid hippy Francis. "Make me a channel of your peace." Yuck! But we can redefine Assisi. You see, the Enemy's Vicar has done something which is very controversial. He invited unbelievers to pray with him! This sickens me. This is why.
You see, the 20th century was our century. We made countries fight each other in almost every decade. We got people to think of man as an object, instead of a subject. We got people to think that man was a mere production of economy. We also got people to think that if you are a certain race, religion, or culture, you are not a person. Not only that, we got them to persecute them! We murdered millions and millions and millions of people. Everywhere you go, there were condemnations. We hate Jews! We hate Blacks! We hate Catholics! I loved it! If not, they were also troubled because they had little money because of the depression. We made man depressed! They had no more hope!
The Enemy's Church knew this. She knew that that man wanted hope. To do this, she had to change her approach on teaching doctrines. She didn't want to follow the "Spirit of the Age" of condemnation. Instead, she wanted to teach truth against the false philosophies, to show that her doctrines are better than the false ones. When I made a person teach false humanism, she striked back teaching authentic humanism: that the perfection of man is life with the Enemy.
She also found a way to evangelize: ecumenism. She prefers to dialogue with other religions. You see, I made people have an "open mind." This means that they hate anything which sounds close-minded. In other words, they are close-minded when it comes to close-mindedness. So when the Enemy taught that His Son is the Only way, people rejected it because it did not feel right and not very open minded. We got people of hating Catholic doctrines such as existence of hell, that the Catholic Church is the only true Church, and so on. In fact, I made them hate Catholic doctrine so much, that they don't even want to hear it.
The Enemy's Church then made a new strategy. She knows that they don't like to hear those things, so she will present something which both parties agree on and work from there. For example, that ArchIdiot Fulton J. Sheen said that the only way to convert Muslims is through Our Lady of Fatima. He said,
"In any apologetic endeavor, it is always best to start with that which people already accept. Because the Moslems have a devotion to Mary, our missionaries should be satisfied merely to expand and to develop that devotion, with the full realization that Our Blessed Lady will carry the Moslems the rest of the way to her Divine Son." (The World's First Love, page 204)
This is what the Enemy's Church did at Assisi. That old charismatic idiot John Paul wanted to have a dialogue. He invited them to pray. Why? Because he wanted to soften their prejudice and dialogue is needed for it. At the same time, he will sneak in the Gospel. Of course, the Church does not condemn this, but your patient doesn't know that. Reginald Garrigou-Lagrange once said,
"It might be expedient for such to associate commonly with pagans and Jews in order to forward the work of their conversion, at least negatively, by softening of prejudice." (The Theological Virtues: Volume One On Faith, B Herder Book Co [1965], page 417)
But don't let your patient see this! Don't even let him try to see the rationale for this event. Make him the judge. Make him condemn the Pope! This is what we want! He doesn't know that communicating with unbelievers isn't necessarily evil, but they should be cautious of it. And if a doubt were to arise about the sufficiency of reason, the bishop should have the decisive last word (ibid). But he doesn't know that. He lives in a country where professors have to be refuted. He has a "debate" mentality. Every error must be refuted. Make him think that the only approach of evangelization is, "Go to Jesus Christ or go to hell!" And if they hear someone saying otherwise, he will refute it. Even though this is not in itself wrong, the Church prefers not to do this. However, make your patient think that the "debate" mentality is the only approach of evangelization. But most of all, never make him read what John Paul preached at the Assisi event itself! Don't make him read things like:
"...I profess here anew my conviction, shared by all Christians, that in Jesus Christ, as Savior of all, true peace is to be found, 'peace to those who are far off and peace to those who are near'" (Cf. Eph 2.17).
and
"His birth was greeted by the angels' song: Glory to God in the highest and peace among men with whom He is pleased" (Cf. Lk 2:14). He preached love among all, even among foes, proclaimed blessed those who work for peace (Cf. Mt 5:9), and through His death and resurrection He brought about reconciliation between heaven and earth (Cf. Col.1:20). To use an expression of Paul the Apostle, 'He is our peace.'" (Eph.2:14).
If he does read it, make him critique it! Make him say, "But look! It doesn't say Jesus is the ONLY peace! This implies that there can be other ways of achieving peace without Jesus!" Of course, it does not imply that at all, but who cares about truth! By condemning the Pope's teaching, he is condemning Paul's teaching and he doesn't even know it! John Paul is only restating what Paul preached.
But you can make your patient say things like, "But it doesn't say enough! It doesn't say, if you don't convert, you will go to hell!" You see, the Pope could have done that, but didn't. If he said something like that dialogue will be lost and we might have won their soul. But the Pope hates us. He doesn't want them to lose their souls to us. So he says only enough truth that is sufficient for them to hear. They believe in peace, and the Pope says Jesus Christ is the true peace. This might make them re-think their views of Catholicism. This might make them think that Catholicism isn't just condemnation and hell, but also a good and peaceful religion. But your patient doesn't know this. And don't let him know! Don't let him see the rationale for doing it!
Also, when the Pope wanted to have a dialogue, he permitted them to pray according to their own religion. Of course, if a person has religious freedom in any land, he should have religious freedom on the Church's home turf as well. John Paul permitted them to pray so that they can have a dialogue and he can preach the truth. This is because prayer itself is not wrong. No one knows or can control what a pagan for example, will pray to. If he pray to the false god, the Enemy might answer if it pleases Him.
This is the big distinction which you cannot afford to let your patient know. John Paul did not say, "pray to your false god." If he did, then he would be preaching falsehood. He invited him to pray, which again, isn't wrong. But your patient doesn't know that and don't let him. Instead, since he is theologically ignorant, make him condemn it. Make him say things like, "Look! He didn't stop them from praying to their false gods!" But if the Pope did do this, all dialogue will be ended and we could have won their souls. However, that old man didn't. He permitted it so that they can have a dialogue.
One final thing. You can make him disagree with Assisi, but your main goal is to make him condemn it publicly. You see, Cardinal Biffi disagreed with John Paul, but he did not publicly dissent from the Pope by writing articles in newspapers, websites, or blogs. What you want him to do is be unlike Cardinal Biffi.
Make him condemn it. After this, his soul is closer to our Father here below.
Your Uncle, Water Strider, senior devil

YOUR A PAWN OF THE DEVIL, WEAVER....NOTHING MORE OR NOTHING LESS!!!!!!!!! 🤗
kfarley
Weaver is happy someone is willing to talk to him-he's used to getting doors slammed in his face.
kfarley
Weaver how many years did they hold you back in school and how long was your brain without oxygen causing your condition-these facts from you would clear things up much more efficiently than you talking about your koala fantasies.
One more comment from kfarley
kfarley
Weaver that's ok-I've had enough fun with you for one night. You are very low-functioning intellectually and have nothing but sexual smears against our Holy Pope because that is where you come from-the gutter. I do thank you however because your postings tonight will have erased any doubt whatsoever of my claims of sedevacantists being psychotic. You did a better job in demonstrating psychosis then …More
Weaver that's ok-I've had enough fun with you for one night. You are very low-functioning intellectually and have nothing but sexual smears against our Holy Pope because that is where you come from-the gutter. I do thank you however because your postings tonight will have erased any doubt whatsoever of my claims of sedevacantists being psychotic. You did a better job in demonstrating psychosis then I ever could just making a claim. I'm sure all your fellow sedevacantists are even surprised at what a complete idiot they have grouped themselves with! I can't thank you enough for making the faithful Catholics on this website have no questions any longer about how bad sedevacantism is. You showed them-THANK YOU Weaver!
REVTHREEVS21
KFARLY, GET A LOAD, OF POPE MICHAEL WEAVER, he is AS stupid as Pope Michael. He is posting garbage, FROM ONE, TWISTED SOURCE. What a Joke. You might as well, be posting something from the NATIONAL ENQUIRER...LOL..HAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHABABABAHBAABHABHABHBAABHABHABHBAAAHAA
AND YOU ACTUALLY WANT US TO LISTEN TO YOU??? 😊 YOUR AN IDIOT WEAVER! YOU BELIEVE, ANYTHING, DON'T YOU! A TRUE, PROTESTANT TO THE …More
KFARLY, GET A LOAD, OF POPE MICHAEL WEAVER, he is AS stupid as Pope Michael. He is posting garbage, FROM ONE, TWISTED SOURCE. What a Joke. You might as well, be posting something from the NATIONAL ENQUIRER...LOL..HAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHABABABAHBAABHABHABHBAABHABHABHBAAAHAA
AND YOU ACTUALLY WANT US TO LISTEN TO YOU??? 😊 YOUR AN IDIOT WEAVER! YOU BELIEVE, ANYTHING, DON'T YOU! A TRUE, PROTESTANT TO THE BONE! HAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAA 👏 🙄 🙄
REVTHREEVS21
LOL AHAHAHAHAHAHAHA, WHAT POPE MICHAEL WEAVER, all you can come up, with...is stupid, jaded garbage, from ONE SOURCE, THAT HAS TOTALLY MISREPRESENTED EVERYTHING...THE CHURCH IS DOING! We are laughing hysterically at you! 😜 😜 😜 your an idiot, Pope Michael Weaver. Your sources, are TOTALLY FLAWED, A TOTAL MISREPRESENTATION....your an embarrassment, easily fooled....hahahahahahahahahaahahaha, a …More
LOL AHAHAHAHAHAHAHA, WHAT POPE MICHAEL WEAVER, all you can come up, with...is stupid, jaded garbage, from ONE SOURCE, THAT HAS TOTALLY MISREPRESENTED EVERYTHING...THE CHURCH IS DOING! We are laughing hysterically at you! 😜 😜 😜 your an idiot, Pope Michael Weaver. Your sources, are TOTALLY FLAWED, A TOTAL MISREPRESENTATION....your an embarrassment, easily fooled....hahahahahahahahahaahahaha, a 5 year old, can see through these lies..... 🧐
One more comment from REVTHREEVS21
REVTHREEVS21
🙂 Unfortunately Pope Michael Weaver, YOU HAVE BEEN BUSTED....CAUGHT IN MORE LIES...WHY DON'T YOU TAKE ANOTHER LOOK AT THE SO-CALLED, Sex-Change Article, and you can see, where your movement, is so desperate, its lying... 🤦
Vatican says 'sex-change' operation
does not change person's gender

By John Norton Catholic News Service
VATICAN CITY (CNS) -- After years of study, the Vatican's doctrinal …More
🙂 Unfortunately Pope Michael Weaver, YOU HAVE BEEN BUSTED....CAUGHT IN MORE LIES...WHY DON'T YOU TAKE ANOTHER LOOK AT THE SO-CALLED, Sex-Change Article, and you can see, where your movement, is so desperate, its lying... 🤦

Vatican says 'sex-change' operation
does not change person's gender

By John Norton Catholic News Service

VATICAN CITY (CNS) -- After years of study, the Vatican's doctrinal
congregation has sent church leaders a confidential document
concluding that "sex-change" procedures do not change a person's
gender in the eyes of the church.

Consequently, the document instructs bishops never to alter the sex
listed in parish baptismal records and says Catholics who have
undergone "sex-change" procedures are not eligible to marry, be
ordained to the priesthood or enter religious life, according to a
source familiar with the text.

The document was completed in 2000 and sent "sub secretum" (under
secrecy) to the papal representatives in each country to provide
guidance on a case-by-case basis to bishops. But when it became clear
that many bishops were still unaware of its existence, in 2002 the
congregation sent it to the presidents of bishops' conferences as
well.

"The key point is that the (transsexual) surgical operation is so
superficial and external that it does not change the personality. If
the person was male, he remains male. If she was female, she remains
female," said the source.

Bishop Wilton D. Gregory of Belleville, Ill., president of the U.S.
bishops' conference, sent a brief letter to U.S. bishops in October
informing them of the Vatican document and highlighting its
instruction not to alter parish baptismal records, except to make a
notation in the margin when deemed necessary.

"The altered condition of a member of the faithful under civil law
does not change one's canonical condition, which is male or female as
determined at the moment of birth," Bishop Gregory wrote.

The Vatican text defines transsexualism as a psychic disorder of
those whose genetic makeup and physical characteristics are
unambiguously of one sex but who feel that they belong to the
opposite sex. In some cases, the urge is so strong that the person
undergoes a "sex-change" operation to acquire the opposite sex's
external sexual organs. The new organs have no reproductive
function.

The document's conclusions close one area of controversial
speculation that arose in Italy in the late 1980s when a priest
publicly announced he had undergone a "sex-change" operation.

Given church teaching that only males can be validly ordained
priests, the question posed in newspapers at the time was whether a
priest who undergoes a "sex-change" operation remains a priest --
the answer is "yes" -- and whether a woman who undergoes the
procedure can be ordained -- "no."

A Vatican source said the text was prepared largely by Jesuit Father
Urbano Navarrete, now a retired canon law professor at Rome's
Gregorian University.

In 1997, Father Navarrete wrote an article on transsexualism in an
authoritative canon law journal and has been consulted by the
doctrinal congregation on specific cases involving transsexualism and
hermaphroditism.

The priest, citing confidentiality rules, declined to speak on the
record to Catholic News Service for this story.

The Vatican document's specific points include:

-- An analysis of the moral licitness of "sex-change" operations. It
concludes that the procedure could be morally acceptable in certain
extreme cases if a medical probability exists that it will "cure" the
patient's internal turmoil.

-- But a source familiar with the document said recent medical evidence
suggested that in a majority of cases the procedure increases the
likelihood of depression and psychic disturbance.

-- A provision giving religious superiors administrative authority to
expel a member of the community who has undergone the procedure. In
most cases of expulsion from religious life, the superior must
conduct a trial.

-- A recommendation of psychiatric treatment and spiritual counseling
for transsexual priests. It suggests they can continue to exercise
their ministry privately if it does not cause scandal.

-- A conclusion that those who undergo sex-change operations are
unsuitable candidates for priesthood and religious life because of
mental instability.

-- A conclusion that people who have undergone a sex-change operation
cannot enter into a valid marriage, either because they would be
marrying someone of the same sex in the eyes of the church or because
their mental state casts doubt on their ability to make and uphold
their marriage vows.

-- An affirmation of the validity of marriages in which one partner
later undergoes the procedure, unless a church tribunal determines
that a transsexual disposition predated the wedding ceremony.

END
kfarley
Weaver-get Jim Condit Jr. to speak with you-you said you thought he was great. I'm betting that even Condit knows that talking with you would make him look stupid so he wouldn't think of it. Come on koala-ask your buddy aboard to agree with your nutty dialogue!
kfarley
I don't have an idea of a pope-I'm not sedevacantist!-Leave it to a dumb koala to make such a statement.