The well-known homilist Fr. Robert Altier is under orders from his Minnesota bishop to stop distributing his talks via internet. We don't know the rationale for this yet, so I have snapped up a copy of his audio files (without his knowledge, of course) and saved it at my home machine (subject to change). I haven't listened to much there, but I'm favorably impressed so far. The audio files use a proprietary commercial format called DSS, so you'll probably need to install the "Olympus DSS Lite" player.
Note to downloaders: Limit your downloading to one connection at a time. A guy in Florida is currently reading five files at once and eating my home machine's entire bandwidth.
Nice audio grab, RC!
Never has been a convert act been so public. :)
you can also get them directly...
for audio: http://web.archive.org/web/20041011072642/www.desertvoice.org/Audio.html
for text:
http://web.archive.org/web/20041011073746/www.desertvoice.org/Written.html
It will ave your bandwith!
von
Altier sez: "I got sick and tired of all the lies. I just laid it out. There are three groups that have infiltrated the Church, the Masons, the Communists, and the homosexuals, who came in 1924."
Uh ...
KEvin..
Maybe he put it pretty bluntly, I give ya that.. But Fr Corapi, Fr Groeschel, Bishop Bruskewitz, Bishop Vasa, Bishop Wenski and several others come to mind .. saying the exact same thing...
Its time to stop watering down the truth fo what the American Church has become. Maybe I need to run back to my homeland-- Poland... Where the truth has always been spoken.
I have to wonder what 1924 event he's referring to: some Communist strategy of corrupting/infiltrating the Church?
von: That's not just blunt - that's goofy. And I know Bruskewitz pretty well, as he was my parish pastor in a Milwaukee suburb before he was made Bishop of Lincoln, and I never heard him say anything quite like that.
Between that and the claims that TaT is somehow morally unacceptable, I'm gonna say I suspect that Archbishop Flynn knows what he's doing here, even though I think he should also have dealt more firmly with some other problems in the archdiocese (the "Rainbow" folks; St. Joan of Arc parish).
Kevin: TaT is ludicrous. I've seen the program firsthand when our Ed board was reviewing it.
CAn you honestly can tell me that you think this program is legit and good for our children? You have seen it and reviewed it and deem it acceptable?
Its much to explicit for my liking. I think I can handle what and what not to tell my children, its my God-given responsibility as a parent. I do however understand that some parents don't take this responsibility and that is quite unfortunate. I don't know of an alternative to that problem. Tat, IMHO is not appropriate whatsoever.
Until I see anything approved from Rome, I will not comply to what the USCCB assumes is an appropriate program. The Charter to date has not been enacted into law by the Holy See so therefore it has no legal binding upon any of us, including the Bishops. Primary example are the many comments from Bshps Vasa, Chaput, Bruskewitz who have been most outspoken regarding this.
Even before the scandals, we have instructed our children regarding abuse and what proper touching is and what it is not. Same as most parents talk to their children about stranger danger and so on.
I'd love to discuss this further with you, it's become quite an interesting conversation. No pun intended.
Pax..
von: I've read what may be one of the most extensive and intensive critiques of Tat (Bettinelli's), and I think it's mostly nonsense. I do have questions about the prudence of the program given the history of the people who were involved in developing it - I think that using something with that history sends a questionable signal. And I certainly think, per Catholic teaching (and right reason), that there needs to be an "opt out" provision for parents. But I simply don't see any evidence that the program is in itself morally unacceptable. I think that claims to that effect are based on a serious misreading of what the Church actually teaches about "sex ed" - along the lines of the sorts of misreadings that has in the past led the Vatican to rebuke some critics (like, as I recall, Mothers' Watch) of some chastity programs (like TeenStar).
... And in any case - I certainly think there's likely to be something wrong with a priest who not only takes public issue with his bishop over TaT, but also combines that with some sort of kooky babbling about Freemasons, Communists, and 1924.
As I said - I know Bruskewitz, and to liken this priest to Bruskewitz is an insult to Bruskewitz.
I was the idiot that stole your bandwidth. My software was automatically set to 5 and I am deeply sorry. Please forive me. Thanks for the heads up though on Fr. Altier. I find his work to be very enlightened.
Kevin,
I have no idea where that 1924 thing came from either. Perhaps some conspiracy theory.
Regarding Bishop Bruskewitz, he will never succomb to a program such as Tat or any other such program for schoolchildren. You know that. Shoot, he is right on the mark for not complying to the USCCB, he recognizes that his authority is the Holy See.
Kevin, its hard enough keeping our kids pure and innocent as it is. Even driving in the car, seeing promiscuous billboards, having to see a commercial about condoms (even though our tv time is limited). When a 6 year old asks questions that are normally a "teen" topic, you get pretty upset about it as a parent.
The last thing we need is for information about sexual abuse, body parts, etc.. to be handed out to children at a young age. Is it really protecting them or harming their innocence? I feel, and I can only speak for myself and knowing my children, that it definately harms their innocence.
I didnt read Dom's article, nor have I seen the groups website that you mention. Im just going by what I reviewed in the program itself. I could never recommend it.
Perhaps there is some sort of "misreading" as you say, but shouldnt we wait for the Holy See to clarify that issue? I have yet to see anything from them regarding such programs fr children. I am almost sure that they would want to protect children's innocence. You would have to agree to that.
von:
First, I'm not saying that Bruskewitz wants TaT. I'm saying that I've never heard him say the specific kinds of things that Altier seems to be saying.
Second, I simply disagree that teaching kids correct names for body parts - and teaching them not to let people touch those parts - violates their innocence. I think that claim is based on a false understanding of the nature of children's innocence. I think that's bad philosophy and theology. And I don't see anything in Catholic teaching (e.g., in The Truth and Meaning of Human Sexuality) that contradicts that.
Now, if the Holy See wants to weigh in and disagree - fine. But it hasn't done so. And in that light, I think it's presumptuous of a priest publically to attack a bishop's decision to use TaT as somehow intrinsically immoral.
... And I'd add that when a priest does such a thing - and especially when he mixes it in with weird conspiracy theorizing about Freemasons and Communists - then there's no way I'm going to attack his bishop for ordering him to cool it.
Oh, by the way, you might also enjoy this, from one of Altier's homilies just a couple years ago: "Satan ... is working ... through his dupes, the Freemasons, who are the lowest form of human life on the earth. These unfortunate souls think that they are going to be able to set up their kingdom and have their one world government, their one world religion, and that they can play god."
Kevin,
Have you ever read any Church documents on Freemasonry? Many encyclicals and other documents have been written about it.
Until 1983, becoming a Freemason meant automatic excommunication.
But even when the automatic excommunication was lifted, the Church reiterated the ban on joining:
"The Church's negative position on Masonic association... remains unaltered, since their principles have always been regarded as irreconcilable with the Church's doctrine. Hence, joining them remains prohibited by the Church. Catholics enrolled in masonic associations are involved in serious sin and may not approach Holy Communion." (Sacred Congregation of the Faith, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger)
Your posts suggest that freemasonry is harmless.
Yepp Tim , I've read them. ievn have Pope Leo's encyclical and have read it several times, I've even let others know of this dreadful "order".
It's not a conspiracy theory either. Its pretty well known that they have been attempting to infiltrate the church for many many years and we can only guess how many of them actually have succeded.
I recall to, wasnt there somthing about John Paul I releasing names of freemasons that are in the church? It was some sort of conspiracy thing that was circulating at the time of his death and even suggested that he was murdered rather than dying a natural death.
Your posts suggest that freemasonry is harmless.
Tim, you've just misrepresented Kevin's statements, and I don't tolerate that. This point is not debatable. Catholics who are willing to engage in false accusation are not doing the Lord's work. You'd better get real scrupulous about accuracy and evidence -- and get slow about accusing people -- if you want to defend the faith.
Of course you are correct in noting that Catholics may not join masonic associations. Masonic principles are contrary to the Catholic faith.
However, Kevin is quite right to object to the ugly rhetoric Fr. Altier apparently used (e.g., "the lowest form of human life on the earth") and to smears blaming a broad group of people.
Most Masons in the US are ignorant (and thus innocent) about anti-Catholic and anti-moral connivings. It is obviously unjust to blame them for such evils. It is downright stupid for a Catholic priest to blame them, because it makes him look like an idiot.
The heresies of secularist liberalism no longer depend on Masonic movements to spread them. If all the lodges were to disappear tomorrow, the problem would not be solved.
Therefore, if Catholics go on the attack against Masonic organizations, they are not fighting the real problem: the secularist-liberal ideas that the movement spread.
I did not misrepresent Kevin's statements, nor did I accuse anyone of anything.
One definition of suggest means to imply as a possibility.
I think any reasonable person might read Kevin's statements and conclude that he thinks Fr. Altier's concern about freemasonry is unwarranted. That doesn't mean he truly believes it, it simply means that people might conclude that.
Note, I did not say "you think freemasonry is harmless," I said your posts suggest (that is, to this reader, and quite possibly to many other reasonable readers) that it is harmless.
There is a big difference.
Kevin,
Back to the subject. There MUST be better programs out there that TaT that would not be so sexually revealing.
I really don't know of many parents that call their body parts by there actual name. We never have, my parents never have. Matter of fact, we use the "Polish" name.
Having a 4,6,and 8 year old and 3 young teens, the younger group is not ready yet to hear such words until they have formally gone through a chastity program that we use in our home.
As I said before, too much information too soon can do much harm.
Especially if you know 4,-8 year olds-- they many many times say things that are innocently unappropriate just from overhearing converations.
We'va all been humiliated by the things kids say- I think they even wrote a book about it or a TV show about "the Darndest things kids say".
Kevin, There is a time and place for everything and I just prefer that it be the parents that deem what is the appropriate age and way to teach children this information.
as far as the comments made by Father, well yes I concede they are a bit alarmist. I do commend him for his obedience to the Bishop.
I also saw the parish bulletin and the TaT program will not be used in their school. You ought to read what the Pastor of St Agnes wrote.
Very beautifuly said and No need to speculate further.
However too, I admire priests who teach the truth and arent afraid to talk about abortion, hell, damnation,homosexuality, contraception, etc.. We so much need more of that even if it means making some people uncomfortable, that just means that their conscience is in confusion because the truth is embedded in their soul and the heart and mind are at odds.
Thanks Keving for the great conversation, I really enjoyed it!
Pax..
Anyone who can criticize this clearly holy priest for standing up for the faith has lost their faith or is profoundly ignorant of the corruption of the hierarchy.
Altier explains it all here. Read. Learn.
http://desertvoice.excerptsofinri.com/fr_altier_103005.html
Father Altier is one of the few Priests who speak the truth about what is happening in our Church today. In our parish here in northern California
is what good Father Robert talks about. If the Masons,and these other bad guys arent resposible, who is? The Holy Spirit is alive and well and if you think a few bad Priests and Bishops are going to destroy the Catholic Church, think again my remnant Brothers in Christ! Pray, Pray and Pray some more. JMJ
It was nice to have I think Fr. Altier will be the Fargo conferece in Oct 2006, he was good back in 2004, and here are some Past Audio and text homiles of Fr. Altier that I'm aware of, they are pretty good and wise words for all times.