In 1962, the noted Thomistic theologian Fr. Reginald Garrigou-Lagrange wrote a book titled, The Priest in Union with Christ. In chapter 3 of this marvelous work, Fr. Garrigou-Lagrange explains the important role of a Catholic priest as “victim.” He says:
“The priest must be in his own way a victim. Why? Because Christ in offering himself during the sacrifice of the Mass offers also his entire mystical body, and especially his minister who is celebrating Mass. Therefore every priest has his own individual vocation to be a victim in order to become like to Christ.
The truth of this becomes even more evident if we consider the opposite error. Take the case of a priest who shares in the priesthood of Christ by virtue of his ordination and yet refuses to share in his state of victim. Such a priest is refusing the obligation laid on all the faithful of taking up the cross; and this obligation presses all the more urgently upon a priest in view of the fact that he is intended to be another Christ amongst the faithful. (emphasis added)”
So, if every Catholic priest has an obligation, by virtue of his ordination, to be a victim, and if refusing to do so is tantamount to refusing to take up his cross, what does this say about a priest who files a lawsuit against a lay critic? Such is the case of Vatican Spokesman, Fr. Thomas Rosica, who recently filed a lawsuit against David Domet, author of the Canadian-based blog, “Vox Cantoris.” Can any priest, claiming to emulate the victimhood of Our Blessed Lord, truly be living his vocation as a victim by suing a blogger for criticizing his public statements? Now, this is not to say that a priest may never defend himself, but as a victim, he has an obligation to assume a very humble role, striving for the good of the sheep, as opposed to himself. However, since the letter from the lawyer appears to be the first time Fr. Rosica has had any contact with Mr. Domet, can he truly be said to have followed the precepts established by Our Blessed Lord in the Gospel of Matthew? Our Lord instructed:
“If your brother sins [against you], go and tell him his fault between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have won over your brother. If he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, so that ‘every fact may be established on the testimony of two or three witnesses.’ If he refuses to listen to them, tell the church. If he refuses to listen even to the church, then treat him as you would a Gentile or a tax collector.” (Matthew 18:15-17)
Whether Fr. Rosica is failing in his duty to be a victim after the model of Christ or failing to follow the instructions Our Lord gave for dealing with those who sin against us, there are two great ironies in Fr. Rosica’s lawsuit alone. The first lies specifically with regard to Fr. Rosica’s constant (and inappropriate) appeal to “mercy,” and the second is written in the lawsuit itself.
On March 18 at Loyola University Maryland, Fr. Rosica gave his comments on “the uniqueness of Pope Francis and his amazing impact on the Catholic Church and the world in just one short year,” at an event called “The Francis Factor.” In his comments, Fr. Rosica proclaimed, “We need the Francis revolution of tenderness and mercy now more than ever before.”
In discussing the mid-term Relatio of the 2014 Synod on the Family, Fr. Rosica spoke of mercy for same-sex couples, those in “irregular” relationships and the distribution of Holy Communion to divorced and re-married Catholics. He said, “it [the Relatio]looked at them with tenderness and mercy, while maintaining the clarity of a teacher and insisting on the importance of accompanying people in their different and often complex situations. This is not soft mercy or cheap grace, but blatant honesty that comes from the heart.”
In 2009, Fr. Rosica wrote an article about deceased Senator Ted Kennedy’s funeral titled, Senator Edward Kennedy’s funeral: On mercy and misery. In that article, Fr. Rosica made multiple appeals to mercy with regard to the notorious senator, even to the point of calling out pro-lifers for their “lack” of mercy. Here are a few excerpts:
- “As a Roman Catholic Priest who is pro-life, I was proud of my Church last week, and grateful for the courageous and gracious actions of American Church leaders in Boston and Washington, who opened the doors of their Church to reveal a Gospel of mercy and hospitality, in the midst of sinfulness and ambiguity of public leaders who are in need of conversion, forgiveness and prayers, like the rest of us.”
- “Civility, charity, mercy and politeness seem to have dropped out of the pro-life lexicon.”
- “To recognize and bring out the sin in others means also recognizing one’s self as a sinner and in need of God’s boundless mercy.”
- “Let us pray that we will become more and more a people, a church and a community overflowing with mercy.”
While Fr. Rosica is so concerned about extending mercy to those who are living in a state of grave sin, he seems to have forgotten about his desire that “we will become more and more a people, a church and a community overflowing with mercy,” as he files what looks to be a rather expensive lawsuit against a Catholic blogger. In fact, according to Fr. Rosica’s lawyers, after making a bold demand that David Domet remove all references to Fr. Rosica from the blog and issue a formal apology to him, the lawfirm reserves the right to sue him anyway. So much for mercy!
But the supreme irony of the whole thing is found in the list of three main complaints against Mr. Domet. The list of complaints read, in part, “Each of the said statements, separately and collectively, expressly and by way of innuendo, are false and defamatory statements that … 3. They suggest that Fr. Rosica is willing to act unethically to further his own agendas and to do so at the expense of others.”
Really??? So, if we are to understand the complaint here in its proper context, Fr. Rosica is upset because a one-man blog has openly criticized Fr. Rosica’s public statements which conflict with the Traditional teachings of the Catholic Church. And, in the act of complaining that Mr. Domet’s comments “suggest that Fr. Rosica is willing to act unethically to further his own agendas and to do so at the expense of others,” Fr. Rosica is willing to file an unethical lawsuit at the expense of a family man in order to further his own agendas. Did Fr. Rosica approach Mr. Domet first in private, as Our Blessed Lord instructed? Did Fr. Rosica extend mercy to Mr. Domet by saying that even if Mr. Domet complied with Fr. Rosica’s demands he reserves the right to sue him anyway? Is Fr. Rosica acting in any way like the victim he was ordained to be? If the answer to these questions is “no,” then Fr. Rosica has made himself guilty of the very thing he complains Mr. Domet of suggesting about him on the Vox Cantoris blog.
Very interesting. First thing popped into my mind is Jesus’ words, “I am the way, the truth, the life…” I believe him because he said it. The beautiful truth that permeates his truth becomes subject to my ignorance, and other assorted qualifying factors he was aware of long before his truth came into being; therefore, perhaps, we need not speak hear or read because every syllable enters the realm of interpretation, excludes the perfection that belongs to God alone, perfectly., how lost can the faithful get?
Spot on analysis, Michael. I was stunned to read what Fr. Rosica wrote in the mid-term Relatio, last year, but this is ridiculous. He shows no mercy to Vox Contoris, and circumvented the procedure clearly laid out by our Lord in the Gospel of Matthew. Sometimes I wish I were a judge.
Nailed it!!
Great article.
I’m wondering when 1 Corinthians 6:1-10 is going to be addressed in this issue, which reads:
“If any of you has a dispute with another, do you dare to take it before the ungodly for judgment instead of before the Lord’s people? 2 Or do you not know that the Lord’s people will judge the world? And if you are to judge the world, are you not competent to judge trivial cases? 3 Do you not know that we will judge angels? How much more the things of this life! 4 Therefore, if you have disputes about such matters, do you ask for a ruling from those whose way of life is scorned in the church? 5 I say this to shame you. Is it possible that there is nobody among you wise enough to judge a dispute between believers? 6 But instead, one brother takes another to court—and this in front of unbelievers! The very fact that you have lawsuits among you means you have been completely defeated already. Why not rather be wronged? Why not rather be cheated? 8 Instead, you yourselves cheat and do wrong, and you do this to your brothers and sisters. 9 Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men[a] 10 nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God”
Excellent point!
GOOD ONE MIKE!
Just check out “Desenting Priests” on Michael Voris’ You tube video, Church Militant tv.
And Life Site News. It’s all on public record. Read for yourself Fr. Rosica’s history
We’re cancelling our subscription to Salt & Light. Can’t be supporting a bad leader like this and call ourselves Catholics. Sorry.
The Lord said that if your left hand offends against thee, cut it off!
That’s what I read!
What a disgrace to the clergy Rosica is. His minions have attacked Pope Saint John Paul 2nd, Benedict 16th not to mention AB Burke in his S&L apostasy TV in Canada. His mistranslations of Francis’s Papal statements are that of a first year college student bizarre quotes of Frances’s Latin, Spanish-Italian to English text. Such lack of ability in this translation field would get him Fired anywhere else. Like Kasper he does not want anyone quoting what he Rosica has said in public. Put together a defense fund like you did for Father Driscoll’s Star of the Sea parish and lets bring Rosica into a court of law in Canada and let him answer under oath about his actions in Canada and elsewhere.
For the record, has the lawsuit actually been filed? I haven’t seen confirmation of that yet.
Speaking based on personal info: If you file a defamation lawsuit, (1) you must prove that your opponent knew the statement was untrue; and (2) you must have suffered financial loss as a result in order to collect financial compensation. Unfortunately I don’t know what Mr. Domet actually wrote, he may have gotten too personal with his criticism. One must be very careful in this regard.
And………………………..Fr. Lombardi didn’t know about this threat of a Lawsuit? Nor did the Holy Father?…………………………REALLY?
Fr. Rosica appeals to mercy without truth. If mercy is an end in itself does it automatically give us moral truth? Truth calls us to reform and repent in order to reach a standard. This standard is to live in the freedom of what God has revealed. (Church teaching) Mercy cannot replace teaching, We dip into the well of mercy and of grace in order to attain and live what is true. Love of God is obedience to God. It requires effort. Fr. Rosica appeals to the good found in human relationships (subjective good) and using this as his guide reduces church teaching (objective good) in order to accommodate. Is this true mercy? Is this true charity? Can objective truth be reduced without doing harm to the soul or to an individuals eternal happiness? Mercy is not a license for accommodation but for reform. “Neither do I condemn you. Go and sin no more.”
Exactly! The proponents of watering down Church teachings always leave out the “Go and sin
no more” part of scripture and use “compassion” as an excuse.
where is the blog post in question? Am I just not seeing the hyperlink to it? Would be nice to see if the blogger included actual (in context) evidence to back-up his remarks, because if he hadn’t, it is slander & defamation
Heather,
I linked to the letter from Fr. Rosica’s lawyers, where the specific complaints are listed. Here is a link to the letter again for ease: http://www.churchmilitant.tv/documents/spec-2015-02-19.pdf
In this letter is a set of 9 quotes from various parts of the Vox Cantoris blog that contain some rather tame (in my honest opinion) criticisms of Fr. Rosica’s public statements.
Ironically, Rosica owns a shoe belonging to The Cure d’Ars, Saint John Vianney. (This is absolutely true!)
Let’s pray -through the intercession of Saint John Vianney that he receives a complete and thorough conversion of heart, mind and soul.
Let’s pray that this conversion goes all throughout and to “the top” of our “Holy Catholic Church.”
Rosica has been ruining Rosica’s reputation, he is prideful and vain.
I am no fan of Father Rosica. David Domet has had this nasty uncharitable affair with Father Rosica for years.
However, the chickens are coming home to roost for David Anthony Domet.
Without any justification or provocation, David Domet has harassed, spread lies, slandered a few young Catholics I personally know on WWW. His evil actions has harmed the reputation and livelihood of these young Catholics he is envious, jealous of. David Anthony Domet and his so called priest friends and the President of Una Voce International know who these young Catholics are.
Father Rosica’s lawyers may want to get in touch with them.
Right now Domet seems to be digging his own grave. He has surrounded himself with the most stupid people giving him very stupid advice.
Being that I am an American, I don’t know anything about whatever the long-standing feud between Fr. Rosica and Mr. Domet may be. Furthermore, I am unaware of any sort of harassment, lies, and slanders against other young Catholics as well. What I do know is that the “incidents” identified in the lawyer’s letter seem to me to be quite tame. Even if there is a long-standing feud between the two men, filing a lawsuit over these 9 quotes is a bit petty and disproportionate a response, IMHO.
And that’s anonymous?
I’ll repeat what I said to a similar comment:
Being that I am an American, I don’t know anything about whatever the long-standing feud between Fr. Rosica and Mr. Domet may be. Furthermore, I am unaware of any sort of harassment, lies, and slanders against other young Catholics as well. What I do know is that the “incidents” identified in the lawyer’s letter seem to me to be quite tame. Even if there is a long-standing feud between the two men, filing a lawsuit over these 9 quotes is a bit petty and disproportionate a response, IMHO.
As an American, maybe you should read up on libel in Canada.
A lot of traditionalist, anti-Semitic commentators have made snide remarks about the “Jewish” law firm that Fr. Rosica has retained. His counsel, a partner in that firm, is a member of the board of Villa Charities with deep connections to the Italian Catholic community in Toronto. I doubt she would advise this priest wrongly on this matter and likely has a better grasp of what’s petty vis-a-vis libel and what isn’t than you do IMHO.
How you can bloviate on things you know nothing of is quite shocking.
I didn’t realize that Canadians were so thin-skinned. You may note that there have been no anti-Semitic remarks in the comments on this website. As for what’s “petty,” it doesn’t take a lawyer to see it for what it is. And it doesn’t take a genius to see public statements being made inconsistent with behavior, nor does it take a philosopher to see the irony in the potential plaintiff’s complaint.
Let me be clear, this post was not, and never was, about Mr. Domet. It is, and has been since the very first time I saw the story, about one man’s inconsistencies and his disproportionate response to criticism, regardless of whether Canadian law makes Mr. Domet’s comments a big deal or not.
Thin-skinned or not, we’ll see how this pans out if it become a matter for the Courts. If it does, my money is on Fr. Rosica prevailing over this gadfly. Any ruin that befalls him will surely be helped by encouragement from people like you.
As for making sacrifices, Fr. Rosica isn’t obligated to submit to character assassination to satisfy your warped view of priestly victimhood.
You people are priceless – as long as it someone else who’s wronged or poor or hungry or slandered – well then, just suck it up. But God help anyone who slights one of you. Comb through Domet’s blog to see what I’m talking about. This guy’s threatened lawsuits, calling the police and all manner of ‘consequences’ for people who’ve rubbed him the wrong way.
I’m not encouraging anyone to do anything. I was simply struck by the irony of Fr. Rosica’s complaint. Nothing more. Nothing less.
Incidentally, I would hardly characterize the quotes cited in the letter from Fr. Rosica’s lawyer as assassination attempts upon his character. They were comments on certain things Fr. Rosica said which could bear a particularly heterodoxical mark. I’m not saying I agree or disagree with Mr. Domet’s assessment, but those remarks in the lawyer’s letter are pretty tame. Incidentally, another irony is that Mr. Domet’s comments would never have gotten the attention they have in recent days had Fr. Rosica simply ignored him.
As for me … I’m not sure where you get the idea that I tell people who are wronged, poor or hungry to just “suck it up.” Maybe I’m just a little tired of seeing priests file lawsuits against publications for stating their thoughts on what those priests said. And honestly, many of Fr. Rosica’s comments and actions are worth scrutinizing … like giving same-sex marriage advocate Gregory Baum a high-profile interview while praising his theology: https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/same-sex-marriage-advocate-gregory-baum-lauded-by-canadian-catholic-media That’s just one example. I’m sure I can find more. If Fr. Rosica doesn’t want to be criticized for things like this, there’s a very simple answer … stop doing things like this.
By “people who’ve rubbed him the wrong way,” I assume you don’t mean the run-of-the-mill Catholic in the pew who has been railroaded into a new religion but you mean the apostates and heretics who run the parishes and diocese and such?
Thank you.
Bloviate? That’s rich. You appear to know next to nothing about how a law firm operates. I’ll walk you through it. Phone call or walk-in visit is made by Mr. Rosica or someone Mr. Rosica knows well enough to ask that the phone call or walk-in visit is made to the law firm’s office on his behalf. Pleasantries are exchanged. Mr. Rosica gives his side of the story and reason for wanting to bring a complaint. Law firm already knows who Rosica is and knows he can muster up the funds to pay for the consult as well as for the representation. Law firm takes some preliminary information in order to draft up initial boilerplate paperwork, irrespective of whether the complaint will ever be filed and/or whether, in reality, it can ever hope to get to a trial. It’s likely the complaint will be dropped or settled before trial since the ‘finder of facts’, in general, really couldn’t care less about the facts, and since, odds are, the blogger will fold from the expense of having to respond to boilerplate paperwork. But, the law firm has done a ‘favor’ for the guy who runs the Pepper and Darkness network and who has a direct link to Lombardi in Rome; and they get paid to spit out some boilerplate paperwork to boot.
“I’ll repeat what I said to a similar comment:”
“”Being that I am an American, I don’t know anything about whatever the long-standing feud between Fr. Rosica and Mr. Domet may be. Furthermore, I am unaware of any sort of harassment, lies, and slanders against other young Catholics as well.”
Sadly, yours is typical American behaviour. It’s like not knowing the religion, culture, language, customs; history of; not knowing for sure about “weapons of mass destruction”, yet barging into countries such as Iraq, Egypt etc…etc…etc… killing innocent people, destroying these countries under the pretext of American freedom and creating chaos where people lived in peace under leaders who knew what it took to maintain law and order.
Don’t comment on what you “don’t know” or are “not aware of” untill you fully “know” and are “aware of”
You will note that my comments in the original post were strictly reserved for the things I did know about. I didn’t venture into any uncharted territories.
“However, since the letter from the lawyer appears to be the first time Fr. Rosica has had any contact with Mr. Domet, can he truly be said to have followed the precepts established by Our Blessed Lord in the Gospel of Matthew?”
Appears. Appears. Appears.
The moment you rendered your ill-informed opinion on what things appeared to be in your “don’t know” and “unaware” perception of the truth, you ventured into uncharted territory.
I’ll repeat myself so you understand. I know David. I know Fr. Rosica. David and Fr. Rosica know each other. I know that this thing between them has gone on for years. I also know that David has irked others with libellous accusations on his blog and has been compelled at times to remove things by priests in Toronto. AND, I know he NEVER apologizes.
The fact that Fr. Rosica has waited this long to slap a lawsuit on David after umpteen provocations and insults for close to a decade is a testament to his patience with this pesky little man.
One more time … the purpose of this blog post was to comment on the letter as written, which was ironic. All of the extraneous information about their long-standing feud, other disputes, personality faults is completely irrelevant. The letter itself, which spotlighted 9 quotes which are themselves rather tame, made an self-fulfilling charge. Feel free to talk about all the other stuff all you want … that wasn’t the point of this post. Never was.
Madame Wendy, you embarrass and beclown yourself.
Yes. Thank you for stating what should be obvious.
No matter how much Domet has been going after Fr. Rosica, this is a hammer to kill a gnat. This priest has a very big pulpit and spews newspeak to many, many gullible Catholics.
Besides if each one of us took just one of Fr. Rosica’s ‘reflections’ and examined it in light of Catholic teaching we’d see just how mild Domet was. Comments above have the right idea: Fr. Rosica has other ways of reaching out, walking with, being merciful or just ignoring, Domet. Why has he not done these things? Because threats of going to law always terrorize the little guy.
Fr. Rosica appears to be a bit of a bully. His ‘interview’ with Gregory Baum is enough to tar him as not faithful to Catholic teaching. He needs to be called out.
The despicable methods of Father Rosica show that the Novus Ordo Church is at their wits end. Mr. Domet shouldn’t give in to this attempt to intimidate him. Rosica has no chance of winning this case, he is only bluffing.
THANK YOU lepantoinstitute.org
for giving a chance to those Catholics who don’t have many places to voice the truth.
If we Catholics believe that ultimately TRUTH will prevail, than we should not silence the voices of those who do not agree with us.
Mundabor’s blog is one such place that refused my comment which is the truth on this subject. However, he has the right to do so since it his blog. As I did in the past, I will never recommend Mundabor ever again.
I have always believed that honest debate fosters an understanding of truth and has the potential to do a great deal of good. It is polemic debate which fosters ill will and malice. I will champion the former and squelch the later.
I wonder how Fr. Rosica is going to pay for his lawsuit? With his own personal funds, or?
The courts may still throw out the lawsuit for arbitrary evidence or whatever; then each party is stuck with their own legal expenses. The wisest thing would have been a personal mending of the fences.
I only heard recently on Church Militant’s Facebook about Fr. Rosica and Mr. Domet.
I don’t intend to send a single penny to either of them.
According to reports, Fr. Rosica has retained the most expensive law firm in all of Toronto. Wow! From a priest that has taken a vow of poverty? Something doesn’t add up.
No one on this Blog has ever mentioned a “Jewish” law firm. The only information I have about the firm is that they are the most expensive firm in all of Toronto. Until Maggie mentioned it in one of her ‘oh so charitable’ posts, I for one had no idea as to their ‘ethnicity’. I do think it is disturbingly curious that a Priest that has taken a vow of poverty, has chosen such an expensive law firm UNLESS they are taking his case ‘pro bono’. I also know that Fr. Rosica has stated in his letter of intent ‘slanderous’ statements by Mr. Donet that do seem a bit tame. As Barbara has said, taking a hammer to kill a knat, and if Mr. Donet has been as loathsome as what has been indicated why are we not seeing evidence of this? Where is the proof? Where is the link? Not to say that he has not been despicable with Fr. Rosica and others, but it’s hard to have any opinion of David Domet especially in the negative when some kind of evidence is not provided. I do know about Fr. Rosica. I have seen plenty of his ‘public statements’ that do anything but uphold Catholic teaching.
This lawsuit, or should I say ‘pending’ lawsuit is clearly seen as an ‘in your face’ tactic, kind of like the ‘in your face’ tweet put up by his brother Priest of the same order, Fr. Timothy Scott to Cardinal Burke. You know, the one that ‘tweeted’ to Cardinal Burke to ” STFU”? These progressive priests sure are gentile are they not? So dignified.
Dear Wendy and Maggie, if I missed the facts behind the accusations made here against David, then I apologize, but could you both be so kind as to post them again?
Just so I’m clear, isn’t the accusation of libel and slander without any proof an act of libel and slander?
Isn’t saying someone is a slanderer without evidence a manner of defaming their character?
KWTC, TLM, I posted proof of what you asked, this morning. February 26, 2015
Only a real gentleman or a lady will have the courage, honour and humility to admit that one is wrong.
I guess Michael will not look very good since he said, “Having conducted my own investigation into some of the allegations against Mr. Domet, and finding the allegations without merit, I have disabled several comments in the combox ”
What Domet did to Fr. Rosica is the same as his libellous, slanderous posts on WWW about these young Catholics and is NOT GOSSIP. IT IS VERY RELEVANT.
If you wish you can send me an e-mail & I will send it to you directly. That is if Michael has the courage and integrity to post this comment.
It is preposterous that Domet’s supporters blind themselves to the TRUTH; and like a swarm of flies hover over a pile of *excrement to protect the virulent maggots there in. * (Dommet likes to use the word S _ _ _ and F _ _ _ on his blog posts.
I have those too.
Having conducted my own investigation into some of the allegations against Mr. Domet, and finding the allegations without merit, I have disabled several comments in the combox. Unfounded and unsubstantiated accusations based upon personal experience, without any facts to show for it, will not be approved. Furthermore, this article is not meant to be a gossip column, a water-cooler, or a laundry line for people to air their grievances. The article is about one man’s ironic lawsuit against another. No more, no less. So, comments intended to perpetuate the gossip mill will no longer be approved, either.
Here’s another comment which seems to be a troll-calumniator, which seems worthy of being erased here…
http://www.lepantoinstitute.org/uncategorized/fr-rosicas-ironic-lawsuit/#comment-5730