He Binds Up the Brokenhearted

You will know they are Christian by their love.

Ever hear those two platitudes? The first is from scripture, referencing Jesus, the later is a church camp song.
Neither is much true in large measure in certain contexts with priests when it comes to their often adolescent interactions with women. It is something heralded from the altar and in a rare parish is actually practiced I have found- most of the love happens in spite of them often It's too often a business. Priests deem the will of God, mandating the killing of their humanity something they can imagine without consulting women involved- so they feel free to 'break up' in homilies in the abstract. I know a priest who emotionally strung along a woman for years and dumped her in a homily and left her feeling like a divorcee without alimony. This is considered 'in God's will." This is of course crap. It totally creates broken hearts rather than binding them up. Anti-Jesus. Women are dispensible. Their feelings irrelevant. Not even worthy of a conversation.

Cardinal Wuerl wanted in the worst way to be a cardinal. Machiavelian- he would lock up anyone in his way and nearly did. He would probably sell his mother to prostitution if he thought it would make him a Cardinal. God's will? Give me a Break. As much as the priesthierachy would like to think themselves Christ on Earth they are human, and the church is a MAN MADE
INSTITUTION hoping to follow the holy spirit and the guidance of scripture, the Word of God, with men in it. If I asked Wuerl's cleaning lady, I bet she would tell me the crap she cleans out of the toilet does not smell like Gold Leaf. Human, I guarantee you.
It's a business.

I would not be a Catholic at all were it not for Jesuits- today I heard a Sermon in which it was lamented by the Jesuit that the clergy have a dangerous tendancy to OVERDIVINIZE themselves because of Christ's mandate given to them and the Holy Spirit given to them. Both of those can be and are routinely betrayed by clergy. It is not Holy to demean and disrespect women. It is not even nice. When they laid to rest Larry Madden, SJ, one tribute noted he loved being a priest but he hated 'clericalism." What is the difference? Clericalism is elevation or undo divinization of clergy such that they can do no wrong- by virtue of their clerical state which automatically should guarantee them certain privileges and honor. Just the opposite of what Jesus did in the world and who he was for the world. He despised the Pharisee whom he called "white washed tombs full of dead men's bones." When the institution of the church values protecting itself over its flock it is not functioning in the Holy Spirit, it has taken a detour to egoism.

Jesus left us the Paraclete, therefore we as the "body of Christ" must be Jesus on earth and now cannot sin. WRONG. That is the dangerous misinterpretation too widely prevalent. Clearly the church , including its hierarchy does sin. Big Time. And it is sin not to recognize it and deal with it appropriately.

The church cannot go around creating spritiual widows, or adulterous relationships because open marriage is forbidden. That is just hypocritical garbage. That has nothing to do with Christ's body. That's man following men called cardinals. Ridiculous. Not Jesus. At All.

I sometimes cannot stomach some of the egoism amongst priests. It almost gets worse the higher up responsibility they have. It should be the other way around. They should get humbler the higher up they are.

And yes, the church is a MAN MADE INSTITUTION that hopes to follow the guidance of the Paraclete, the Holy Spirit. We are the Body of Christ only so far as we Bind Up the Brokenhearted, after his Sacred Heart, not create worse heartbreak.

-----------------
In the District of Columbia it is illegal by virtue of the DC Human Rights Act to discriminate against anyone on the basis of marital status. But they do in the church. It is considered in this country a constitutional right to marry heterosexually. (Homosexually not quite). There was a case Loving v. Virginia which overturned a Virginia law prohibiting interracial marriage (when I was born it was illegal in Virginia for a black person to marry a white person.) It is now considered a constitutional right to marry someone of a different race, or anyone heterosexually. But the church says no. So the church could be sued if they fired someone for marrying because the Constitution does not have a 'religious exemption' stating 'except priest.' The church would then have to pay damages for the future wage loss. So it should change its policy in America because it is violating the US Constitution. (and they should be sued by the first person with standing to change the policy because it is evil.)