Friday, March 30, 2012

Victoria Kennedy embarasses herself after public rebuke from Bishop Robert McManus...

BOSTON (Reuters) - A small Massachusetts Roman Catholic college rescinded its invitation to Vicki Kennedy to speak at its graduation ceremony this spring, saying the local bishop objected to honoring the widow of the liberal lion Senator Edward M. Kennedy.

A spokesman for Worcester Bishop Robert McManus declined to say why exactly he objected to the choice of Kennedy, a member of the most prominent U.S. Catholic family in politics.

'Bishop McManus is acting, he feels, consistently with what all of the U.S. bishops asked colleges or higher institutions to do going back to 2004, that they not honor ... Catholics who take a public stance or position on issues contrary to things that the Church is trying to teach,' said Raymond Delisle, a spokesman for the diocese.

Kennedy said she was 'disheartened' by the public rebuke.

'I am a lifelong Catholic and my faith is very important to me,' she said in a statement. 'I have not met Bishop McManus nor has he been willing to meet with me to discuss his objections.'

She said that by opposing her appearance at the college, the bishop 'has made a judgment about my worthiness as a Catholic.'

Senator Kennedy, a Democrat, was a liberal standard-bearer during his nearly 47 years in office and an advocate for abortion rights -- a stance that ran afoul of church teachings. His brother John F. Kennedy, the first Catholic president of the United States, was assassinated in 1963.

The school, Anna Maria College of Paxton, Massachusetts, apologized to Kennedy.

'As a small, Catholic college that relies heavily on the good will of its relationship with the Bishop and the larger Catholic community, its options are limited,' it said in a statement.

The Catholic church has been increasingly vocal on political issues over the past year, particularly regarding the use of contraception, which the church opposes.

In February, clergy around the United States were asked to read statements at the pulpit calling on the administration of President Barack Obama to exempt religious employers from paying for insurance coverage of contraceptives.

Following Edward Kennedy's death in 2009, the clan has slowly faded from the political spotlight, though Joseph Kennedy III -- grandson of Edward's brother Robert, who also served in the Senate -- has announced plans to run for Congress. (See here).

Victoria Kennedy has embarassed herself.  Her invitation to speak at Anna Maria College having been rescinded is the direct result of her refusal to accept Catholic teaching.  For example, in an op-ed piece in The Washington Post,  Ms. Kennedy wrote, "The pro-choice position recognizes that the United States is a diverse, pluralistic society where a woman has a constitutional right to make a decision based on her own conscience, religious beliefs and medical needs." 

What is this but a direct challenge to Catholic teaching regarding abortion?  In Evangelium Vitae, No. 62, Pope John Paul II stated clearly that, "No circumstance, no purpose, no law whatsoever can ever make licit an act which is intrinsically illicit, since it is contrary to the law of God which is written in every human heart, knowable by reason itself, and proclaimed by the Church."

Vickie Kennedy's faith is important to her?  In what sense?  She refuses to accept even a fundamental teaching of the Church on the sanctity of human life.

Talk about disheartening!

Cardinal Carlo Martini has chosen to dissent from the Church's teaching and to engage in lying

In my last post, I noted how Cardinal Carlo Martini says [in his new book], "I disagree with the position of those in the Church, that take issue with civil unions..It is not bad, instead of casual sex between men, that two people have a certain stability..."  Besides demonstrating his personal loss of faith, the retired Cardinal provides us with further evidence that the homosexual agenda has made significant inroads within the Church.  But that hardly comes as news.  Back in 1995, reporter Edwin Thomas of Micromega magazine carried out an unusual survey.  Every evening for several weeks, Mr. Thomas would go for a walk in the area surrounding Saint Peter's Basilica.  Mr. Thomas reported that he was approached by 64 churchmen, "of all kinds, from seminarians to the secretary of a nunciature."

Now the Church has spoken loudly and clearly many times over, condemning in her official and authoritative teaching, homosexual acts.  So for Cardinal Martini to suggest that "it is not bad" for two men [or women] to engage in sexual relations is nothing short of demonic.  And that this retired renegade, who by his own words reveals himself to have been infected by the poison from Hell, to suggest that homosexual relationships can be "stable," is simply incredible.

Dr. Rick Fitzgibbons of the Catholic Medical Association, in an interview with zenit which may be found here,  was asked, "Is the opinion of the APA on same-sex unions and adoption consistent with the research on the medical and psychiatric difficulties in those with same-sex attractions and on the developmental needs of children"?  To which Dr. Fitzgibbons responded:  "No. The APA has chosen to ignore the significant medical research which has documented serious psychiatric and medical illnesses associated with those same-sex attractions and behaviors. This research and that on the needs of children for a father and a mother have been reviewed in several important recent papers from the University of South Carolina School of Medicine and the University of Utah School of Medicine.

The peer-reviewed literature demonstrates that an inability to maintain committed relationships and rampant promiscuity are the norm in the homosexual lifestyle. To illustrate this, one recent study in Amsterdam, by Xiridou, demonstrated that 86% of the new cases of AIDS came from those in committed relationships, and that those in casual relationships averaged between 16-28 sexual partners per year."

When asked, "What else does the research show in regards to psychiatric and medical health risks for those living the homosexual lifestyle?"  Dr. Fitzgibbons responded: "Well-designed research studies have shown that many psychiatric disorders are far more prevalent, three to five times, in teen-agers and adults with same-sex attraction [SSA]. These include major depression, suicidal ideation and attempts, anxiety disorders, substance abuse, conduct disorder, low self-esteem in males and sexual promiscuity with an inability to maintain committed relationships...It is important to note that "homophobia" is not the cause of these disorders, as many of these studies were done in cultures in which homosexuality is widely accepted."

Cardinal Martini, at such an advanced age, has chosen to dissent from the teaching of the Lord Jesus and to engage in lying.

Pray for him.

Cardinal Martini: Here, let me help you navigate the murky field of human sexuality

ROME, March 27, 2012 ( – Cardinal Carlo Martini, who at the conclave of 2005 was a favorite of ‘social justice’ Catholics to be elected Pope, has penned a book wherein he supports homosexual relationships. The powerful Cardinal who was Archbishop of Milan until his retirement in 2002 at age 75, now lives in Jerusalem and suffers from Parkinson’s disease.

Given Cardinal Martini’s prominence in the Catholic Church (some sources suggest that he had quite a few votes to become Pope in the 2005 conclave) his statements on homosexuality point to a powerful counter-ideology that has made significant inroads into the Church’s teaching on the matter of homosexuality. It is an ideology or theology that was warned about already in 1986 by Martini’s contemporary Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, now Pope Benedict XVI.

In his newly released book, Credere e conoscere (Faith and Understanding), Cardinal Martini posits his disagreement with the Catholic teaching against homosexual civil unions. 'I disagree with the positions of those in the Church, that take issue with civil unions,' he wrote. 'It is not bad, instead of casual sex between men, that two people have a certain stability' and that the 'state could recognize them.'

Cardinal Martini is also quoted as saying in his book that, "Sexuality is a very complex subject, about which there is also 'conflict of interpretations'...It's a murky field.."

I'm sure it is murky from where the Cardinal is standing.  For he has embraced a legalism which comes into conflict with moral norms.  See here.   But for Catholics who haven't embraced such insanity, the truth and meaning of human sexuality is crystal clear, informed by the only interpretation which matters: the Church's interpretation.  See here.

Wednesday, March 28, 2012

"Many unnatural acts are being committed in the name of love.."

Our Lady of America warned Sister Mary Ephrem (Mildred Neuzil) that:
Many unnatural acts are being committed in the name of love. This evil is being disguised and tolerated as an intrinsic right like any other. Even some of My priests and consecrated virgins are being caught up into this web of evil, not realizing its terrible consequences. … there are those in high places in the Church who disobey and refuse respect to my Son‟s Vicar on earth. These betray the teachings inspired by the Divine Spirit sent by my Son to be with the Church „til the end of time. …There are those who teach false doctrines, and those who repudiate the Holy Sacraments. They are filled with intellectual pride. And so refusing to follow my humble Son, they are being destroyed together with those who misguidedly follow them down the path of error and falsehood." 

Today, homosexual acts, which are unnatural, are being promoted "in the name of love."  Professor Chai Feldblum, a homosexual activist, has said that, "Real change will come when the public recognizes gay love not just as morally neutral, but as morally good, to the same extent that straight love is good."

Father Albert Hebert, S.M., in his important book "Prophecies: The Chastisement and Purification," writes, "Today, persons great and lowly commit sin, deny it and even blasphemously call it virtue.  For example, active homosexuals and lesbians call their perverse practices 'love' and demand the legal status of normal married man and wife...That is wickedness which calls for destruction." (p. 79).

Is there really any doubt that the world is calling for chastisement?  In January of 1957, Our Lady told Sister Mary Ephrem: "The hour grows late. My Son's patience will not last forever. Help me hold back His anger, which is about to descend on sinful and ungrateful men. Suffering and anguish, such as never before experienced, is about to overtake mankind. It is the darkest hour. But if men will come to me, my Immaculate Heart will make it bright again with the mercy which my Son will rain down through my hands. Help me save those who will not save themselves. Help me bring once again the sunshine of God's peace upon the world."

Again, on December 20, 1959, Sister Ephrem writes, "Our Lady came to me again on December 20, 1959. These were her words to me as I understood them: 'O my child, tell your spiritual father that I come again to warn and to plead. Oh, penance, penance! How little my children understand it! They give me many words, but sacrifice themselves they will not. It is not me they love but themselves. Oh, what blindness, sweet child, what blindness! How it pierces my heart!

―See, I weep, but my children show me no compassion. They behold the sword in my heart but will make no move to withdraw it. I give them love; they give me only ingratitude.

―Weep, then, dear child, weep with your Mother over the sins of men. Inter-cede with me before the throne of mercy, for sin is overwhelming the world and punishment is not far away.'" (Our Lady of America, see here).

Do we hear God's voice today?  Do we hear the voice of His sorrowful Mother, pleading for us to reconcile with her Son?  Or have we become so secularized that we seek to extinguish the spirit while despising prophecies in direct violation of the exhortation of the Holy Spirit through St. Paul (1 Thess 5: 19-21)?

When a mother weeps, things are serious.  Very serious.  How close are we to chastisement?  The exact hour we may not know.  But if we are spiritually awake, the signs are growing very alarming.

Terence Weldon has lost his faith in Christ, His Church and her doctrines

Terence Weldon wants to introduce us to James Nickoloff, a confused and lost soul whom he refers to as a "gay Catholic theologian."  Weldon writes, "Dr James B Nickoloff is an openly gay, Catholic theologian, who unlike many others to whom that description applies, is working in an eminently respectable corner of the Catholic academy. He is Associate Professor of Religious Studies at the College of the Holy Cross in Worcester, Massachusetts, and also an adjunct professor at the Jesuit University of Santa Clara, California, where he held a Bannan Fellowship for 2008-2009. In June 2009, he delivered a lecture on his research at Santa Clara University for the academic year, 'Intrinsically Disordered”: Gay People and the Holiness of the Church.'

In his introduction to the lecture, he writes about himself: 'In the interest of full disclosure, let me make it clear that I write as a professional Catholic systematic theologian who is also a self-affirming gay man and legally married in Massachusetts.'

With such a clear, honest self-description, it is not surprising that he has come under attack from orthotoxic Catholic fundamentalists. For example, the Holy Cross Cardinal Newman Society posted an outraged reaction to his participation in a Rainbow Alliance Week forum, at which he is alleged to have spread 'confusion' and undermined Church teaching, displaying as evidence [a] flyer he distributed at the meeting. Yet every item on the flyer is taken from completely orthodox Catholic documents: from the Vatican, from the USCCB, or from diocesan offices. Now, how can one be said to be 'undermining' Church teaching by disseminating it?" (See here).

What Mr. Weldon won't tell you, being the ardent propagandist that he is, is that James Nickoloff is not interested in "full disclosure" when it comes to his background.  We learn here that: "Prof. James Nickoloff, of the Religious Studies department, is a former Jesuit priest who told a student group in November that he was personally engaged in homosexuality and 'married' in the state of Massachusetts to another man. He implied the sanction of the Catholic Church as he also identified himself as a professor of religious studies at a Catholic college. This act undermines the efforts of the Church to counsel and serve those with homosexual inclinations and to help them find happiness and fulfillment in Christ through chastity or in a lifestyle not destructive to both their bodies and souls."
When communicating with others, we all have certain responsibilities.  For example, we all have a responsibility to submit ourselves to truth when communicating.  Dr. Germain Grisez explains that, “As creatures, human persons are utterly dependent on God.  Their freedom and action presuppose realities whose meaning and value cannot be changed.  Therefore, human fulfillment requires knowing and conforming to the truth, and especially to the truth about what is good.  But since genuine community is cooperation in seeking common fulfillment, it depends on submission to truth.  Consequently, since all parties to communication should be open to genuine community, they should submit themselves to truth.  The alternative is pursuing what they want regardless of truth, caring about no common good beyond themselves, and so, while using means of communication, failing to promote genuine community.”

Terence Weldon is not interested in genuine community.  If he were, he would be honest in his communications.  He is not interested in submitting himself to the demands of truth.  Weldon is a manipulator who trusts in himself alone.  But Cardinal Newman, prophet of our times, warns us not to follow ourselves in matters of faith and morals, but Christ and His Church. He writes, “Be our mind as heavenly as it may be, most loving, most holy, most zealous, most energetic, most peaceful, yet if we look off from Him [Christ and His Church] for a moment, and look towards ourselves, at once those excellent tempers fall into some extreme or mistake. Charity becomes over-easiness; holiness is tainted with pride; zeal degenerates into fierceness; activity eats up the spirit of prayer; hope is heightened into presumption. We cannot guide ourselves. God’s revealed word is our sovereign rule of conduct; and, therefore among other reasons, is faith so principal a grace, for it is the directing power which receives the commands of Christ, and applies them to the heart.”

Terence Weldon is a modernist. He has lost his faith in Christ, His Church and her doctrines, even if he cannot steel himself to admit this.  And because he has lost his faith, he is anxious to rob others of theirs.  Misery loves company. Pray for him.

Tuesday, March 27, 2012

Terence Weldon attempts to justify his calumny against Pope Benedict XVI

Recently, radical homosexual activist Terence Weldon wrote an ugly Blog post suggesting that Pope Benedict XVI has a homosexual inclination.  In this offensive post, Mr. Weldon wrote: "‘The question has been often asked,and sometimes answered by way of speculation amounting to not much more than guesswork or innuendo based largely on observations on the devoted, ever present and attentive gorgeous Georg or the expensive Prada red shoes, or the personalized celebrity fragrance.

Does it matter? Richard Sipe, noting that Benedict has has been the author [of] seriously nasty Vatican documents seeking to bar gay men from the priesthood, and labelling our orientation as 'disordered,' and has delivered speeches condemning gay marriage a 'threat to humanity', writes in a recent post that yes, it does matter. After speaking to people on the ground in Rome, both clerics and journalists, he has produced the strongest evidence that I have yet seen that Benedict is indeed 'gay' – in the limited sense of having an orientation to the same – sex. (He is careful to stress that this does not imply any actual sexual activity, and we may safely assume that he is not engaging in the so-called 'gay lifestyle' in Rome’s gay bars, clubs and saunas – although many of his priest[s] do."

Now Mr. Weldon is feeling the heat.  Many within the Church, like Deacon Nick Donnelly, have expressed their outrage.  In a pathetic attempt to justify his calumny, this bitter propagandist who wants to homosexualize the Church [while serving as an Extraordinary Minister of the Eucharist], writes: "Even in terms of the Catholic Catechism, a simple same- sex orientation is morally neutral – only same-sex genital acts are condemned. I was very careful to make clear that I was not suggesting that Benedict engages in any such acts...Simply to say that someone is gay is no more a slander or accusation that to say that he is left-handed. To deduce any insult from that, is to betray the accuser as someone who, in spite of all scientific evidence and the clear teaching of the Catechism, as someone who sees gay people as intrinsically morally reprehensible. They display their prejudice openly, for all the world to see." (See here).

Wrong Mr. Weldon. The Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches us that, “Respect for the reputation of persons forbids every attitude and word likely to cause them unjust injury.  He becomes guilty of calumny who, by remarks contrary to the truth, harms the reputation of others and gives occasion for false judgments concerning them.” ( CCC, 2477).  You have falsely accused Pope Benedict XVI of having a homosexual inclination which, although not a sin in itself, “ a more or less strong tendency ordered toward an intrinsic moral evil; and thus the inclination itself must be seen as an objective disorder.” (Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church on the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons, No. 3).

Calumny is a lie told about someone, accusing him of something of which he is not guilty.  It is a sin against charity and justice.  It is more or less serious depending on the importance of the object of the slanderous lie and also on the evils caused to the victim.  You have falsely accused the Vicar of Christ of having a more or less strong tendency ordered toward an intrinsic moral evil.  And you are implying that the Pope is a hypocrite since he has described the homosexual inclination as “intrinsically disordered” and, in fact, signed the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith’s letter cited above.

Mr. Weldon promotes  homosexuality and same-sex "marriage" at his website. He has engaged in blasphemy, asserting that Our Lord Jesus had a homosexual inclination.  And now he has engaged in calumny against Pope Benedict XVI. The question is: why hasn’t Archbishop Nichols called in an exorcist?

Monday, March 26, 2012

Terence Weldon: False prophet pointing the way to animalism and barbarism...

Dr. Antonio Pardo has explained that in animals, "..the interaction of other instincts (particularly dominance) can result in behavior that appears to be homosexual. Such behavior cannot be equated with an animal homosexuality. All it means is that animal sexual behavior encompasses aspects beyond that of reproduction."

This scientific fact upsets radical homosexual activists who believe that homosexual behavior is observable in animals and that since homosexuality is in accordance with animal nature it must also be in accordance with human nature since man is also animal. This is their reasoning.

Radical homosexual activist and dissenter Terence Weldon, who serves as an Extraordinary Minister of the Eucharist as well as a member of the Soho Masses Pastoral Council, is one such individual.  At his website "Queering the Church," this angry dissident Catholic has referred to me as "deranged" for defending the Church's teaching that the homosexual inclination is "intrinsically disordered."

But there is another reason Weldon's premise fails.  And it is this: The strong desire animals, including the human animal, feel for sex gratification is nature's means of alluring them to breed. To seek the satisfaction while at the same time defrauding nature is what is meant by perversion. Other animals, having no free will and guided only by instinct, cannot abuse their faculties and there are no unnatural vices found among them. Man alone is able to act unnaturally, but is bound not to do so by the natural moral law.

Terence Weldon would reduce man to the purely animal, denying his free will while abolishing the natural moral law.  In their wonderful book entitled "Our Moral Life in Christ: A Basic Course on Moral Theology," Aurelio Fernandez and James Socias explain that, "Every man is a moral being, capable of doing good and evil, of being just or unjust, honorable or dishonorable.  Moral good and evil cannot be attributed to the animals, only physical good and evil.  Thus, for example, an animal is either healthy or sick, or an animal may be able to skillfully accomplish its proper end which is instinctively ingrained in its genes.  A horse is said to be good or bad in a horse race; a dog can have a better or worse nose for hunting; but neither the horse nor the dog can sin or practice virtue, nor can they be just or unjust.  In no way are they morally responsible...

Man, on the other hand, is morally responsible for his actions.  He acts with thought and deliberation.  The reason is that he alone has knowledge and a will.  Intelligence gives meaning to things and free will allows for the fulfillment or omission of actions the intellect has determined to be good or bad.

The human person, therefore, can lead an exemplary existence, striving for sanctity, or committing the most evil actions.  This reality is often evident, and was noted by Aristotle:

'For man, when perfected, is the best of animals, but, when separated from law and justice, he is the worst of all; since armed injustice is the more dangerous, and he is equipped at birth with arms, meant to be used by intelligence and virtue, which he may use for the worst ends.  Wherefore, if he have not virtue, he is the most savage of animals, and the most full of lust and gluttony.  But justice is the bond of men in states, for the administration of justice, which is the determination of what is just, is the principle of order in political society.' (Aristotle, Politics, Bk. 1, Ch. 2).

With these two options, the good that perfects and the evil that degrades, human existence is lived out.  Morality is the science that teaches man how to choose good and avoid evil and offers him the means, so that, besides living with the dignity proper to him, he may accomplish his end, eternal salvation." (Our Moral Life in Christ, pp. 51-52).

This is the teaching of the Catechism of the Catholic Church: "God created man a rational being, conferring on him the dignity of a person who can initiate and control his own actions. 'God willed that man should be 'left in the hand of his own counsel,' so that he might of his own accord seek his Creator and freely attain his full and blessed perfection by cleaving to him.'" (CCC, 1730).

And again: "The more one does what is good, the freer one becomes.  There is no true freedom except in the service of what is good and just.  The choice to disobey and do evil is an abuse of freedom and leads to the slavery of sin." (CCC, 1733).

But for Mr. Weldon, false prophet pointing the way to animalism and barbarism, God and His Commandments must be banished from society in preparation for the emerging satanic society which is based on defeatist ideology.  In his book Trousered Apes, professor Duncan Williams explains that, "The whole modern cult of violence and animalism is in essence an admission of defeat.  Since we cannot be men to any idealistic extent, let us lapse into barbaric animalism but, still clinging to vestiges of a past which we hate but cannot escape, let us clothe our defeat in high-sounding terms: 'Alienation,' 'cult of unpleasure,' 'realism,' and similar jargon.  Yet all this fashionable phraseology cannot conceal the fact that the Emperor has no clothes.."

Saint Bernardine of Siena explained just how animalistic homosexual acts are.  He said, "No sin in the world grips the soul as the accursed sodomy; this sin has always been detested by all those who live according to God...Deviant passion is close to madness; this vice disturbs the intellect, destroys elevation and generosity of soul, brings the mind down from great thoughts to the lowliest, makes the person slothful, irascible, obstinate and obdurate, servile and soft and incapable of anything; furthermore, agitated by an insatiable craving for pleasure, the person follows not reason but frenzy...They become blind and, when their thoughts should soar to high and great things, they are broken down and reduced to vile and useless and putrid things, which could never make them happy...Just as people participate in the glory of God in different degrees, so also in hell some suffer more than others.  He who lived with this vice of sodomy suffers more than another, for this is the greatest sin." (Sermon XXXIX in Prediche volgari, pp. 896-897, 915).

This is the sound doctrine men need to hear.  Instead, Archbishop Vincent Nichols continues to tolerate Terence Weldon's dissent from the Church's teaching and his promotion of an animalistic ideology which is rooted in defeatism and the demonic.

Sunday, March 25, 2012

Blog comment: " are making a lot of potentially very powerful people very, very angry."

In one of his last homilies, Archbishop Oscar Romero, the martyred Archbishop of San Salvador, said: "A preaching that does not point out sin is not the preaching of the gospel. A preaching that makes sinners feel good so that they become entrenched in their sinful state, betrays the gospel's call. A preaching that does not discomfit sinners but lulls them in their sin leaves Zebulun and Naphtali in the shadow of death. A preaching that awakens, a preaching that enlightens -- as when a light turned on awakens and of course annoys a sleeper -- that is the preaching of Christ, calling, "wake up! Be converted!" this is the church's authentic preaching. Naturally, such preaching must meet conflict, must spoil what is miscalled prestige, must disturb, must be persecuted. It cannot get along with the powers of darkness and sin."

Because I oppose that preaching which leaves Zebulun and Naphtali in the shadow of death, I am once again receiving death threats.  Recently I wrote about the fact that Archbishop Vincent Nichols is continuing to tolerate a radical homosexual activist while demonstrating a blatant disregard for the right of the faithful to receive Catholic doctrine in its purity and integrity (Veritatis Splendor, No. 113).  See here.  This resulted in death threats and a comment from an individual calling himself Matt Westwood which, he said, is "a warning that you are making a lot of potentially very powerful people very, very angry."

I will not be deterred.  My patron Saint, St. Paul, exhorts us: " stir into flame the gift of God  that you have through the imposition of my hands. For God did not give us a spirit of cowardice but rather of power and love and self-control. So do not be ashamed of your testimony to our Lord, nor of me, a prisoner for his sake; but bear your share of hardship for the gospel with the strength that comes from God." (2 Timothy 1: 6-8).

We are reminded in Lumen Gentium of the Second Vatican Council that, the Church, in its twofold ministry toward its own members and toward those outside her pale, shares in Jesus’ threefold office of Priest, Prophet and King, that is, it participates in Jesus’ ministry to sanctify, to teach and to govern. While bishops, priests and deacons exercise, within the Church, the ministries of sanctifying, teaching and governing through the power and authority bestowed upon them at their sacramental ordination, all Catholic lay men and women also share in this threefold ministry of Christ. Catholic lay men and women, by their baptismal and confirmational character, are empowered, in Christ through the Holy Spirit, to be priests, prophets and kings and so come to share in the Church’s ministry of sanctification, teaching and governing. Lumen Gentium tells us that, in collaboration with their bishops and clergy, "the faithful who by Baptism are incorporated into Christ, are placed in the People of God, and in their own way share the priestly, prophetic and kingly office of Christ, and to the best of their ability carry on the mission of the whole Christian people in the Church and in the world." (No. 31).

The homosexual movement has become totalitarian.  It seeks to impose its agenda with brute force of necessary.  I have been warning of this for years.  Only recently Dr. Jeff Mirus warned that, "No group is more hateful to modern society than the perceived moralistic prigs who, out of what most perceive as religiously-motivated prejudice, seek to diminish the personal sexual liberty of others. Nothing could be more obvious in our current culture than that such people must be silenced and, if necessary, restrained. Moreover, it seems only right and just that their denunciation of the gay lifestyle and their opposition to gay marriage should be criminalized. In fact, it should be criminalized in the name of liberty. That is why gay marriage is the lie that will create the next Gulag. The insistence on ignoring vice is the hallmark of a debased culture, but the insistence that a lie be publicly affirmed as true is the hallmark of ideological totalitarianism." (See here).

Saturday, March 24, 2012

Can we trust the Sentinel & Enterprise to cover the Catholic Church or issues which concern Catholics?

Professor James Hitchcock has said that many in the media belong to a "self-defined 'enlightened' class who claim the right to judge other people's beliefs, even when they do not understand those beliefs, a claim which clearly contradicts the same enlightened class's constant sermons about 'respect' and 'understanding.' Their favorite cause is 'sexual freedom' and nothing sets off their alarm bells faster than the suggestion that chastity may have some value...Religious believers are continually accused of trying to impose their beliefs on others, which in reality means resisting having secular beliefs imposed on them...The enlightened class obviously does not understand Catholic teachings about many things, nor does it wish to, and it gives itself license to trash those teachings..." (See here).

Just last month the "enlightened class" over at the Fitchburg Sentinel & Enterprise provided anti-Catholic bigot Bill Press the opportunity to trash the Catholic Bishops, accusing them of being deceitful with regard to the Obama administration's contraception mandate and of advancing a teaching which is appallingly "medieval."  Mr. Press wrote, "I love protests, and have taken part in many. But there are real protests and there are phony protests. And one of the phoniest we've ever seen is today's protest by Catholic bishops against the Obama administration's new rules on insurance coverage of contraception.

Here's the truth. On Jan. 20, the Health and Human Services Agency, under Secretary Kathleen Sibelius, issued a new rule that insurance policies, as part of their basic package, must offer contraceptive services with no deductible or co-pay. An exception was made for 335,000 churches, missions, or other places of worship where all employees were Catholic or members of any religion which opposed contraception as a matter of faith.

The new ruling does not require Catholic hospitals or clinics to provide birth control pills or devices. It does not force Catholics to practice contraception. It does not interfere with anyone's religion. It does not prevent priests and bishops from continuing their appalling medieval and widely ignored attempts to convince Catholics that contraception is sinful. It simply says that there can no longer be two kinds of health insurance policies: those that cover contraception and those that don't.

Catholic bishops are being dishonest. They accuse the president of infringing on religious liberty. Yet they fail to acknowledge, for example, that not everybody who works in a Catholic hospital or university is a Catholic."  (February 13, 2012 edition of the Sentinel & Enterprise).

Even non-Catholics of good will can see through Mr. Press' nonsense.  But to label the Church's teaching on artificial contraception "medieval" is just hateful and proves Archbishop Fulton Sheen was correct when he said that, "There are not a hundred people in America who hate the Catholic Church. There are millions of people who hate what they wrongly believe to be the Catholic Church — which is, of course, quite a different thing."

This ignorance as to what the Church is and what she teaches pervades most of our secular media.  The Sentinel & Enterprise routinely publishes opinion pieces which are just wrong on the facts.  Not only is Catholic teaching often misrepresented but the newspaper fails to get even basic facts correct.  For example, in an article which may be found here, the newspaper reports on more than 25 protesters and their children who stood outside St. Anna's Parish on Lancaster Street in Leominster to show their opposition to the Obama adminstration's contraception mandate.  The article says that one protester is from St. Camilla's Church in Fitchburg.  The problem?  The parish referred to is dedicated not to St. Camilla but rather to St. Camillus de Lellis, who was actually my father's patron saint.*

Now before you say, "Well that's an honest mistake," consider that this Catholic parish is in the Sentinel & Enterprises' very own city!  And they still managed to get it wrong!  But hey, why should the "enlightened class" worry about such matters?  After all, the Church and her teaching are merely "medieval throwbacks" to a "superstitious time" right?

I wrote the editor of the newspaper a while back offering to cover the Church and Church-related issues.  I didn't get a response.  But the newspaper did publish this gem on Easter Sunday.

Can we trust the Sentinel & Enterprise to cover the Catholic Church and issues which concern Catholics with fairness, accuracy and objectivity?  What do you think?

*  More accurately, the parish is now St. Bernard's at St. Camillus.

Friday, March 23, 2012

Archbishop Vincent Nichols continues to tolerate dissent from Terence Weldon

Terence Weldon, the radical homosexual activist who authors the "Queering the Church" Blog and who serves as an Extraordinary Minister at the infamous Soho Masses in England - the same disturbed individual who has blasphemously suggested that Our Lord Jesus had a homosexual inclination - is once again challenging the authoritative teaching of the Catholic Church regarding the homosexual inclination.  He writes, "In the CDF Hallowe’en Letter [here he is sarcastically and irreverently refering to the October 1, 1986 document entitled "Letter on the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons" published by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith], possibly the most offensive and damaging element was the labelling of the homosexual orientation as 'intrinsically disordered' – but just what does 'disordered' in fact mean? Science has shown from mental health and from animal biology that it [the homosexual inclination] is entirely natural, and not in any scientific sense disordered." (See here).

Actually science has shown exactly the opposite.  Dutch psychologist Gerard J.M. van den Aardweg, Ph.D., a specialist on homosexuality (unlike Mr. Weldon who has no expertise in this area), says that the claim that homosexuality is normal is one of those statements that are "so foolish that only intellectuals could believe them." It is like saying that anorexia nervosa is healthy. Dr. Aardweg notes that, "The term neurotic describes such relationships well. It suggests the ego-centeredness of the relationship; the attention-seeking instead of loving...Neurotic, in short, suggests all kinds of dramas and childish conflicts as well as the basic disinterestedness in the partner, notwithstanding the shallow pretensions of 'love.' Nowhere is there more self-deception in the homosexual than in his representation of himself as a lover. One partner is important to the other only insofar as he satisfies that other's needs. Real, unselfish love for a desired partner would, in fact, end up destroying homosexual 'love'!" (Dr. Gerard J.M. van den Aardweg, The Battle for Normality, Ignatius Press, 1997, pp. 62-63).

In an interview with ZENIT, which may be found here, Dale O'Leary, a writer and researcher for the Catholic Medical Association, says that the CMA has found in its research that, "..well-designed studies that compare persons with same-sex attractions with the general public have found that persons with same-sex attractions are far more likely to suffer from psychological disorders...The studies published in the Archives of General Psychiatry found that persons self-identified as homosexual in comparison to the general public had almost double the rate of suicidal ideation or attempts, substance abuse problems and psychological disorders. One of the studies found that 78.6% of the gay, lesbian or bisexual group suffered from multiple disorders...And there are other problems: Domestic violence is more common among same-sex couples. Men with same-sex attractions are more likely to become infected with a STD, including HIV, hepatitis or HPV, which can lead to cancer. Thus, several studies suggest that 50% of men who have sex with men will become HIV positive before age 50."

And what of Mr. Weldon's ridiculous claim that science has shown "from animal biology" that the homosexual inclination is not "in any scientific sense disordered"?  It is significant that Mr. Weldon doesn't produce any research to back his asinine claim.  This because there is none.  Quite the reverse is true.  In fact, Dr. Antonio Pardo, Professor of Bioethics at the University of Navarre, Spain, explains that: "Properly speaking, homosexuality does not exist among animals...For reasons of survival, the reproductive instinct among animals is always directed towards an individual of the opposite sex.  Therefore, an animal can never be homosexual as such.  Nevertheless, the interaction of other instincts (particularly dominance) can result in behavior that appears to be homosexual.  Such behavior cannot be equated with an animal homosexuality.  All it means is that animal sexual behavior encompasses aspects beyond that of reproduction." (Antonio Pardo, "Aspectos medicos de la homosexualidad," Nuestro Tiempo, Jul-Aug. 1995, pp. 82-89).

Mr. Weldon betrays his ignorance with the "if animals do it then it must be natural" argument.  Animals frequently engage in other forms of behavior such as parental killing of offspring or intra-species devouring.  Shall we then say that such behaviors would be "normal" and "healthy"?

But enough of Terence Weldon.  I'm frankly far more concerned about his Bishop - Archbishop Vincent Nichols.  The Archbishop doesn't seem concerned at all about the right of the faithful to receive Catholic doctrine in its purity and integrity (Veritatis Splendor, No. 113).  He seems oblivious to the scandal of the Soho Masses and the actions of Terence Weldon.  See here.

Thursday, March 22, 2012

The Visitation Report into the Catholic Church in Ireland: Rebuking the Culture of Dissent

The Visitation Report into the Church in Ireland, ordered by Pope Benedict XVI, the full text of which may be found here, says "It must be stressed that dissent from the fundamental teachings of the Church is not the authentic path towards renewal."

The sexual abuse crisis which exploded throughout the Catholic Church in Ireland [and elsewhere] has its origin in a Culture of Dissent.  For, as Father Vincent Miceli has reminded us, "falsity is the heart of immorality."  Betrayal arises in man's heart and is soon manifested in his actions which often culminate in criminal violence.  But, as Fr. Miceli lamented, "while we are all aware of the tremendous role of violence in the unfolding history of human events...what is not realized is that the apparent arbitrariness of and haphazardness of violence can be and ought to be seriously and precisely analyzed from the philosophical and theological point of view." (Essay entitled "The Taproot of Violence).

For far too long, many priests have been offering not the fine wheat of sound doctrine but the chaff of theological dissent from the teaching of the Church's Magisterium.  Hence we have experienced not renewal but a spiritual dry rot. Vatican II, in its' Decree on the Ministry and Life of Priests (Presbyterorum Ordinis) No. 4, had this to say: "The People of God are joined together primarily by the word of the living God. And rightfully they expect this from their priests. Since no one can be saved who does not first believe, priests, as co-workers with their bishops, have the primary duty of proclaiming the Gospel of God to all. In this way they fulfill the command of the Lord: "Going therefore into the whole world preach the Gospel to every creature" (Mk 16:15), and they establish and build up the People of God. Through the saving word the spark of faith is lit in the hearts of unbelievers, and fed in the hearts of the faithful. This is the way that the congregation of faithful is started and grows, just as the Apostle describes: "Faith comes from hearing, and hearing through the word of Christ" (Rom 10:17).

To all men, therefore, priests are debtors that the truth of the Gospel which they have may be given to others. And so, whether by entering into profitable dialogue they bring people to the worship of God, whether by openly preaching they proclaim the mystery of Christ, or whether in the light of Christ they treat contemporary problems, they are relying not on their own wisdom for it is the word of Christ they teach, and it is to conversion and holiness that they exhort all men."

According to the Council, the task of priests is "not to teach their own wisdom but God's Word." And this task is of no less importance for the priest than his offering of the Eucharistic Sacrifice. Both of these are inseperably linked to each other: "The ministerial priesthood has the task not only of representing Christ - Head of the Church - before the assembly of the faithful, but also of acting in the name of the whole Church when presenting to God the prayer of the Church, and above all when offering the Eucharistic sacrifice." (Catechism of the Catholic Church, No. 1552).

For this reason, priests have the very serious obligation to teach the faithful under their care that it is never licit to have sexual relations outside of marriage; that a Catholic cannot (having been validly married in the Church) after divorce, marry another or otherwise pretend that sexual relations with another individual are somehow "marital"; that "formal cooperation in an abortion constitutes a grave offense" and that '"the Church attaches the canonical penalty of excommunication to this crime against human life" (CCC, 2272); and that "every action which, whether in anticipation of the conjugal act, or in its accomplishment, or in the development of its natural consequences, proposes, whether as an end or as a means, to render procreation impossible, is intrinsically evil.." (CCC, No. 2370, citing Humanae Vitae, No. 14).

The Church proposes these (and other teachings) as true and it does so in the name of Christ. The priest is not to question them. He is not to ignore them or neglect them out of a false sense of "compassion" or "charity." It was Pope Paul VI who said that, "To diminish in no way the saving teaching of Christ constitutes an eminent form of charity for souls." (Humanae Vitae, No. 29). Pope John Paul II reiterated these words in Familiaris Consortio, No. 33.

We are reminded in Lumen Gentium 14 of the Second Vatican Council that: "He is not saved, however, who, though part of the body of the Church, does not persevere in charity. He remains indeed in the bosom of the Church, but, as it were, only in a "bodily" manner and not "in his heart." All the Church's children should remember that their exalted status is to be attributed not to their own merits but to the special grace of Christ. If they fail moreover to respond to that grace in thought, word and deed, not only shall they not be saved but they will be the more severely judged."

When a priest ignores or neglects his duty, his task, of serving the Word of God with fidelity, he fails to persevere in that charity described by Popes Paul VI and John Paul II as a charity which diminishes in no way the saving teaching of Christ. And he will be the more severely judged (Luke 12:48)*.

* "..Much will be required of the person entrusted with much, and still more will be demanded of the person entrusted with more."

Monday, March 19, 2012

Lesbian demands that her children's Catholic school remove Catechism quote on homosexuality

Ann Michelle Tesluk, a lesbian whose children attend a Catholic school, is demanding that the school, which is located in Peterborough, Ontario, remove a Catechism quote from a pamphlet because it refers to the homosexual inclination as "objectively disordered."  See here.

I wrote a series of posts after the Archdiocese of Boston announced a new policy which says that Catholic schools can partner with homosexual parents.  I reminded His Eminence Sean Cardinal O'Malley that, in its Declaration on Christian Education (Gravissimum Educationis), No. 3, the Vatican II Fathers explained that parents "must be recognized as the primary and principal educators" of their children and that, "This role in education is so important that only with difficulty can it be supplied where it is lacking. Parents are the ones who must create a family atmosphere animated by love and respect for God and man, in which the well-rounded personal and social education of children is fostered."

And I added, "But parents who are living in a same-sex relationship cannot create that 'family atmosphere animated by love and respect for God and man' in which 'the well-rounded personal and social education of children is fostered.' The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, in its document entitled Considerations Regarding Proposals to Give Legal Recognition to Unions Between Homosexual Persons, has said that adoption of children by homosexuals 'would actually mean doing violence to these children,' and that their situation of dependence would place them 'in an environment that is not conducive to their full human development.' (No. 7).

And then I wrote:  "Can Catholic schools partner with homosexual or lesbian parents? In a word, no. Archbishop Charles Chaput has already addressed this fact in a statement issued earlier this year. The Catholic school must strive to ensure that the environment in which a child lives as he or she is being formed as a human being corresponds to the end of Catholic education. And what is that end? Vatican II teaches clearly that, "A Christian education...has as its principal purpose this goal: that the baptized, while they are gradually introduced to the knowledge of the mystery of salvation, become ever more aware of the gift of faith they have received, and that they learn in addition how to worship God the Father in spirit and truth (cf. Jn 4:23) especially in liturgical action, and be conformed in their personal lives according to the new man created in justice and holiness of truth (Eph 4:22-24); also that they develop into perfect manhood, to the mature measure of the fullness of Christ (cf. Eph 4:13).."

How important is it that a Catholic school strive to ensure that a child's environment corresponds to the end of a Catholic education? Pope Pius XI provides us with an answer, "In order to obtain perfect education, it is of the utmost importance to see that all those conditions which surround the child during the period of his formation, in other words that the combination of circumstances which we call environment, correspond exactly to the end proposed." (Encyclical Letter Divini Illius Magistri, No. 70).

Pope Pius XI continues, "The first natural and necessary element in this environment, as regards education, is the family, and this precisely because so ordained by the Creator Himself. Accordingly that education, as a rule, will be more effective and lasting which is received in a well-ordered and well-disciplined Christian family; and more efficacious in proportion to the clear and constant good example set, first by parents, and then by other members of the household." (No. 71). The full Encyclical may be found here.

Same-sex parents are not equipped to provide that "well-ordered and well-disciplined Christian family" necessary for the effective reception of Christian education. Not to mention the conditions required for the normal development of the child. See here for example.

In one post from January of 2011, I addressed Cardinal O'Malley writing, "Our Lord Jesus spoke in the sixth chapter of Matthew, verse 24: 'No one can serve two masters; for he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and mammon.' Now, mammon can represent either money or any other created thing which stands in the way of a total commitment to the Lord Jesus....My question: By allowing children of homosexual households into Catholic schools, are you not thereby inviting violence and disorder? After all, how can these children be expected to serve two masters? Will they not come to hate the one and love the other? Will they not be devoted to one while despising the other? Either these children will come to fully embrace Catholic teaching and thereby be set in opposition to their parents illicit sexual behavior, or [and this is the far more likely scenario given that children tend to love their parents or guardians], they will come to despise the Church while condoning intrinsically disordered behavior which have they grown accustom to being exposed to."

No man can serve two masters.  He will hate the one and love the other.  He will be devoted to the one and despise the other.  Violence and disorder have been introduced into those Catholic schools and school districts which believe they can partner with homosexual parents.  Just as I warned.

But then, my patron Saint - for whom I was named - said it best under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit some 2,000 years ago: "Do not be yoked with those who are different, with unbelievers.  For what partnership do rightousness and lawlessness have? Or what fellowship does light have with darkness.  What accord has Christ with Belial?  Or what has a believer in common with an unbeliever?" (2 Corinthians 6: 14, 15).

God's Holy Word assures us that rightousness cannot partner with lawlessness.  And homosexual parents who are not committed toward living chaste lives or who reject the teaching of the Lord Jesus through His Church are not committed to righteousness but rather lawlessness.

Sunday, March 18, 2012

Martial Law just around the corner?

As this article explains, "Leading GOP candidate Ron Paul has warned in recent interviews that the amendments passed in the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) are not only dangerous, but authorize the establishment of total martial law inside the United States. Not only does the bill, in sections 1031 and 1032, declare the unconstitutional right to detain Americans indefinitely without trial, but it authorizes an Internet offensive and online Pentagon takeover under the pretext of cybersecurity and stopping online piracy."

People are being gradually desensitized and lulled into a false sense of security. Most simply aren't aware of the dangers which are advancing steadily; dangers which I have been warning about for years. William Parker, in an article entitled "Your fourth amendment rights under attack by Obama, DOJ," writes: "There is no talk of 'the slippery slope' anymore, which so many people used as an argument against many policies enacted by the Bush administration. Yet, now more than ever, it seems the slippery slope has given way to the sheer drop from the cliffs of sanity. There are intentional actions already in progress to simply take from us the rights we have apparently taken for granted. The Dept. of Justice apparently believes that U.S. citizens do not enjoy a "reasonable expectation of privacy" with respect to cell phone use, and have been attempting to acquire the ability to simply demand user information from the cell phone companies without going through standard procedures to obtain a warrant for specific information on specific individuals for use in specific prosecutions. They are assaulting the fourth amendment in yet another case, asserting that "email over 181 days old should not be protected from warrantless search and seizure."

Where is the outrage? These are not things that are occurring as a consequence of, or as a by-product of, some other action being taken for some otherwise lofty purpose. The government means to take these freedoms, piece by piece, with the hopes that nobody will care until it's too late."

Saturday, March 17, 2012

I agree with Father Daniel J. Becker on the need for exorcism and deliverance prayer...let's begin within the Diocese itself!

Pope Benedict XVI, a little while back, said that: "Today we see in a truly terrifying way that the greatest persecution of the church does not come from outside enemies but is born of sin within the church." (See here).  This truth is often downplayed by some when it is not forgotten altogether.  In this week's Catholic Free Press, Father Daniel J. Becker (who to his credit acknowledges that "each one of us is a sinner, with particular faults and bad habits which darken our souls"), writes in an article entitled "Shine the light on evil": "The truth of today's Gospel passage, 'men preferred darkness to light, because their works are evil' is evident at Planned Parenthood in Worcester.  Those promoting the evil of abortion do not want to hear the truth, nor do they want anyone else to hear it...Anyone paying attention can see that our society prefers darkness to light, and also can see 'an enemy's hand in this.' (Mt 13: 30)."

Unfortunately, the same may be said of many of those who have, or are currently, serving within the Worcester Diocese.  For example, Sister Anna Marie Kane, S.S.J., who served as Vicar of Religious for the diocese, once said that, "Abortion is a delicate and complex reality.  We must continue our struggle of respecting other's choices even if we don't agree with them."    Dr. Vincent Forde, who served in the Office of Religious Education for the diocese, when asked if contraception is sinful, responded by saying, "I have plenty of words from the Church that it is sinful.  I've not word from God on that." Dr. Forde also insisted that, "The Church does not have objective certainty in anything God has not revealed, and He has not on questions of contraception or homosexuality." Father Paul O'Connell, who served as a Religious Educator, said that, "The issue is not whether someone is sexually active before marriage, but is it moral and committed?" and "..whether someone should have sex before marriage is an individual moral decision, based on their conscience."  Douglas Kimball, who served with the Office of Family Life Ministry, asserted that, "Humanae Vitae is simply advice from the Pope.  The Pope did not mean this was the last word on the subject."

Just last year, the Worcester Commission for Women invited dissident theologian Elizabeth Dreyer to speak at its "Gather Us In" conference.  Dreyer is known for her dissent from the Church's teaching on women's ordination and was one of sixteen who signed a document agitating for change in the Church's teaching.  See here and here.

The Commission for Women has also featured Joyce Rupp as a speaker.  A self proclaimed "spiritual midwife," Rupp, a Catholic religious - at least in name -  claims to have learnt a lot from Eagle Crux a native American spiritualist and feels that she resonates with mystical islamic sufism. She tells us that everything is made of stardust including ourselves and that stones have as much right to be here as we have, infact more so because they have been here longer. Her books include how to draw sacred mandela dancing circles and even have the rites for the blessing of the sexual organs! On Ireland she says that the Irish love of learning was first fostered by the wise druids and in the same article goes on to extoll New-Ageism as valuable and that some in the church are envious of it because it draws people toward spiritual growth. In her work entitled "Cosmic Dance," Rupp describes an encounter with a group of lesbians: :Different from me, thousands of them. Holding hands, kissing, arms around each other, stretching me beyond the safe world of heterosexuality. A gathering of lesbians challenging me to enter a world I never visit."

 I could go on but you get the idea.  Years of institutionalized apostasy have taken their toll on a diocese crippled by a deep spiritual sickness.  I agree with Fr. Becker when he says that, "There is evidence for [a] connection between demonic activity and the abortion industry.."  Which is why I called for deliverance prayer in Fitchburg, Massachusetts when Planned Parenthood set up shop.  My call was simply ignored. See here.

I fully agree with Father Becker that exorcism prayers will drive out the demons which are behind the demonic abortion industry.  I also support deliverance prayer and fasting (and most importantly the Sacrament of Penance - hence the title of this Blog which is dedicated to Our Lady of La Salette who brings us to reconciliation with her Son Jesus) as weapons in the spiritual battle.  But just as Jesus cleansed the Temple with a whip fashioned by cord, we must first cleanse the local Church before seeking to evangelize a broken world which prefers darkness to light.  Why?  Because until we remove the plank from our own eyes, we will not be able to see clearly enough to remove the speck from our brother's eye.  Yes, I believe somebody said that.  Hence the old axiom: Nemo potest dare quod non habet - You can't give what you do not possess.

When can we expect the Diocese or Worcester to begin?

Thursday, March 15, 2012

Rejecting the Crucifix as offensive: Preparation for the Reign of Antichrist

When one of the world's leading exorcists, Father Gabriele Amorth, was asked how one can tell if someone is possessed, he replied, "By their aversion to the sacrament and all things sacred." One of the clearest signs of demonic possession is a hatred for the Eucharist or the crucifix.  Back in December of 2009, little Jalen Cromwell of Taunton, Massachusetts, was forced to undergo psychological evaluations for drawing a stick figure of the crucified Jesus.  See here.  And electrician Colin Atkinson's palm cross was deemed "insensitive."  See here.  As noted here, "..David Cameron's government will insist at the European Court of Human Rights that Christians can be sacked by their employers for wearing crosses or crucifixes."  And remember when the White House asked Georgetown University to cover the IHS monogram (a symbol of Jesus' holy name) at Gaston Hall where Obama was scheduled to deliver a speech?  See here.

There are numerous other examples of this growing hostility toward the cross or the crucifix.  In his treatise on ascetical and mystical theology, The Very Reverend Adolphe Tanquerey, S.S., D.D., explains that, "The Sacramentals and blessed objects are also efficacious remedies [for possession and diabolical temptation] because of the prayers said by the Church when blessing them...The Crucifix, the Sign of the Cross, and especially genuine relics of the True Cross are terrifying to the devil who was vanquished by the Cross: 'That the one who conquered by a tree should himself be likewise conquered by the Tree.'  For the same reason the Evil Spirit dreads the invocation of the Holy Name of Jesus, which, on the Master's Own promise, possesses a wondrous power for putting the devil to flight." (The Spiritual Life: A Treatise on Ascetical and Mystical Theology, p. 724, citing the Preface for the Feast of the Holy Cross, Tan Books).

 Antichrist will reveal himself within the context of an atheistic, materialistic society which has lost its faith in God and which is prepared to fall down and worship man.  The Antichrist will not tolerate the Cross or Christian symbols.  In his Life of Christ (Image Books, 1977, p. 10), Archbishop Fulton John Sheen wrote, "We do know that at the end of time, when the great conflict between the forces of good and evil takes place, Satan will appear without the Cross, as the Great Philanthropist and Social Reformer to become the final temptation of mankind." Indeed, Paul Henri-Spaak, who served as Belgian Prime Minister and gained international prominence in 1945 when he was elected chairman of the first session of the General Assembly of the United Nations, had called for such a "Great Philanthropist and Social Reformer": "We do not want another committee, we have too many already. What we want is a man of sufficient stature to hold the allegiance of all people, and to lift us out of the economic morass in which we are sinking. Send us such a man and be he God or the Devil, we will receive him."

Saint Paul assures us that this man of iniquity will seek to displace God and to be worshipped himself.  Robert Hugh Benson, in his classic The Lord of the World (a most prophetic work) describes the humanitarian religion of Antichrist as one which will replace Christian symbols such as the Crucifix with its own symbols: "Humanitarianism is a religion devoid of the supernatural.  It is developing a ritual under freemasonry; it has a creed, 'God is man'; and the rest.  It has, therefore, a real food of a sort to offer religious cravings: it idealizes, and yet makes no demands upon the spiritual faculties.  Then, they have the use of all the churches except ours, and of all the Cathedrals; and they are beginning at last to encourage sentiment.  Then they may display their symbols and we may not..."

Symbols are powerful because they convey meaning.  Which is why we are experiencing a push to strip Christian symbols from the public square.  While Colin Atkinson came under fire for his palm cross and Jalen Cromwell was forced to undergo psychological evaluations because of his hand-drawn Crucifix, Andres Serrano's "Piss Christ," which depicts a Crucifix submerged in a glass of Serrano's own urine mixed with cow's blood, is considered by some to be a "work of art" and received $15,000 from the taxpayer-funded National Endowment for the Arts.  Serrano's supporters have argued that the "Piss Christ" represents an issue of artistic freedom and freedom of speech.

And while the Obama White House asked for the IHS monogram to be covered up at Georgetown (a request which was honored), the same Obama White House had no such problem with a Masonic symbol - see photograph.

Tuesday, March 13, 2012

"..there is in preparation a true schism which could soon become open and proclaimed.."

Gary Gutting, who teaches philosophy at the University of Notre Dame, has declared in the New York Times that the faithful "decide the nature and extent of episcopal authority" and what is moral or immoral.  He writes, "...haven’t the members of the Catholic Church recognized their bishops as having full and sole authority to determine the teachings of the Church? By no means. There was, perhaps, a time when the vast majority of Catholics accepted the bishops as having an absolute right to define theological and ethical doctrines. Those days, if they ever existed, are long gone. Most Catholics — meaning, to be more precise, people who were raised Catholic or converted as adults and continue to take church teachings and practices seriously — now reserve the right to reject doctrines insisted on by their bishops and to interpret in their own way the doctrines that they do accept. This is above all true in matters of sexual morality, especially birth control, where the majority of Catholics have concluded that the teachings of the bishops do not apply to them. Such “reservations” are an essential constraint on the authority of the bishops.

The bishops and the minority of Catholics who support their full authority have tried to marginalize Catholics who do not accept the bishops as absolute arbiters of doctrine. They speak of 'cafeteria Catholics' or merely 'cultural Catholics,' and imply that the only 'real Catholics' are those who accept their teachings entirely. But this marginalization begs the question I’m raising about the proper source of the judgment that the bishops have divine authority. Since, as I’ve argued, members of the church are themselves this source, it is not for the bishops but for the faithful to decide the nature and extent of episcopal authority. The bishops truly are, as they so often say, 'servants of the servants of the Lord.'

It may be objected that, regardless of what individual Catholics think, the bishops in fact exercise effective control over the church. This is true in many respects, but only to the extent that members of the church accept their authority. Stalin’s alleged query about papal authority ('How many divisions does the Pope have?') expresses more than just cynical realpolitik. The authority of the Catholic bishops is enforceable morally but not militarily or politically. It resides entirely in the fact that people freely accept it." (See here).

In his Encyclical Letter Humanum Genus (on Freemasonry), Pope Leo XIII warned that: "Wickedly, also, but at the same time quite consistently, do those act who do away with the expectation of the joys of heaven, and bring down all happiness to the level of mortality, and, as it were, sink it in the earth. Of what We have said the following fact, astonishing not so much in itself as in its open expression, may serve as a confirmation. For, since generally no one is accustomed to obey crafty and clever men so submissively as those whose soul is weakened and broken down by the domination of the passions, there have been in the sect of the Freemasons some who have plainly determined and proposed that, artfully and of set purpose, the multitude should be satiated with a boundless license of vice, as, when this had been done, it would easily come under their power and authority for any acts of daring.

What refers to domestic life in the teaching of the naturalists is almost all contained in the following declarations: that marriage belongs to the genus of commercial contracts, which can rightly be revoked by the will of those who made them, and that the civil rulers of the State have power over the matrimonial bond; that in the education of youth nothing is to be taught in the matter of religion as of certain and fixed opinion; and each one must be left at liberty to follow, when he comes of age, whatever he may prefer. To these things the Freemasons fully assent; and not only assent, but have long endeavoured to make them into a law and institution. For in many countries, and those nominally Catholic, it is enacted that no marriages shall be considered lawful except those contracted by the civil rite; in other places the law permits divorce; and in others every effort is used to make it lawful as soon as may be. Thus, the time is quickly coming when marriages will be turned into another kind of contract-that is into changeable and uncertain unions which fancy may join together, and which the same when changed may disunite....With the greatest unanimity the sect of the Freemasons also endeavours to take to itself the education of youth. They think that they can easily mold to their opinions that soft and pliant age, and bend it whither they will; and that nothing can be more fitted than this to enable them to bring up the youth of the State after their own plan. Therefore, in the education and instruction of children they allow no share, either of teaching or of discipline, to the ministers of the Church; and in many places they have procured that the education of youth shall be exclusively in the hands of laymen, and that nothing which treats of the most important and most holy duties of men to God shall be introduced into the instructions on morals.

What, therefore, sect of the Freemasons is, and what course it pursues, appears sufficiently from the summary We have briefly given. Their chief dogmas are so greatly and manifestly at variance with reason that nothing can be more perverse. To wish to destroy the religion and the Church which God Himself has established, and whose perpetuity He insures by His protection, and to bring back after a lapse of eighteen centuries the manners and customs of the pagans, is signal folly and audacious impiety. Neither is it less horrible nor more tolerable that they should repudiate the benefits which Jesus Christ so mercifully obtained, not only for individuals, but also for the family and for civil society, benefits which, even according to the judgment and testimony of enemies of Christianity, are very great. In this insane and wicked endeavor we may almost see the implacable hatred and spirit of revenge with which Satan himself is inflamed against Jesus Christ.

So also the studious endeavour of the Freemasons to destroy the chief foundations of justice and honesty, and to co-operate with those who would wish, as if they were mere animals, to do what they please, tends only to the ignominious and disgraceful ruin of the human race. The evil, too, is increased by the dangers which threaten both domestic and civil society. As We have elsewhere shown, in marriage, according to the belief of almost every nation, there is something sacred and religious; and the law of God has determined that marriages shall not be dissolved. If they are deprived of their sacred character, and made dissoluble, trouble and confusion in the family will be the result, the wife being deprived of her dignity and the children left without protection as to their interests and well being.

To have in public matters no care for religion, and in the arrangement and administration of civil affairs to have no more regard for God than if He did not exist, is a rashness unknown to the very pagans; for in their heart and soul the notion of a divinity and the need of public religion were so firmly fixed that they would have thought it easier to have city without foundation than a city without God. Human society, indeed for which by nature we are formed, has been constituted by God the Author of nature; and from Him, as from their principle and source, flow in all their strength and permanence the countless benefits with which society abounds. As we are each of us admonished by the very voice of nature to worship God in piety and holiness, as the Giver unto us of life and of all that is good therein, so also and for the same reason, nations and States are bound to worship Him; and therefore it is clear that those who would absolve society from all religious duty act not only unjustly but also with ignorance and folly."

Most people today have become so desensitized that they are incapable of seeing just how far this masonic agenda has advanced. The movement to eradicate Christianity is accelerating. Masonry, if it is to prepare the way for the Man of Sin, must concentrate its attacks on the one institution which stands in its way: the Holy Roman Catholic Church. After more than two thousand years of Christian history, the charge levelled against Christians by the pagan historian Tacitus is being revived: The Christians are the enemies of the human race. (Annals, XV, 44).

The new humanitarian religion of Antichrist must institute its own cult, ministers and temples which will be filled with its own faithful who have replaced the hope for Heaven with the idols of humanity, fertility, maternity and virility as surely as the Greco-Romans worshiped the statues of Venus and Apollo. Already we are witnessing an increasing hatred for the Crucifix. As Romano Guardini warned so long ago: "One day the Antichrist will come: a human being who introduces an order of things in which rebellion against God will attain its ultimate power. He will be filled with enlightenment and strength. The ultimate aim of all aims will be to prove that existence witout Christ is possible - nay rather, that Christ is the enemy of existence, which can be fully realized only when all Christian values have been destroyed. His arguments will be so impressive, supported by means of such tremendous power - violent and diplomatic, material and intellectual - that to reject them will result in almost insurmountable scandal, and everyone whose eyes are not opened by grace will be lost. Then it will be clear what the Christian essence really is: that which stems not from the world, but from the heart of God; victory of grace over the world; redemption of the world, for her true essence is not to be found in herself, but in God, from whom she has received it. When God becomes all in all, the world will finally burst into flower."

Our Lady warned us on November 15, 1990 that, "The great trial has arrived for your Church.  Thse errors which have brought people to the loss of the true faith have continued to spread.  Many pastors have been neither attentive nor vigilant and have allowed many rapacious wolves, clothed as lambs, to insinuate themselves into the flock in order to bring disorder and destruction.  How great is your responsibility, O pastors of the holy Church of God!  You continue along the path of division from the Pope and of the rejection of his Magisterium; indeed, in a hidden way, there is in preparation a true schism which could soon become open and proclaimed.  And then, there will remain only a small faithful remnant, over which I will keep watch in the garden of my Immaculate Heart." (To Father Gobbi).

The schism Our Lady spoke of is indeed beginning to emerge.  A new humanitarian religion and a new Future Church are being constructed.  The new religion will be devoid of the supernatural.  It will be man-centered.  Men will decide for themselves what is moral and immoral.  They will build this new Church in their own image and likeness.  Those who still adhere to Christ and His teaching will be declared enemies of progress and the new Moloch State.

Monday, March 12, 2012

Catholic Free Press columnists and falsity...

Falsity is the heart of immorality.  And the Diocese of Worcester, Massachusetts has been crippled for years by the spirit of falsity.  In a previous post, I said that: "Any priest who convinces those entrusted to his care to rationalize sin is no lover of souls but is instead an enemy of souls. When a person is encouraged to rationalize what is known to be wicked in the sight of the Lord, that person opens a chasm between themselves and God which continues to grow wider and wider until they can no longer hear His call and discern the word of truth that He has spoken."

Recently, I received an anonymous comment accusing me [falsely] of "slandering" a couple of columnists who have been featured in The Catholic Free Press.  This because I exposed their errors.  I usually don't respond to anonymous comments [anyone who refuses to use their real name when making an accusation isn't really worth the time after all], but I do so here to once again highlight the spirit of dishonesty which has infected the Worcester Diocese like a cancer.  Calumny, as defined by the Catechism of the Catholic Church [something this confused soul should spend some time with],  consists of "remarks contrary to the truth" which results in harm to "the reputation of others" while giving "occasion for false judgments concerning them." (CCC, 2477).

Now the two columnists which I am supposed to have "slandered" are Father John Catoir and Stacy Trasancos.  The first, as noted here, is promoting what amounts to subjectivist conscience.  And, as Dr. Germain Grisez tells us: "The sin of deliberate nonassent is committed by those who rationalize their failure to assent as following their 'conscience,' using the word in a subjectivist sense.  Conscience truly so-called is formed by moral truth, which can be known with certitude by the help of the Church's teaching.  'Conscience' in a subjectivist sense refers to one's own opinions and preferences, treated as more authoritative than any practical truth or requirement originating beyond oneself.  But to treat one's own opinions and preferences as more authoritative than the Church's teaching is deliberate refusal to give that teaching the assent it deserves; and this refusal is only rationalized, not justified, by saying: 'My conscience tells me it is right for me to do X, so it is right for me, no matter what the Pope says!'"

In his Encyclical Letter Humanae Vitae, Pope Paul VI teaches clearly that spouses, "are not free to do as they like in the service of transmitting life, on the supposition that it is lawful for them to decide independently of other considerations what is the right course to follow.  On the contrary, they are bound to ensure that what they do corresponds to the will of God the Creator."  What is this if not a complete rejection of subjectivist conscience?

The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, in its Instruction on the Ecclesial Vocation of the Theologian, explains that, "..argumentation appealing to the obligation to follow one's own conscience cannot legitimate dissent.  This is true, first of all, because conscience illumines the practical judgment about a decision to make, while here we are concerned with the truth of a doctrinal pronouncement.  This is furthermore the case because while the theologian, like every believer, must follow his conscience, he is also obliged to form it.  Conscience is not an independent and infallible faculty.  It is an act of moral judgment regarding a responsible choice.  A right conscience is one duly illumined by faith and by the objective moral law and it presupposes, as well, the uprightness of the will in the pursuit of the true good."

So much for Fr. Catoir, purveyor of a subjectivist conscience.  The second, Stacy Trasancos, I dealt with here.  I wrote, "In a Blog post on the subject of women's ordination, Mrs. Trasancos writes, "We know that by the end of the first century the Roman Catholic Church was established and there can be little doubt that the cultural influences of that time and place affected the doctrine [that only men are called to the ministerial priesthood]. We do also know that the Church has evolved over time and that part of theology's goal is to communicate faith to changing cultures. For these reasons, maybe the question of women in the priesthood will remain unsettled. There isn't any hard logic to support the idea that the concrete forms of the ecclesiastical offices cannot be changed....Whether women should or will someday be priests, isn't for this single writer to say." (See here).

I appealed to the CDF's document Inter Insigniores to refute Trasancos' falsehood [that the Church's doctrine was affected by cultural influences] as well as her assertion (via a quotation she cites) that there isn't any "hard logic to support the idea that the concrete forms of the ecclesiastical offices cannot be changed."  And then I cited Pope John Paul II in Ordinatio Sacerdotalis, No. 4: " 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."

When one sets oneself against a teaching of the Church which must be held definitively, one sets oneself against the teaching of the Church.  This truth is made clear in Canon 750 of the Code of Canon Law.  Archbishop J. Francis Stafford of Denver has said [correctly] that the issue of women's ordination has been explored exhaustively, and now "it is time to move on...The Church's teaching is definitive, and has been set forth infallibly by formal declaration. It will not and cannot change. Therefore, for those who see with the eyes of faith, the matter is resolved"

For Trasancos to suggest that the matter isn't necessarily resolved is dishonest. 

I'll say it again: falsity is the heart of immorality.

Saturday, March 10, 2012

Father John Catoir and those who produce The Catholic Free Press: the Church's teaching regarding artificial contraception is "beyond the strength" of many Catholics...

In a previous post, I noted how The Catholic Free Press [official newspaper of the Diocese of Worcester, Massachusetts], is now surprised that the government is mandating contraception and I wrote, "Once a people appeal to conscience in order to condone sin, it is only a matter of time before such sin is openly mandated. Long before contraception was being mandated by the government, there were those in the Church - including throughout the Diocese of Worcester - who were unleashing the leaven of infidelity by neglecting to preach against sin or by appealing to a dissenting notion of the primacy of conscience.

Richard Blanchard was documenting this infidelity (within the Worcester Diocese) at the same time I was writing against it in the pages of The Catholic Free Press more than twenty years ago. For example, in his newsletter 'Just The Facts,' No. 6, (1993), Richard noted how a Couple-to-Couple team was teaching CCD students preparing for Confirmation in Leominster, Massachusetts (St. Leo's Parish) that, 'If your conscience convinces you that birth control is right, even if the Church says its wrong, you can practice birth control and not be sinning.' And then Richard explains: 'This has been taught for over 20 years and still is being taught in this diocese [Worcester]. The basis for this teaching is dissent and a dissenting concept of the primacy of conscience which is nothing less than situation ethics.'

In the same newsletter, Richard Blanchard noted that, 'During the episcopate of Timothy J. Harrington...dissent and disobedience has flourished and taken deep September of 1984 Sister Anna Kane was appointed Vicar of Religious and Director of the then Office of Women, at the same time she became a member of Bishop Harrington's administrative cabinet. She became very militant against Humanae Vitae. Under the administration of Fr. Piermarini, (now Msgr), the religious education department employed Dr. Vincent Forde, Bernard Cooke and Alice Laffey as instructors of the Education in Ministry Program, also known as the Master Catechist Program which has for its goal, master certification for CCD teaching. All [of these instructors] openly strong advocates against the teaching on birth control in Humanae Vitae.'

Within the pages of The Catholic Free Press, Humanae Vitae was openly mocked. For example, in his "Essay in Theology" column entitled "Humanae Vitae; a troubling silence (CFP, August 13, 1993), dissident priest Father Richard P. McBrien referred to the Church as "a dysfunctional family" because it will not change its teaching on the sinfullness of artificial contraception to appease those who just cannot or will not accept it.

As a result of 40 years of poor catechesis - or none at all - and outright complacency throughout the Catholic Church in America, too many people today (including sadly, many Catholics) have come to view conscience as a sort of fortress built so as to shelter them from the exacting demands of truth. In the words of Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, "In the Psalms we meet from time to time the prayer that God should free man from his hidden sins. The Psalmist sees as his greatest danger the fact that he no longer recognizes them as sins and thus falls into them in apparently good conscience. Not being able to have a guilty conscience is a sickness...And thus one cannot aprove the maxim that everyone may always do what his conscience allows him to do: In that case the person without a conscience would be permitted to do anything. In truth it is his fault that his conscience is so broken that he no longer sees what he as a man should see. In other words, included in the concept of conscience is an obligation, namely, the obligation to care for it, to form it and educate it. Conscience has a right to respect and obedience in the measure in which the person himself respects it and gives it the care which its dignity deserves. The right of conscience is the obligation of the formation of conscience. Just as we try to develop our use of language and we try to rule our use of rules, so must we also seek the true measure of conscience so that finally the inner word of conscience can arrive at its validity.

For us this means that the Church's magisterium bears the responsibility for correct formation. It makes an appeal, one can say, to the inner vibrations its word causes in the process of the maturing of conscience. It is thus an oversimplification to put a statement of the magisterium in opposition to conscience. In such a case I must ask myself much more. What is it in me that contradicts this word of the magisterium? Is it perhaps only my comfort? My obstinacy? Or is it an estrangement through some way of life that allows me something which the magisterium forbids and that appears to me to be better motivated or more suitable simply because society considers it reasonable? It is only in the context of this kind of struggle that the conscience can be trained, and the magisterium has the right to expect that the conscience will be open to it in a manner befitting the seriousness of the matter. If I believe that the Church has its origins in the Lord, then the teaching office in the Church has a right to expect that it, as it authentically develops, will be accepted as a priority factor in the formation of conscience." (Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, Keynote Address of the Fourth Bishops' Workshop of the National Catholic Bioethics Center, on "Moral Theology Today: Certitudes and Doubts," February 1984).

In the same address, Cardinal Ratzinger explains that, "Conscience is understood by many as a sort of deification of subjectivity, a rock of bronze on which even the magisterium is shattered....Conscience appears finally as subjectivity raised to the ultimate standard."

If anyone is naive enough to think that this mindset isn't to be found within the Worcester Diocese any longer, they deceive themselves.  This week's Catholic Free Press features an article written by Father John Catoir.  In his article entitled "Birth-Control Revisited," the confused priest does his best to deify the subjective conscience writing, "The condemnation of contraceptives by the Church has led to great turmoil in the past.."  Of course, Fr. Catoir neglects to mention why: the fact that Charles Curran and a host of other dissidents led a campaign against Pope Paul VI's Encyclical Letter Humanae Vitae.  Fr. Catoir continues: "..but no one in authority condemns any individual who is not able to comply with the letter of the law."  That is certainly true.  The Church doesn't condemn the sinner.  The sinner condemns himself or herself in this case by rejecting God's plan for marriage and family.

Fr. Catoir: "The grave responsibilities of raising a large family are daunting, nevertheless the grace of God abounds.  Most married couples are generous in doing what they can, even if it is less than the ideal.  Our culture makes raising a large family extremely difficult for most couples, consequently, the U.S. bishops issued a pastoral letter, 'On Human Life,' back in 1968 to help them form their conscience.  Here is an excerpt from that document: 'In the final analysis, conscience is inviolable, and no person is to be forced to act in a manner contrary to his/her conscience, as the moral tradition of the Church attests...'

Of course, Fr. Catoir - being the intellectually dishonest cleric that he is - conveniently omits the Church's teaching, as reflected in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, regarding the formation of conscience which Pope Benedict XVI addressed above:

"Conscience must be informed and moral judgment enlightened. A well-formed conscience is upright and truthful. It formulates its judgments according to reason, in conformity with the true good willed by the wisdom of the Creator. The education of conscience is indispensable for human beings who are subjected to negative influences and tempted by sin to prefer their own judgment and to reject authoritative teachings." (CCC, 1783)

And again:

"The education of the conscience is a lifelong task. From the earliest years, it awakens the child to the knowledge and practice of the interior law recognized by conscience. Prudent education teaches virtue; it prevents or cures fear, selfishness and pride, resentment arising from guilt, and feelings of complacency, born of human weakness and faults. The education of the conscience guarantees freedom and engenders peace of heart." (CCC, 1784).

And again:

"In the formation of conscience the Word of God is the light for our path, we must assimilate it in faith and prayer and put it into practice. We must also examine our conscience before the Lord's Cross. We are assisted by the gifts of the Holy Spirit, aided by the witness or advice of others and guided by the authoritative teaching of the Church." (CCC, 1785).

So Fr. Catoir is simply regurgitating that devilish and (in the words of Richard Blanchard) that "dissenting concept of the primacy of conscience which is nothing less than situation ethics."

Back to Fr. Catoir, the charitable Catholic priest who would allow married couples to remain in grave sin and so be eternally lost: "The fact that a very high percentage of Catholics have found it necessary to use contraceptives in order to limit the number of their children, is not the issue behind the bishop's reaction to Obama-care.  The bishops are not trying to force anyone to do what they deem to be beyond their strength..."

Do you see what Fr. Catoir is saying here?   That a "very high percentage of Catholics" has decided to contracept because they deem the Church's teaching [which is Christ's teaching] to be too difficult and that this is "okay" because such people are merely following the dictates of their own conscience, a conscience which is inviolable.

Fr. Catoir is really doing the devil's work here.  And so is The Catholic Free Press by publishing his garbage.  But then, those who produce the CFP obviously share his defeatist view.  This represents a real tragedy.  The first Bishop of Worcester, John J. Wright - later made a Cardinal - writing about Pope Paul VI's Encyclical Letter Humanae Vitae, stated that, "The pressures on Pope Paul VI to speak on contraception other than he did have been massive.  They have been pressures of human respect, politics, prestigious opinion, emotional torment, threats that Church unity might be destroyed or ecumenical hopes dimmed....What Pope Paul has done, what he had to do, is recall to a generation that does not like the word, the fact that sin exists; that artificial contraception is objectively sinful; that those who impose it, foster it, counsel it, whether they be governments, experts, or - God forgive them! - spiritual directors, impose, foster and counsel objective sin."

Isn't this exactly what Fr. Catoir - and those who produce The Catholic Free Press by extension since they published his views - are doing?  Fostering objective sin?

What of Fr. Catoir's implication that the Church's teaching regarding artificial contraception is "beyond the strength" of many Catholics?  Hard yes. But beyond the strength of these Catholics?  God always provides His grace, His special help, to those who seek (honestly) to fulfill this law as well as all His commands.  The Lord Jesus did not promise anyone an easy, carefree life in this world.  In fact, He warned us all - religious, married or single - that there is a price which must be paid to enter the Kingdom of Heaven: "If any man will come after Me, let him deny himself, take up his cross and follow Me." (Matthew 16: 24).

Father Catoir, and those who produce The Catholic Free Press, apparently do not accept this teaching of the Master.  For them, it is "beyond the strength" of ordinary Catholics.  And when the Lord says [to us all] "My grace is sufficient for thee," He is obviously mistaken.

Pray for them.

Related reading: Catholic Free Press columnist Stacy Trasancos.
Site Meter