Showing posts with label Now. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Now. Show all posts

Friday, June 03, 2016

President Barack Obama now considers himself to be the living teaching office of the Church?


President Obama insists that, "his understanding of the Bible and his Christian beliefs led him to issue the directive at public schools calling on students to be allowed to use the bathroom of their choosing regardless of their biological sex.

Speaking at a town hall in Elkhart, Indiana, Mr. Obama said that: "My reading of scripture tells me that that [the] Golden Rule is pretty high up there in terms of my Christian belief."

And therein lies the problem.  In 2 Peter 3: 15-16, we read, "And consider the patience of our Lord as salvation, as our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given to him, also wrote to you, speaking of these things as he does in all his letters. In them there are some things hard to understand that the ignorant and unstable distort to their own destruction, just as they do the other scriptures."


It isn't Barack Obama's role to interpret the Sacred Scriptures.  It is the task of the Church.  In Dei Verbum, No. 10, of the Second Vatican Council we read: "...the task of authentically interpreting the word of God, whether written or handed on,  has been entrusted exclusively to the living teaching office of the Church,  whose authority is exercised in the name of Jesus Christ. This teaching office is not above the word of God, but serves it, teaching only what has been handed on, listening to it devoutly, guarding it scrupulously and explaining it faithfully in accord with a divine commission and with the help of the Holy Spirit, it draws from this one deposit of faith everything which it presents for belief as divinely revealed.

It is clear, therefore, that sacred tradition, Sacred Scripture and the teaching authority of the Church, in accord with God's most wise design, are so linked and joined together that one cannot stand without the others, and that all together and each in its own way under the action of the one Holy Spirit contribute effectively to the salvation of souls."

The Golden Rule is a moral rule found in many religions, though it takes slightly different forms. In the Christian West, it takes the form based on the words of Jesus, "Whatever you wish that men would do to you, do so to them" (Matt 7:12), or more popularly, "Do unto others as you would have others do unto you."

 
It is true that everything must be done to help sinners but this cannot include helping them to sin or to remain in sin. Because of human frailty, every sinner deserves both pity and compassion. However, vice and sin (Such as that outlined in Deuteronomy 22:5, see here) must be excluded from this compassion. This because sin can never be the proper object of compassion. (Summa Theologica, II-II, q. 30, a.1, ad 1).

It is a false compassion which supplies the sinner with the means to remain attached to sin. Such "compassion" provides an assistance (whether material or moral) which actually enables the sinner to remain firmly attached to his evil ways. By contrast, true compassion leads the sinner away from vice and back to virtue. As Thomas Aquinas explains:

"We love sinners out of charity, not so as to will what they will, or to rejoice in what gives them joy, but so as to make them will what we will, and rejoice in what rejoices us. Hence it is written: 'They shall be turned to thee, and thou shalt not be turned to them.'" (St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, II-II, q. 25, a.6, ad 4, citing Jeremiah 15:19).

St. Thomas Aquinas teaches us that the sentiment of compassion only becomes a virtue when it is guided by reason, since "it is essential to human virtue that the movements of the soul should be regulated by reason." (Summa Theologica, II-II, q. 30, c.3). Without such regulation, compassion is merely a passion. A false compassion is a compassion not regulated and tempered by reason and is, therefore, a potentially dangerous inclination. This because it is subject to favoring not only that which is good but also that which is evil (Summa Theologica, II-II, q. 30, a.1, ad 3).

An authentic compassion always stems from charity. True compassion is an effect of charity (Summa Theologica, II-II, q. 30, a.3, ad 3). But it must be remembered that the object of this virtue is God, whose love extends to His creatures. (Summa Theologica, II-II, q. 25, a.3). Therefore, the virtue of compassion seeks to bring God to the one who suffers so that he may thereby participate in the infinite love of God. As St. Augustine explains:

"'Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.' Now, you love yourself suitably when you love God better than yourself. What, then, you aim at in yourself you must aim at in your neighbor, namely, that he may love God with a perfect affection." (St. Augustine, Of the Morals of the Catholic Church, No. 49, which may be found here: http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/1401.htm).
 
This is the true practice of the Golden Rule.  Barack Obama doesn't understand this.  He interprets the Scriptures unto his own destruction....while doing damage to the common good of the nation he is supposed to represent.
 


Sunday, August 02, 2015

The Boy Scouts will now expose their youth to homosexual predators

OneNewsNow reports:

"A traditional values leader finds it ironic that the largest pro-LGBT lobbying group in the U.S. criticized Scott Walker for voicing support for a Boy Scouts policy the Wisconsin governor said protected children.

Last week the BSA voted to drop its longtime ban on openly homosexual leaders. Prior to that vote, Walker – an Eagle Scout and GOP presidential hopeful – was asked how he felt about the proposed policy change.

'I have had a lifelong commitment to the Scouts and support the previous membership policy because it protected children and advanced Scout values,' he told the Independent Journal Review.

In response, the Human Rights Campaign called for an apology from the governor. '[His] suggestion [that the Scouts' policy] somehow 'protects' children from gay adults is offensive, outrageous, and absolutely unacceptable,' HRC president Chad Griffin offered in a statement. 'His comments imply that we represent a threat to the safety and well-being of young people.'

Peter LaBarbera of Americans for Truth About Homosexuality takes issue with Griffin's reaction, reminding HRC of its own history – and particularly that of one of its major contributors and co-founders.

'Terry Bean himself is being prosecuted for having homosexual sex with an underage boy – and now it's come out that he had sex with another underage boy,' LaBarbera explains. 'And so for the Human Rights Campaign to condemn Scott Walker for wanting to protect Boy Scouts from homosexual predators is just the height of irony.'"

Harry Hay, the founder of the Mattachine Society which, "proved to be the catalyst for the American gay rights movement." (Dudley Clendinen, "Harry Hay, Early Proponent of Gay Rights, Dies at 90," The New York Times, October 25, 2002), deserted the Catholic Church after having homosexual relations at the age of 14 (with a sailor ten years his senior), and was himself a proponent of man-boy sex, giving a speech at an October 7, 1984 conference of NAMBLA (North American Man/Boy Love Association) in San Francisco.

Harry Hay spoke frequently at NAMBLA events and periodically came to the defense of the organization.

So, one of the founders - some would say the founder - of the American "gay rights" movement, was a proponent of sexual relations between men and boys. Why doesn't this trouble those in the mainstream media?  Because the mainstream media has bought fully into the radical homosexual agenda and is incapable of any objectivity whatsoever with regard to the subject of homosexuality.

This point is illustrated most eloquently in Phil Valentine's book entitled "The Conservative's Handbook."  Mr. Valentine notes that, "On September 26, 1999, thirteen-year-old Jesse Dirkhising was lured to the apartment of two gay men where he was repeatedly raped and then strangled to death, some reports say with his own underwear. Where was the national outrage?  Here was a child  who was sodomized and murdered by two adult men and the mainstream media ignored it."

Mr. Valentine adds that the murder of Matthew Shepherd "sparked outrage across the country" because the mainstream media which virtually ignored the brutal rape and murder of little Jesse Dirkhising, "played up the crime and the subsequent call from the Left for federal hate-crime legislation to protect gays."

Then Mr. Valentine notes, "Unfortunately for little Jesse Dirkhising and his family, he doesn't fall into any protected group.  The crime against him wasn't based on race or religion or sexual orientation.  It was merely two deranged, perverted monsters who preyed upon an innocent little boy. Was he any less dead than Matthew Shepherd?  There's no question that his death was more tragic - a young boy, repeatedly raped then killed.  Why did the media ignore it?  Because it didn't fit their definition of a politically correct story." (The Conservative's Handbook, p. 98).

Sex between men and boys has long been a part of homosexual culture and history as documented by openly homosexual history professor William Armstrong Percy III in his book entitled "Pederasty and Pedagogy in Archaic Greece." See here.  Of course, propagandists for the Homosexual Hate Movement will never admit to this.

Monday, June 08, 2015

Why is the Coliseum, with the lift for introducing wild animals into it, being rebuilt now?

The Termite Nations have dispensed with God and His Commandments in their quest for unbridled hedonism. We are being prepared for the Reign of Antichrist. The Rev. P. Huchede, in his work entitled "History of Antichrist," explains the religious preparation, both intellectual and moral, for the Reign of Antichrist which will arrive after economic collapse: "But how shall he deprive the world of Christianity and have himself adored as God? Alas, it is only too true that the minds and hearts of men are admirably disposed for revolution and consequently ready to accept and bear the cruel yoke of such a tyrant. Revolution as the word itself implies means a subversion, but a subversion of all that is true, good, beautiful, and grand in the universe. It is the subversion of religion, representing its dogmas as myths and its moral teachings as tyranical. It is the subversion of authority. Licentiousness under the name of liberty becomes the order of the day; each one is invested with the right to govern himself. It is the subversion of reason: and do we not find leading minds in some of the most enlightened nations denying the principle of contradiction and maintaining the absolute identity of all beings? Revolution is therefore essentially destructive, and it becomes cosmopolitan by the action of secret societies scattered throughout the world. Is it not true to say that the 'mystery of iniquity' is prepared in secret revolutionary dens? But it does not suffice to destroy; it is absolutely necessary to build up again. The world cannot subsist long in a vacuum. It must have a religion; it must have a philosophy; it must have an authority. Revolution will furnish all these. Instead of the reasonable and supernatural religion of Jesus Christ, Revolution will preach Pantheism. The God-humanity will impart the theurgic spirit and thus lead men to adore the demon as the author of universal emancipation...

What frightful immorality must follow in the train of this shameless prostitution of religion! Never has the threefold concupiscence made greater ravage among mankind. And this is the religion sought and hoped for as the cherished boon of the aspirations of our modern free thinkers. To our Christian philosophy, the honor of humanity's revolution will substitute a babel of extravagant and absurd ideas. Instead of a mild and efficient authority consecrated alike by Church and state, despotism and anarchy will rise up and contend for the shreds of religious liberty and human policy...if the state of perversion continue for a while longer, he [Antichrist] will find the world prepared to receive and serve him." (Rev. P. Huchede, History of Antichrist, pp. 13-14, Tan Books).

The spirit of Antichrist is intensifying and hostility toward Christians (and the Catholic Church in particular) is spreading like a cancer.  Father Bernard Maria Clausi. O.F.M. (d. 1849), speaking of the coming chastisement, says that before the Triumph of the Church, "terrible will be the persecution of the wicked against the just.."  See here.


And this persecution is beginning to intensify.  Soon it will become bloody. For the Lucifer State will not tolerate dissent.  Already preparation is underway for killing those who refuse to accept the Satanic programme.  See here.

Why is the Coliseum being rebuilt now? Why is it so important to rebuild the lifts for introducing wild animals into the Coliseum?

Thursday, February 26, 2015

The battle lines have now been drawn

Years ago, when Pope John Paul II still reigned, Michael Brown over at Spirit Daily contacted Father Albert Roux of the Marian Movement of Priests because of a story he was writing on Father Stefano Gobbi.

Fr. Roux  emphasized that: "The Blessed Mother keeps saying that when the Pope [John Paul II] dies the Church will be projected into a dense darkness and it's going to be a great confusion, where people will be dropping out of the Church...There is a man of iniquity who is supposed to be entering the Church. To me that is the anti-christ and his false prophet, and my understanding is that the false prophet will be a false pope who will empty the Church of her spirituality and her doctrine, and will create the abomination of desolation by declaring that the Gospels are not historical and that the divinity of Christ is questionable and the Eucharist is just a symbol. Then he's going to raise the anti-christ, which is going to happen before Jesus's return...

The anti-christ can not come on the public scene until John Paul dies. Something is holding the anti-christ from coming out and I believe this is the papacy of John Paul II. John Paul is not afraid of anyone and he would face up to the anti-christ and unmask him publicly and [the anti-christ] would lose his clout. He would be humiliated, and Satan is not about to let this happen, so he's got to wait till John Paul dies for the anti-christ to appear on the public scene....

I think the United Nations is preparing for the anti-christ's coming to the public scene. He's going to govern the world through the United Nations. Now is the time that Jesus is separating the goats from the sheep. What He's going to do is send Mary to advise and to send events for us to make decisions when we face them. Either we stand on the right hand of Jesus or the left hand side. When Jesus comes in glory He's going to destroy His enemies and then He's going to recreate the earthly paradise  that Adam and Eve had. Those on the right hand side will go into this new promised land." See here.      

Is there not a real sense that the two camps of the Mystical Body of Christ and the Mystical Body of Antichrist are now entering a time of final battle?

It was Archbishop Fulton John Sheen who warned that,"We are living in the days of the Apocalypse - the last days of our era...The two great forces of the Mystical Body of Christ and the Mystical Body of Antichrist are beginning to draw up the battle lines for the catastrophic contest."

And that was more than forty years ago. The battle lines have now been drawn. The catastrophic contest begins in earnest at the upcoming Synod.  The Man of Sin waits for his prophet to prepare his entrance into the Church.

When he enters, the man-God will eventually abolish the Mass and demand that worship which belongs to God alone.

Which side dear reader will you fall on?  Be warned: the fate of your soul depends upon the answer to that question.

Monday, December 22, 2014

Now Pope Francis looks toward Communist China

Now that Pope Francis has done his part to ensure that U.S. sanctions against the murderous regime in Cuba have been removed, the Holy See is already looking toward thawing relations with another brutal Communist regime: China.  See here.

Back in October, Matt Hadro, writing for the Catholic News Agency, explained that: "The state of religious freedom in China is moving from bad to worse, said U.S. Rep. Chris Smith (R-N.J.), responding to a new report by the Congressional-Executive Commission on China.

'There’s a huge gulf now' between China and the Catholic Church, Smith stated during an Oct. 9 conference call with reporters. He acknowledged that 'the underground church has been brutally persecuted in China, both Protestant and Catholic,' but said that now even the state-recognized church is facing persecution.
 
'The Patriotic Church, the Catholic Church, they are being targeted with church demolitions and other kinds of repression which we have not seen before. So there’s a great deal of concern that religious freedom, as bad as it was, has further deteriorated in China.'

Smith and Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) co-hosted the teleconference, focusing on the latest annual report from the human rights monitoring group, the Congressional-Executive Commission on China.

Both lawmakers cited various ways that the Chinese government has infringed upon the freedom of its citizens, including gross violations of human rights and targeting churches.

Smith cited a statement from the report: 'Chinese authorities continued to harass, detain, imprison, and interfere with the religious activities of members of both registered and unregistered Protestant communities who ran afoul of government or party policy.'

It is very easy to 'run afoul of government policy,' Smith added, noting that simply meeting to talk about religion could be a violation.

The report also detailed the government’s hostility to Catholicism, saying that 'authorities continued to harass Catholics who practice their faith outside of state-approved parameters.'

Among the incidents of harassment in the past year were the reported detainment of two underground Catholic priests for 'organizing adult catechism classes' and fines levied against laymen supporting the priests’ efforts.

The government reportedly prevented Catholics from joining Pope Francis in his visit to South Korea, and threatened Chinese Catholics already in South Korea against participating in the papal events, the report noted.

Smith reflected on concerns stemming from a meeting he had with the atheist head of the government’s religious freedom office.

'They are so dismissive and disparaging of God and religion and religious expressions, it’s no wonder that they are at a hair-trigger to do anything they want, and they do it with impunity to hurt religious expression,' he stated.

Rita Biesemans, in a comment left at my last post dealing with masonic infiltration of the Catholic Church, had this to say: "When I was in 2nd year High School Latin-Greek Humanities in a nun-run boarding school in the 1950's, we had the 'Spekpater' (the "Bacon Priest") preaching during one of our yearly retreat weeks. One day he told us : 'For know that there are priests being trained and formed at the KRIM (Russia) to infiltrate the Church, to spread false teachings in order to corrupt and ruin the Church.' This made such an impact and impression on my soul that I will never forget it."

Anatoliy Golitsyn, the former KGB officer and counterintelligence agent, in his book entitled "The Perestroika Deception," warned that: "They [the Soviets] intend...to induce the Americans to adopt their own 'restructuring' and convergence of the Soviet and American systems using to this end the fear of nuclear conflict...Convergence will be accompanied by blood baths and political re-education camps in Western Europe and the United States. The Soviet Strategists are counting on an economic depression in the United States and intend to introduce their reformed model of socialism with a human face as an alternative to the American system during the depression." (Anatoliy Golitsyn, The Perestroika Deception, 1990).

Golitsyn defected to the West and spent many years attempting to warn the West of long-range Soviet plans.  In 1954, H. Rowan Gaither, who served as President of the Ford Foundation, told Norman Dodd of the Congressional Reese Commission that, "...all of us here at the policy-making level have had experience with directives...from the White House....The substance of them is that we shall use our grant-making power so as to alter our life in the United States that we can be comfortably merged with the Soviet Union."

Now, some of you might be thinking: What is the connection?  There is a fundamental opposition of Communist principles to those of Freemasonry.  The Freemason believes in man but the Communist believes only in the Party, in the State.

Not so according to the Vatican.  Pope Leo XIII, in his Encyclical Letter Humanum Genus, teaches that:

"In the sphere of politics, the Naturalists lay down that all men have the same rights and that all are equal and alike in every respect; that everyone is by nature free and independent; that no one has the right to exercise authority over another; that it is an act of violence to demand of men obedience to any authority not emanating from themselves.  All power is, therefore, in the free people.  Those who exercise authority do so either by the mandate or permission of the people, so that, when the popular will changes, rulers of State may lawfully be deposed even against their will.  The source of all rights and civic duties is held to reside either in the multitude or in the ruling power of the State, provided that it has been constituted according to the new principles.  They hold also that the State should not acknowledge God and that, out of the various forms of religion, there is no reason why one should be preferred to another.  According to them, all should be on the same level. [This is why the Creed will eventually have to go, see my last post]."

Pope Leo XIII continues:

"Now, that these views are held by the Freemasons also, and that they want to set up States constituted according to this ideal, is too well known to be in need of proof.   For a long time they have been openly striving with all their strength and with all the resources at their command to bring this about.  They thus prepare the way for those numerous and more reckless spirits who, in their mad desire to arrive at equality and common ownership of goods, are ready to hurl society into an even worse condition, by the destruction of all distinctions of rank and property....In thi mad and wicked design, the implacable hatred and thirst for vengeance with which Satan is animated against Our Lord Jesus Christ becomes almost visible to our bodily eyes."

Later on, in the same Encyclical Letter, Pope Leo XIII adds:

"From the anti-social character of the errors we have mentioned, it is clear that the greatest dangers are to be feared for States.  For once the fear of God and the reverence due to His laws have been taken away, the authority of rulers treated with contempt, free reign and approval given to sedition, popular passions recklessly fanned, and all restraining influences eliminated except the fear of punishment, then there will necessarily follow a revolutionary upheaval and a period of wholesale destruction of existing institutions...A complete change and upheaval of this kind is being carefully prepared by numerous associations of Communists and Socialists, in fact, it is their openly avowed aim; and Freemasonry is not only not opposed to their plans, but looks upon them with the greatest favour, as its leading principles are identical with theirs.  If the Freemasons do not immediately and everywhere proceed to realise the ultimate conclusions contained in these principles, this is not because they are restrained by the discipline of the organization or by lack of determination, but partly on account of the power and virtue of that divine religion which cannot be crushed out of existence, and partly because the more balanced part of mankind are unwilling to sink into slavery under the domination of secret societies, and offer vigorous resistance to their insane endeavours."

This is why ecclesiastical masonry has infiltrated the Church.  The Church cannot be destroyed from without.  External persecution only serves to make her stronger.  The blood of martyrs is the seed of the Church as Tertullian reminded us.  Ecclesiastical masonry is Freemasonry which has infiltrated the Church with the goal of subverting her from within by questioning all traditional doctrines and remaking the Church into the image and likeness of man.

It was Cardinal Stefan Wyszynski who warned, back in June of 1963, that "It is not the Communists whom we fear.  What fills us with anguish is the spectacle of false brethren."  Here the great Cardinal was warning of those modern-day Judases who, instead of openly attacking the Church, seek to infiltrate and penetrate her in order to introduce and impose humanitarian, naturalistic and anti-traditional ideas.

Thursday, April 05, 2012

Father Joseph Bachand: Will you now accuse Pope Benedict XVI of "evil"?

Writing for the Associated Press, Nicole Winfield is reporting that, "Pope Benedict XVI issued a blistering denunciation Thursday of priests who have questioned church teaching on celibacy and ordaining women, saying they were being selfish in disobeying his authority.


Benedict made the rare and explicit criticism from the altar of St. Peter's Basilica in his homily on Holy Thursday, when priests recall the promises they made when ordained...In his homily, Benedict said the dissidents claim to be motivated by concern for the church. But he suggested that in reality they were just making 'a desperate push to do something to change the church in accordance with (their) own preferences and ideas.'...He said Jesus always followed true obedience to God's will, not 'human caprice.'.." (See here).

Several years ago, when I expressed concerns over La Salette priests promoting the ordination of women to the ministerial priesthood during a vocation retreat, a La Salette Provincial [Father Joseph Bachand, m.s.] accused me of engaging in "evil." Father Bachand had been involved with the infamous St. Luke Institute.

While Fr. Bachand considered my defense of Church teaching as “evil,” Dr. Germain Grisez explains that, “Where religious assent is known to be due, it is a sin to withhold it. Here this sin is called deliberate nonassent. To communicate such nonassent to others with the intention of encouraging them to share in it is a more serious sin, called here sinful dissent.”

It should come as no surprise that dissent within the Church leads to polarization and undermines truth which is the principle of the Church’s communion. In its Instruction on the Ecclesial Vocation of the Theologian, No. 40, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith said that, “The Church ‘is like a sacrament, a sign and instrument, that is, of communion with God and of unity among all men’ (LG, 1). Consequently, to pursue concord and communion is to enhance the force of her witness and credibility. To succumb to the temptation of dissent, on the other hand, is to allow the ‘leaven of infidelity to the Holy Spirit’ to start to work.”


The warning of Pope Paul VI, given during his Homily at Holy Thursday Mass on April 3, 1969, has been largely ignored by confused clerics like Fr. Bachand and the laity who follow these selfish guides:

"There is talk of renewal in the doctrine and in the conscience of the Church of God; but how can the living and true Church be authentic and persistent if the complex structure that forms it and defines it a spiritual and social 'mystical body', is today so often and so gravely corroded by dissent and challenge and by forgetfulness of its hierarchical structure, and is countered in its divine and indispensable constituent charism, its pastoral authority? How can it claim to be a Church, that is a united people, even though locally broken up and historically and legitimately diversified, when a practically schismatic ferment is dividing it, subdividing it and breaking it into groups which are more than anything else zealous for arbitrary and fundamentally egoistical autonomy, masked by Christian pluralism or liberty of conscience?"

Related reading here.



Sunday, March 04, 2012

Why should those who produce The Catholic Free Press be surprised that government is now mandating contraception?

In an editorial entitled, "Stop the erosion of religious liberty," The Catholic Free Press, official newspaper of the Diocese of Worcester, Massachusetts, laments that, "The Obama administration has embarked on a systematic effort to erode religious liberty to the point of non-existence by attempting to restrict it solely to freedom of worship.  Through administrative policies and mandates, religious liberty and freedom of conscience in the United States is under attack, as witnessed by the most recent 'accommodation.'..The Obama administration has been chipping away at the right of religious institutions to abide by their beliefs when those beliefs oppose the secularist agenda, particularly in the arena of morality.  This was clearly evident in the decision not to renew a federal grant by the Department of Health and Human Services to the bishops'  Migration and Refugee Services for its human trafficking program because it would not provide the full range of reproductive services, including abortion and contraception, to human trafficking victims and unaccompanied refugee minors...President Obama made the decision to impose the Department of Health and Human Services' Interim Final Rules on Preventive Services, requiring all private health plans, including those of Catholic hospitals, charities and schools, to provide coverage of prescription contraceptives, including abortion-inducing drugs, and sterilization for women.  The so-called "religious employer" exemption that was put forth with these rules is so narrowly defined that it is meaningless.  Unless a religious institution employs and serves only individuals of the same religious tradition, it does not qualify for the exemption.  Therefore, Catholic hospitals and schools who serve people of all faiths, precisely because of their Catholic mission, do not qualify for the exemption.  The recent 'accommodation' offered in response to the outcry that resulted from this mandate, which was unquestionably a direct assault on the Roman Catholic Church's religious liberty, does not lessen the concerns initially raised...We cannot lose sight of the fact that the 'accommodation' does not alter the Obama administration's mandate promoting contraception, sterilization, and abortion-inducing drugs as a matter of government policy.  It is particularly troubling that the attitude toward human life identifies pregnancy as a disease, posing a threat to one's health.."

How did we get to where we are in the United States?  In the words of Archbishop Charles Chaput, spoken in 2009, "40 years of American Catholic complacency and poor formation are bearing exactly the fruit we should have expected...We can't talk about following St. Paul and converting our culture until we sober up and get honest about what we've allowed ourselves to become. We need to stop lying to each other..."


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 roots....in 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."

And subjectivity raised to the ultimate standard gives rise to dictatorship. For, as Pope John Paul II reminded us in Centesimus Annus, "Authentic democracy is possible only in a State ruled by law, and on the basis of a correct conception of the human person. It requires that the necessary conditions be present for the advancement both of the individual through education and formation in true ideals, and of the 'subjectivity' of society through the creation of structures of participation and shared responsibility. Nowadays there is a tendency to claim that agnosticism and sceptical relativism are the philosophy and the basic attitude which correspond to democratic forms of political life. Those who are convinced that they know the truth and firmly adhere to it are considered unreliable from a democratic point of view, since they do not accept that truth is determined by the majority, or that it is subject to variation according to different political trends. It must be observed in this regard that if there is no ultimate truth to guide and direct political activity, then ideas and convictions can easily be manipulated for reasons of power. As history demonstrates, a democracy without values easily turns into open or thinly disguised totalitarianism."


Why should those who produce The Catholic Free Press be surprised that government is now mandating contraception?  The Church in the United States is only reaping what it has sown.
Site Meter