Once again, Francis is contradicting Our Lady of Fatima on sins of the flesh. See here. Two years ago, I addressed this error. See here.
In a talk entitled "Legalism, Moral Truth and Pastoral Practice" given at a 1990 symposium in Philadelphia, Dr. Germain Grisez explained to those present that, "Theologians and pastors who dissent from received Catholic teaching think they are rejecting legalism because they set aside what they think are mere rules in favor of what they feel are more reasonable standards. Their views are thoroughly imbued with legalism, however. For dissenters think of valid moral norms as rules formulated to protect relevant values. Some even make their legalism explicit by denying that there is any necessary connection between moral goodness (which they restrict to the transcendental level of a love with no specific content) and right action (which they isolate at the categorical level of inner-worldly behavior). But whether their legalism is explicit or not, all the dissenters hold that specific moral norms admit exceptions whenever, all things considered, making an exception seems the best - or least bad - thing to do. Most dissenters also think that specific moral norms that were valid in times past can be inappropriate today, and so they regard the Church’s contested moral teachings as outdated rules that the Church should change."
This is the attitude of Francis, the revolutionary who wants the teachings of the Lord Jesus to change. See here.
Showing posts with label Sins. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Sins. Show all posts
Friday, August 16, 2019
Tuesday, September 05, 2017
Francis: Our Lady of Fatima was lying or mistaken...
Francis is at it again. This time he is implying that the Mother of God at Fatima was either lying or mistaken. He asserted in an interview that:
"The smallest sins are the sins of the flesh, because the flesh is weak...The most dangerous sins are those of the mind."
But Our Lady of Fatima said that: "More souls go to Hell because of sins of the flesh than for any other
reason." See here.
Sister Lucia, the last living Fatima seer, said this refers primarily to sins against
chastity, also called sins of impurity. The reason for this statement is not because sins against chastity are the most grievous sins, but the most common and, as Sr Lucia stated,
"because of conscience, " since sins of impurity are less likely to be repented of than other sins.
Why? 1) because the sense of injustice committed, which is the primary stimulus to
repent of one's sins, is not strongly felt when engaging in them, with the exception of
adultery;
2) There is a greater sense of shame when committing certain impure acts and hence greater difficulty confessing them in the sacrament of confession, or even repenting of them in one's heart;
3) Sexual activity of all kinds is presented by our post-Christian —
even anti-Christian — popular culture as natural and good, and sexual abstinence is even taught to be unhealthy. The sixth commandment, relating to chastity, has always been
called "the difficult commandment." Today, with pornography everywhere and women and girls dressing more immodestly than ever, it can almost be called "the impossible
commandment." However, Jesus assures us: "What is impossible with men is possible with God." (Lk 18:27) We may add that all who invoke the Blessed Virgin Mary for help in
overcoming sins of impurity, will receive the grace to do so, as she herself has revealed to St Bridget of Sweden and various other saints. And those who strive to live chaste lives know from experience, when sins of impurity are humbly repented of and confessed, a
great burden is removed from our consciences, and we experience that peace of soul that the world and carnal indulgence cannot give.
Clearly, Francis is repudiating the clear and unambiguous message from Our Lady of Fatima. For him, "sins below the belt" aren't really that serious. They are "the smallest sins."
"The smallest sins are the sins of the flesh, because the flesh is weak...The most dangerous sins are those of the mind."
But Our Lady of Fatima said that: "More souls go to Hell because of sins of the flesh than for any other
reason." See here.
Sister Lucia, the last living Fatima seer, said this refers primarily to sins against
chastity, also called sins of impurity. The reason for this statement is not because sins against chastity are the most grievous sins, but the most common and, as Sr Lucia stated,
"because of conscience, " since sins of impurity are less likely to be repented of than other sins.
Why? 1) because the sense of injustice committed, which is the primary stimulus to
repent of one's sins, is not strongly felt when engaging in them, with the exception of
adultery;
2) There is a greater sense of shame when committing certain impure acts and hence greater difficulty confessing them in the sacrament of confession, or even repenting of them in one's heart;
3) Sexual activity of all kinds is presented by our post-Christian —
even anti-Christian — popular culture as natural and good, and sexual abstinence is even taught to be unhealthy. The sixth commandment, relating to chastity, has always been
called "the difficult commandment." Today, with pornography everywhere and women and girls dressing more immodestly than ever, it can almost be called "the impossible
commandment." However, Jesus assures us: "What is impossible with men is possible with God." (Lk 18:27) We may add that all who invoke the Blessed Virgin Mary for help in
overcoming sins of impurity, will receive the grace to do so, as she herself has revealed to St Bridget of Sweden and various other saints. And those who strive to live chaste lives know from experience, when sins of impurity are humbly repented of and confessed, a
great burden is removed from our consciences, and we experience that peace of soul that the world and carnal indulgence cannot give.
Clearly, Francis is repudiating the clear and unambiguous message from Our Lady of Fatima. For him, "sins below the belt" aren't really that serious. They are "the smallest sins."
Monday, June 27, 2016
Francis: The sin of a priest is as grievous as the sins of the whole people, stop giving scandal!
St. Alphonsus De Liguori, a Doctor of the Church and a moral theologian,
explains that, "The Lord ordained in Leviticus that for the sin of a
single priest a calf should be offered, as well as for the sins of the
entire people. From this Innocent III concludes that the sin of a priest
is as grievous as the sins of the whole people. The reason is, says the
Pontiff, that by his sin the priest leads the entire people into sin
('Unde conjicitur quod peccatum Sacerdotis totius multitudinis peccato
coaequatur, quia Sacerdos in suo peccato totam fecit delinquere
multitudinem' - In Consecr. Pont. s. I.)
And, long before, the Lord himself said the same: 'If the priest that is anointed shall sin, he maketh the people to offend.' Hence, St. Augustine, addressing priests, says, 'Do not close heaven: but this you do if you give to others a bad example to lead a wicked life.' Our Lord said one day to St. Bridget, that when sinners see the bad example of the priest, they are encouraged to commit sin, and even begin to glory in the vices of which they were before ashamed. Hence our Lord added that worse maledictions shall fall on the priest than on others, because by his sinful life he brings himself and others to perdition.'...says St. John Chrysostom, the life of the priest is the root from which the people, who are the branches, receive nutriment.
St. Ambrose also says that priests are the head from which virtue flows to the members, that is, to seculars. The whole head is sick, says the Prophet Isaias;...from the sole of the foot unto the top of the head there is no soundness therein. St. Isidore explains this passage in the following words: 'This languishing head is the priest that commits sin, and that communicates his sin to the whole body.' St. Leo weeps over this evil, saying, 'How can health be found in the body if the head be not sound?' Who, says St. Bernard, shall seek in a sink the limpid water of the spring? Shall I, adds the saint, seek counsel from the man that knows not how to give counsel to himself? Speaking of the bad example of princes, Plutarch says, that it poisons not a single cup, but the public fountain; and thus, because all draw from the fountain, all are poisoned. This may be said with greater truth of the bad example of priests; hence Eugene III has said that bad Superiors are the principal causes of the sins of inferiors...St. Bernardine of Sienna writes that many, seeing the bad example of the scandalous ecclesiastic, begin even to waver in faith, and thus abandon themselves to vice, despising the sacraments, hell, and heaven." (St. Alphonsus De Liguori, Dignity and Duties of the Priest, pp. 142-144, 149).
The scandalous ecclesiastic. How else to describe someone sitting on the See of Peter who says that the Church needs to apologize to "gays" (individuals who are committed to living in sin, as opposed to those who possess a homosexual inclination but live a chaste life)?
That Francis would choose such language is very revealing. The Roman Catholic apostolate Courage, which assists those with a homosexual inclination to live authentically Catholic lives, embracing chastity, explains why it will not use the terms "gay" and "lesbian":
Q. Why doesn’t Courage use the terms “gay” and “lesbian”?
A. Courage discourages persons with same-sex attractions from labeling themselves “gay” and “lesbian” for the following reasons:
1) The secular world usually uses those terms to refer to someone who is either actively homosexual or intends to be. When a person decides to “come out” and say “I am gay” or “I am lesbian”, the person usually means “this is who I am – I was born this way and I intend to live this way. I have a right to find a same-sex partner with whom to have a romantic sexual relationship.” To “come out” as being “gay” or “lesbian” doesn’t usually mean “I have homosexual attractions and I have a deep commitment to living a chaste life..."
In other words, Francis wants the Church founded by Christ Jesus to apologize to individuals who self-identify as "gay" and who have no intention whatsoever to live an authentic Catholic life. He cannot argue that he means by "gay" those who suffer from a homosexual inclination but remain committed to living a chaste life. For the Church has already expressed, in her official teaching, solidarity with such people:
"The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God's will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord's Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition." (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2358).
Therefore there is nothing the Church needs to apologize for. In the words of Dr. Dietrich Von Hildebrand, "There were sinners in the Church yesterday and there are sinners in the Church today. But the Church Herself, in her divine teaching, emerges gloriously unspotted in a history stained by human weaknesses, errors, imperfections, and sins."
Cardinal Journet explains:
"All contradictions are eliminated as soon as we understand that the members of the Church do indeed sin, but they do so by their betraying the Church. The Church is thus not without sinners, but She is without sin. The Church as person is responsible for penance. She is not responsible for sins....The members of the Church themselves - laity, clerics, priests, Bishops, and Popes - who disobey the Church are responsible for their sins, but the Church as person is not responsible...It is forgotten that the Church as person is the Bride of Christ, 'Whom He has purchased with His own blood." (Acts 20:28).
If there are Catholics here and there who have engaged in unjust discrimination against homosexual persons, that is something for them to confess. But the Church is not responsible for these sins. And She certainly cannot apologize for her Teaching, which comes from the Lord Jesus.
Once again Francis has caused scandal. And his words, which are not thought out, are leading people into sin.
And, long before, the Lord himself said the same: 'If the priest that is anointed shall sin, he maketh the people to offend.' Hence, St. Augustine, addressing priests, says, 'Do not close heaven: but this you do if you give to others a bad example to lead a wicked life.' Our Lord said one day to St. Bridget, that when sinners see the bad example of the priest, they are encouraged to commit sin, and even begin to glory in the vices of which they were before ashamed. Hence our Lord added that worse maledictions shall fall on the priest than on others, because by his sinful life he brings himself and others to perdition.'...says St. John Chrysostom, the life of the priest is the root from which the people, who are the branches, receive nutriment.
St. Ambrose also says that priests are the head from which virtue flows to the members, that is, to seculars. The whole head is sick, says the Prophet Isaias;...from the sole of the foot unto the top of the head there is no soundness therein. St. Isidore explains this passage in the following words: 'This languishing head is the priest that commits sin, and that communicates his sin to the whole body.' St. Leo weeps over this evil, saying, 'How can health be found in the body if the head be not sound?' Who, says St. Bernard, shall seek in a sink the limpid water of the spring? Shall I, adds the saint, seek counsel from the man that knows not how to give counsel to himself? Speaking of the bad example of princes, Plutarch says, that it poisons not a single cup, but the public fountain; and thus, because all draw from the fountain, all are poisoned. This may be said with greater truth of the bad example of priests; hence Eugene III has said that bad Superiors are the principal causes of the sins of inferiors...St. Bernardine of Sienna writes that many, seeing the bad example of the scandalous ecclesiastic, begin even to waver in faith, and thus abandon themselves to vice, despising the sacraments, hell, and heaven." (St. Alphonsus De Liguori, Dignity and Duties of the Priest, pp. 142-144, 149).
The scandalous ecclesiastic. How else to describe someone sitting on the See of Peter who says that the Church needs to apologize to "gays" (individuals who are committed to living in sin, as opposed to those who possess a homosexual inclination but live a chaste life)?
That Francis would choose such language is very revealing. The Roman Catholic apostolate Courage, which assists those with a homosexual inclination to live authentically Catholic lives, embracing chastity, explains why it will not use the terms "gay" and "lesbian":
Q. Why doesn’t Courage use the terms “gay” and “lesbian”?
A. Courage discourages persons with same-sex attractions from labeling themselves “gay” and “lesbian” for the following reasons:
1) The secular world usually uses those terms to refer to someone who is either actively homosexual or intends to be. When a person decides to “come out” and say “I am gay” or “I am lesbian”, the person usually means “this is who I am – I was born this way and I intend to live this way. I have a right to find a same-sex partner with whom to have a romantic sexual relationship.” To “come out” as being “gay” or “lesbian” doesn’t usually mean “I have homosexual attractions and I have a deep commitment to living a chaste life..."
In other words, Francis wants the Church founded by Christ Jesus to apologize to individuals who self-identify as "gay" and who have no intention whatsoever to live an authentic Catholic life. He cannot argue that he means by "gay" those who suffer from a homosexual inclination but remain committed to living a chaste life. For the Church has already expressed, in her official teaching, solidarity with such people:
"The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God's will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord's Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition." (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2358).
Therefore there is nothing the Church needs to apologize for. In the words of Dr. Dietrich Von Hildebrand, "There were sinners in the Church yesterday and there are sinners in the Church today. But the Church Herself, in her divine teaching, emerges gloriously unspotted in a history stained by human weaknesses, errors, imperfections, and sins."
Cardinal Journet explains:
"All contradictions are eliminated as soon as we understand that the members of the Church do indeed sin, but they do so by their betraying the Church. The Church is thus not without sinners, but She is without sin. The Church as person is responsible for penance. She is not responsible for sins....The members of the Church themselves - laity, clerics, priests, Bishops, and Popes - who disobey the Church are responsible for their sins, but the Church as person is not responsible...It is forgotten that the Church as person is the Bride of Christ, 'Whom He has purchased with His own blood." (Acts 20:28).
If there are Catholics here and there who have engaged in unjust discrimination against homosexual persons, that is something for them to confess. But the Church is not responsible for these sins. And She certainly cannot apologize for her Teaching, which comes from the Lord Jesus.
Once again Francis has caused scandal. And his words, which are not thought out, are leading people into sin.
Monday, June 13, 2016
Sins that cry to heaven for vengeance
As we ponder the horrible, hate-filled attack against the Orlando night club and the murder of homosexual persons, let us examine ALL of the sins which cry to heaven for vengeance:
"The catechetical tradition also recalls that there are 'sins that cry to heaven': the blood of Abel, the sin of the Sodomites, the cry of the people oppressed in Egypt, the cry of the foreigner, the widow, and the orphan, injustice to the wage earner." Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1867.
The first, the sin of Abel, is murder. The second, the sin of the sodomites, refers to homosexual ACTS.
Homosexual ACTS represent an evil which is on the same level as homicide. They are both abominations before God.
Violence against homosexual persons is incompatible with the Gospel. So are homosexual ACTS.
Saint Peter Damian, Doctor of the Church, from his classic work The Book of Gomorrah:
"the vice of sodomy "surpasses the enormity of all others," because:
"Without fail, it brings death to the body and destruction to the soul. It pollutes the flesh, extinguishes the light of the mind, expels the Holy Spirit from the temple of the human heart, and gives entrance to the devil, the stimulator of lust. It leads to error, totally removes truth from the deluded mind ... It opens up hell and closes the gates of paradise
... It is this vice that violates temperance, slays modesty, strangles chastity, and slaughters virginity ... It defiles all things, sullies all things, pollutes all things ...
"This vice excludes a man from the assembled choir of the Church ... it separates the soul from God to associate it with demons. This utterly diseased queen of Sodom renders him who obeys the laws of her tyranny infamous to men and odious to God She strips her knights of the armor of virtue, exposing them to be pierced by the spears of every vice ... She humiliates her slave in the church and condemns him in court; she defiles him in secret and dishonors him in public; she gnaws at his conscience like a worm and consumes his flesh like fire. ... this unfortunate man (he) is deprived of all moral sense, his memory fails, and the mind's vision is darkened. Unmindful of God, he also forgets his own identity. This disease erodes the foundation of faith, saps the vitality of hope, dissolves the bond of love. It makes way with justice, demolishes fortitude, removes temperance, and blunts the edge of prudence.
"Shall I say more?"
Pretty clear teaching. But don't expect the liberal, anti-God mainstream media to touch on this. They're too busy promoting and defending the anti-God LGBT agenda while straining, along with Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, to avoid pointing any fingers at radical Islam.
Certain chastisements are PERMITTED by God when a people turn their backs on Him.
"The catechetical tradition also recalls that there are 'sins that cry to heaven': the blood of Abel, the sin of the Sodomites, the cry of the people oppressed in Egypt, the cry of the foreigner, the widow, and the orphan, injustice to the wage earner." Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1867.
The first, the sin of Abel, is murder. The second, the sin of the sodomites, refers to homosexual ACTS.
Homosexual ACTS represent an evil which is on the same level as homicide. They are both abominations before God.
Violence against homosexual persons is incompatible with the Gospel. So are homosexual ACTS.
Saint Peter Damian, Doctor of the Church, from his classic work The Book of Gomorrah:
"the vice of sodomy "surpasses the enormity of all others," because:
"Without fail, it brings death to the body and destruction to the soul. It pollutes the flesh, extinguishes the light of the mind, expels the Holy Spirit from the temple of the human heart, and gives entrance to the devil, the stimulator of lust. It leads to error, totally removes truth from the deluded mind ... It opens up hell and closes the gates of paradise
... It is this vice that violates temperance, slays modesty, strangles chastity, and slaughters virginity ... It defiles all things, sullies all things, pollutes all things ...
"This vice excludes a man from the assembled choir of the Church ... it separates the soul from God to associate it with demons. This utterly diseased queen of Sodom renders him who obeys the laws of her tyranny infamous to men and odious to God She strips her knights of the armor of virtue, exposing them to be pierced by the spears of every vice ... She humiliates her slave in the church and condemns him in court; she defiles him in secret and dishonors him in public; she gnaws at his conscience like a worm and consumes his flesh like fire. ... this unfortunate man (he) is deprived of all moral sense, his memory fails, and the mind's vision is darkened. Unmindful of God, he also forgets his own identity. This disease erodes the foundation of faith, saps the vitality of hope, dissolves the bond of love. It makes way with justice, demolishes fortitude, removes temperance, and blunts the edge of prudence.
"Shall I say more?"
Pretty clear teaching. But don't expect the liberal, anti-God mainstream media to touch on this. They're too busy promoting and defending the anti-God LGBT agenda while straining, along with Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, to avoid pointing any fingers at radical Islam.
Certain chastisements are PERMITTED by God when a people turn their backs on Him.
Saturday, May 14, 2016
Idle hands and priests who act out sexually...
Another priest acting out sexually. This one posting photos of himself on a "gay" [read sodomite] website. See here.
Many priests today have succumbed to luxuria. Allergic to real work and having given themselves over to a life of ease and comfort, boredom has wreaked much havoc in their lives.
The axiom, "Idle hands are the devil’s workshop” is rooted in Sacred Scripture. The apostle Paul tells us that those who waste their time in idleness or in a non-productive manner are easily led into sin: “We hear that some among you are idle. They are not busy; they are busybodies” (2 Thessalonians 3:11).
Saint Paul and his fellow missionaries set an example of diligence for the church. “You yourselves know how you ought to follow our example. We were not idle when we were with you. . . . On the contrary, we worked night and day, laboring and toiling so that we would not be a burden to any of you” (2 Thessalonians 3:7-8).
But a Cult of Softness and laziness has crept into the lives of so many clergy today. So many are accustomed to a life devoid of any physical work that they have sought entertainment to alleviate their boredom. Many of these have sought solace in alcohol or have turned to various sexcapades to satisfy their lusts.
Perhaps it's time to expect our priests to DO more. Instead of cooks to prepare their meals, perhaps they could cook for themselves? Rather than employing housekeepers, perhaps they could pick up a dust cloth or push a vacuum themselves? Perhaps they could clean the Church and wash the altar linen? Clean the parish grounds etc. Most of these tasks, if not all, have been delegated to lay persons in most parishes.
Perhaps the laity have spoiled the clergy? Maybe if we expected more from our clergy, maybe if they actually did some physical work along with the spiritual, they wouldn't have so much idle time.
Idleness which is the Devil's workshop.
Many priests today have succumbed to luxuria. Allergic to real work and having given themselves over to a life of ease and comfort, boredom has wreaked much havoc in their lives.
The axiom, "Idle hands are the devil’s workshop” is rooted in Sacred Scripture. The apostle Paul tells us that those who waste their time in idleness or in a non-productive manner are easily led into sin: “We hear that some among you are idle. They are not busy; they are busybodies” (2 Thessalonians 3:11).
Saint Paul and his fellow missionaries set an example of diligence for the church. “You yourselves know how you ought to follow our example. We were not idle when we were with you. . . . On the contrary, we worked night and day, laboring and toiling so that we would not be a burden to any of you” (2 Thessalonians 3:7-8).
But a Cult of Softness and laziness has crept into the lives of so many clergy today. So many are accustomed to a life devoid of any physical work that they have sought entertainment to alleviate their boredom. Many of these have sought solace in alcohol or have turned to various sexcapades to satisfy their lusts.
Perhaps it's time to expect our priests to DO more. Instead of cooks to prepare their meals, perhaps they could cook for themselves? Rather than employing housekeepers, perhaps they could pick up a dust cloth or push a vacuum themselves? Perhaps they could clean the Church and wash the altar linen? Clean the parish grounds etc. Most of these tasks, if not all, have been delegated to lay persons in most parishes.
Perhaps the laity have spoiled the clergy? Maybe if we expected more from our clergy, maybe if they actually did some physical work along with the spiritual, they wouldn't have so much idle time.
Idleness which is the Devil's workshop.
Saturday, February 28, 2015
Cardinal Sean O'Malley: Where is your clear and emphatic opposition to a sin that cries to Heaven for vengeance?
As noted here, "Immaculate Heart of Mary School of Still River, MA has withdrawn its marching band and float of Saint Patrick from this year’s Saint Patrick’s Day Parade after learning that a small homosexual activist group will be allowed to march while publicly identifying its homosexuality.
The school is compelled by the teachings of the Catholic Church to pull out. According to the Principal, Brother Thomas Dalton, 'Catholics are forbidden to sponsor or even participate in an event which openly promotes unnatural and immoral behavior. The Church will never accept nor condone same sex marriage and the homosexual life style.'
For 25 years the school has participated in the parade dedicated to Saint Patrick and believes that to have a float with his representation leading a group openly promoting and proud of its homosexual identity would draw down the ire of this great patron of the Boston Archdiocese. 'Saint Patrick stands with Saint Paul in condemning the sin of sodomy,' stated Brother Dalton. 'The name of Saint Patrick should be dropped from the parade as he would have nothing to do with the likes of it today.'
The director of the Band, Br. Peter Bracket stated, 'All the Band members and their parents—although greatly disappointed in not being able to march—are fully supportive of the School’s decision. We have to remain loyal to Church teachings which states in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, promulgated by Saint John Paul II, that ‘homosexual acts are acts of grave depravity’ and ‘are intrinsically disordered…Under no circumstances can they be approved.’ (#2357)'
Brother Peter Bracket is right. The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, in its document entitled Considerations Regarding Proposals to Give Legal Recognition to Unions Between Homosexual Persons, warns that even where homosexual unions have been legalized, "clear and emphatic opposition is a duty." (No. 5). This important document stresses that, "any kind of formal cooperation in the enactment or application of such gravely unjust laws" and even any "material cooperation on the level of their application" must be avoided. "In this area," states the document, "everyone can exercise the right to conscientious objection."
Considerations makes it abundantly clear that, "The Church teaches that respect for homosexual persons cannot lead in any way to approval of homosexual behavior or to considerations of homosexual unions." (No. 11). In other words, there can be no doubt that all Catholics have a moral duty to oppose the homosexual agenda.
The good folks at Immaculate Heart of Mary School in Still River, Massachusetts understand this. What a shame that Cardinal Sean O'Malley does not.
The Catholic community in and around Boston deserves an authentic shepherd who understands that opposition to all sin - AND ESPECIALLY SINS THAT CRY TO HEAVEN FOR VENGEANCE- is a duty of each and every Catholic.
The faithful deserve wheat. And they suffer from a Cardinal who offers only chaff.
The school is compelled by the teachings of the Catholic Church to pull out. According to the Principal, Brother Thomas Dalton, 'Catholics are forbidden to sponsor or even participate in an event which openly promotes unnatural and immoral behavior. The Church will never accept nor condone same sex marriage and the homosexual life style.'
For 25 years the school has participated in the parade dedicated to Saint Patrick and believes that to have a float with his representation leading a group openly promoting and proud of its homosexual identity would draw down the ire of this great patron of the Boston Archdiocese. 'Saint Patrick stands with Saint Paul in condemning the sin of sodomy,' stated Brother Dalton. 'The name of Saint Patrick should be dropped from the parade as he would have nothing to do with the likes of it today.'
The director of the Band, Br. Peter Bracket stated, 'All the Band members and their parents—although greatly disappointed in not being able to march—are fully supportive of the School’s decision. We have to remain loyal to Church teachings which states in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, promulgated by Saint John Paul II, that ‘homosexual acts are acts of grave depravity’ and ‘are intrinsically disordered…Under no circumstances can they be approved.’ (#2357)'
Brother Peter Bracket is right. The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, in its document entitled Considerations Regarding Proposals to Give Legal Recognition to Unions Between Homosexual Persons, warns that even where homosexual unions have been legalized, "clear and emphatic opposition is a duty." (No. 5). This important document stresses that, "any kind of formal cooperation in the enactment or application of such gravely unjust laws" and even any "material cooperation on the level of their application" must be avoided. "In this area," states the document, "everyone can exercise the right to conscientious objection."
Considerations makes it abundantly clear that, "The Church teaches that respect for homosexual persons cannot lead in any way to approval of homosexual behavior or to considerations of homosexual unions." (No. 11). In other words, there can be no doubt that all Catholics have a moral duty to oppose the homosexual agenda.
The good folks at Immaculate Heart of Mary School in Still River, Massachusetts understand this. What a shame that Cardinal Sean O'Malley does not.
The Catholic community in and around Boston deserves an authentic shepherd who understands that opposition to all sin - AND ESPECIALLY SINS THAT CRY TO HEAVEN FOR VENGEANCE- is a duty of each and every Catholic.
The faithful deserve wheat. And they suffer from a Cardinal who offers only chaff.
Thursday, June 14, 2012
Do those who produce The Catholic Free Press really understand the gravity of child sexual abuse?
Just how serious is the sin of scandal when committed by a priest? St. Alphonsus De Liguori, a Doctor of the Church and a moral theologian, explains that, "The Lord ordained in Leviticus that for the sin of a single priest a calf should be offered, as well as for the sins of the entire people. From this Innocent III concludes that the sin of a priest is as grievous as the sins of the whole people. The reason is, says the Pontiff, that by his sin the priest leads the entire people into sin ('Unde conjicitur quod peccatum Sacerdotis totius multitudinis peccato coaequatur, quia Sacerdos in suo peccato totam fecit delinquere multitudinem' - In Consecr. Pont. s. I.)
And, long before, the Lord himself said the same: 'If the priest that is anointed shall sin, he maketh the people to offend.' Hence, St. Augustine, addressing priests, says, 'Do not close heaven: but this you do if you give to others a bad example to lead a wicked life.' Our Lord said one day to St. Bridget, that when sinners see the bad example of the priest, they are encouraged to commit sin, and even begin to glory in the vices of which they were before ashamed. Hence our Lord added that worse maledictions shall fall on the priest than on others, because by his sinful life he brings himself and others to perdition.'...says St. John Chrysostom, the life of the priest is the root from which the people, who are the branches, receive nutriment.
St. Ambrose also says that priests are the head from which virtue flows to the members, that is, to seculars. The whole head is sick, says the Prophet Isaias;...from the sole of the foot unto the top of the head there is no soundness therein. St. Isidore explains this passage in the following words: 'This languishing head is the priest that commits sin, and that communicates his sin to the whole body.' St. Leo weeps over this evil, saying, 'How can health be found in the body if the head be not sound?' Who, says St. Bernard, shall seek in a sink the limpid water of the spring? Shall I, adds the saint, seek counsel from the man that knows not how to give counsel to himself? Speaking of the bad example of princes, Plutarch says, that it poisons not a single cup, but the public fountain; and thus, because all draw from the fountain, all are poisoned. This may be said with greater truth of the bad example of priests; hence Eugene III has said that bad Superiors are the principal causes of the sins of inferiors...St. Bernardine of Sienna writes that many, seeing the bad example of the scandalous ecclesiastic, begin even to waver in faith, and thus abandon themselves to vice, despising the sacraments, hell, and heaven." (St. Alphonsus De Liguori, Dignity and Duties of the Priest, pp. 142-144, 149).
In recent posts, I have examined how Father Jonathan Joseph Slavinskas has had nothing but praise for the late Father Joseph Coonan, whose ministry was tarred with scandal. Specifically, Father Slavinskas said that Fr. Coonan was a "great influence" who helped "nourish" his vocation. This praise for a priest credibly accused of abusing children was published in The "Catholic" Free Press. See my posts here and here.
What does this suggest about the Worcester Diocese and most especially its official newspaper? Is there really an appreciation at the diocesan level as to the seriousness of child abuse? Such would not appear to be the case.
Meanwhile, another of Fr. Slavinskas' sisters has left comments at this Blog singing the praises of Fr. Joseph Coonan, even though the Worcester Diocese removed him from ministry years ago because the accusations against him were found to be credible. Beth Slavinskas left three comments. In these comments, she asserts that, "Father Coonan was a great priest who revitalized a lot of youths faith in the Catholic Church." And she adds, "I am saying that Fr. Coonan's time at Saint John's was positive."
Positive? For whom? As Dr. Germain Grisez reminds us, "In a loose sense, scandal refers to bad publicity; in the strict sense, it refers to leading others into sin (see CCC, 2284-2287). Jesus warns: 'If any of you put a stumbling block before one of these little ones who believe in me, it would be better for you if a great millstone were hung around your neck and you were thrown into the sea' (Mk 9: 42; Mt 18: 6; Lk 17: 1-2). Since clerical sexual abuse not only injures its victims as sexual abuse always does but poses a threat and obstacle to their and others' faith, the Church is injured far more by its scandalousness in this strict sense than she is by bad publicity about it."
What do you think: Do those who produce the "Catholic" Free Press really understand the gravity of child sexual abuse? If so, why would they publish comments praising a disgraced priest who was removed from ministry because the accusations that he abused children were found to be credible? The photo below is that of Fr. Jonathan Joseph Slavinskas.
And, long before, the Lord himself said the same: 'If the priest that is anointed shall sin, he maketh the people to offend.' Hence, St. Augustine, addressing priests, says, 'Do not close heaven: but this you do if you give to others a bad example to lead a wicked life.' Our Lord said one day to St. Bridget, that when sinners see the bad example of the priest, they are encouraged to commit sin, and even begin to glory in the vices of which they were before ashamed. Hence our Lord added that worse maledictions shall fall on the priest than on others, because by his sinful life he brings himself and others to perdition.'...says St. John Chrysostom, the life of the priest is the root from which the people, who are the branches, receive nutriment.
St. Ambrose also says that priests are the head from which virtue flows to the members, that is, to seculars. The whole head is sick, says the Prophet Isaias;...from the sole of the foot unto the top of the head there is no soundness therein. St. Isidore explains this passage in the following words: 'This languishing head is the priest that commits sin, and that communicates his sin to the whole body.' St. Leo weeps over this evil, saying, 'How can health be found in the body if the head be not sound?' Who, says St. Bernard, shall seek in a sink the limpid water of the spring? Shall I, adds the saint, seek counsel from the man that knows not how to give counsel to himself? Speaking of the bad example of princes, Plutarch says, that it poisons not a single cup, but the public fountain; and thus, because all draw from the fountain, all are poisoned. This may be said with greater truth of the bad example of priests; hence Eugene III has said that bad Superiors are the principal causes of the sins of inferiors...St. Bernardine of Sienna writes that many, seeing the bad example of the scandalous ecclesiastic, begin even to waver in faith, and thus abandon themselves to vice, despising the sacraments, hell, and heaven." (St. Alphonsus De Liguori, Dignity and Duties of the Priest, pp. 142-144, 149).
In recent posts, I have examined how Father Jonathan Joseph Slavinskas has had nothing but praise for the late Father Joseph Coonan, whose ministry was tarred with scandal. Specifically, Father Slavinskas said that Fr. Coonan was a "great influence" who helped "nourish" his vocation. This praise for a priest credibly accused of abusing children was published in The "Catholic" Free Press. See my posts here and here.
What does this suggest about the Worcester Diocese and most especially its official newspaper? Is there really an appreciation at the diocesan level as to the seriousness of child abuse? Such would not appear to be the case.
Meanwhile, another of Fr. Slavinskas' sisters has left comments at this Blog singing the praises of Fr. Joseph Coonan, even though the Worcester Diocese removed him from ministry years ago because the accusations against him were found to be credible. Beth Slavinskas left three comments. In these comments, she asserts that, "Father Coonan was a great priest who revitalized a lot of youths faith in the Catholic Church." And she adds, "I am saying that Fr. Coonan's time at Saint John's was positive."
Positive? For whom? As Dr. Germain Grisez reminds us, "In a loose sense, scandal refers to bad publicity; in the strict sense, it refers to leading others into sin (see CCC, 2284-2287). Jesus warns: 'If any of you put a stumbling block before one of these little ones who believe in me, it would be better for you if a great millstone were hung around your neck and you were thrown into the sea' (Mk 9: 42; Mt 18: 6; Lk 17: 1-2). Since clerical sexual abuse not only injures its victims as sexual abuse always does but poses a threat and obstacle to their and others' faith, the Church is injured far more by its scandalousness in this strict sense than she is by bad publicity about it."
What do you think: Do those who produce the "Catholic" Free Press really understand the gravity of child sexual abuse? If so, why would they publish comments praising a disgraced priest who was removed from ministry because the accusations that he abused children were found to be credible? The photo below is that of Fr. Jonathan Joseph Slavinskas.
Sunday, April 04, 2010
"...the mouth of the wicked..."
The Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, now feels "deep sorrow and regret" for his statement that the Catholic Church in Ireland has lost "all credibility." See here. As well he should. For the Proverbs teach us that, "The just man weighs well his utterance, but the mouth of the wicked pours out evil" (15: 28).
However, as I explained in a previous post, Archbishop Williams has argued - against the entire Christian Tradition - that homosexual relationships are comparable to marriage while attempting to make a case for active same-sex relationships. And he is not alone. The many forces behind the New World Order seek to discredit the Church because She alone stands in the way of the satanic agenda to prepare the way for the emergence of the Man of Sin.
Homosexuality is ranked among the "sins that cry to heaven for vengeance." Which is why the angels said to Lot: "We are about to destroy this place, for the outcry reaching the Lord against those in the city is so great that he has sent us to destroy it." In his Second Epistle, St. Peter explains how the punishment inflicted on Sodom and Gomorrah stands as a warning to evildoers: "God condemned the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah to destruction, reducing them to ashes, making them an example for the godless of what is coming." (2 Peter 2: 6).
Archbishop Williams needs to repent of the evil which he has promoted. The evil of a sin which cries to heaven to vengeance. See here. Also Genesis 19: 13.
However, as I explained in a previous post, Archbishop Williams has argued - against the entire Christian Tradition - that homosexual relationships are comparable to marriage while attempting to make a case for active same-sex relationships. And he is not alone. The many forces behind the New World Order seek to discredit the Church because She alone stands in the way of the satanic agenda to prepare the way for the emergence of the Man of Sin.
Homosexuality is ranked among the "sins that cry to heaven for vengeance." Which is why the angels said to Lot: "We are about to destroy this place, for the outcry reaching the Lord against those in the city is so great that he has sent us to destroy it." In his Second Epistle, St. Peter explains how the punishment inflicted on Sodom and Gomorrah stands as a warning to evildoers: "God condemned the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah to destruction, reducing them to ashes, making them an example for the godless of what is coming." (2 Peter 2: 6).
Archbishop Williams needs to repent of the evil which he has promoted. The evil of a sin which cries to heaven to vengeance. See here. Also Genesis 19: 13.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)