Saturday, May 28, 2011

Deacon Nick Donnelly on "Catholics for Choice" credal statement: "To raise the use of condoms onto the same level as belief in God is a gross act of heresy and apostasy.."

My good friend Nick Donnelly, a permanent deacon of the Diocese of Lancaster, is reporting that,  "On the eve of the Vatican conference on the morality and effectiveness of condoms in response to HIV/AIDS the pro-abortion group ‘Catholics’ for Choice have issued a ‘creed’ that puts belief in condoms on the same level as belief in God:

‘We believe in God.

We believe that sex is sacred.

We believe in caring for each other.

We believe in using condoms.

We thank Pope Benedict for acknowledging that condoms save lives.’

In a press release issued with this advert in an Italian newspaper Jon O’Brien, the president of Catholics for Choice, mischievously attempts to portray Pope Benedict XVI as supporting the use of condoms: 'The first ray of light from the Vatican came from Pope Benedict XVI himself last year when he acknowledged that condom use can prevent the spread of the disease. Since then, conservatives within the church have worked to try and muddy this clarity, but Catholic health workers must resist their attempts to roll back progress and endanger the lives and health of millions of people at risk for contracting HIV and AIDS. No longer can the Vatican stand by dangerous statements of men like Cardinal Trujillo, who claimed that HIV could pass through a condom.'

In his interview with Peter Seewald published in Light of the World Pope Benedict said that the use of condoms was always immoral and less than human. He did say that a homosexual prostitute considering using a condom to stop the spread of HIV was the beginning of moral reasoning. This example was clearly not an endorsement by the Holy Father of the use of condoms as moral.

Protect the Pope comment: This ‘credal’ statement from ‘Catholics for Choice’ captures the depth of dissent that they, and their supporters, have sunk. The God they believe in is a ‘god’ created by them in their own image, and is not the God of Jesus Christ and apostolic faith.

Their statement of belief in the sacredness of sex is impoverished and debased, for it makes no mention of love, nor does it distinguish between the moral sexual love between wives and husbands, and the immorality of sex outside of marriage.

They say they believe in caring for each other but this care does not include pre-born children, who they actively seek to kill.

Their pressing Pope Benedict into supporting their position is intentionally misleading and mendacious.

That ‘Catholics for Choice’ call opposition to the use of condoms ‘dissent’ is not only absurd, but also a diabolical twisting of the truth.

To raise the use of condoms onto the same level as belief in God is a gross act of heresy and apostasy. When will the Church take legal action to stop this anti-catholic organisation that is funded by enemies of the Church from passing itself off as ‘Catholic’?" (See here).

It was Saint Cyprian of Carthage, writing against the Greco-Roman pagan world and its vices, who said that, "That Jupiter of theirs is not more supreme in dominion than in vice, inflamed with earthly love in the midst of his own breaking forth by the help of birds to violate the purity of boys. And now put the question: Can he who looks upon such things be healthy-minded or modest? Men imitate the gods whom they adore, and to such miserable beings their crimes become their religion." (Letters 1:8).

In a series of letters written from 1969-1970, Sister Lucia [of the Fatima apparition] wrote: "It is indeed sad that so many people let themselves be dominated by the diabolical wave that is sweeping the world, and that they are blinded to the point of being incapable of seeing error! Their principal fault is they have abandoned prayer; in this way they have become estranged from God, and without God everything fails. The devil is very cunning and looks for our weak points in order to attack us. If we are not diligent and careful to obtain strength from God, we shall fall, for our age is very wicked and we are weak. Only the strength of God can keep us on our feet."

Indeed.  Those who have abandoned prayer have succumbed to a multitude of vices and crimes which quickly become their religion.  Abortion becomes an ersatz "sacrament" in the Moloch religion and contraception a sort of unholy sacramental for those who would worship at the altar of lust.  And too many clerics, paralyzed with either fear or indifference or both, say nothing.  These cowardly clerics, these chicken Catholics, are afraid to stand against the Culture of Death and the emerging Moloch religion which will serve the City of Satan.

Deacon Nick is not one of them.  He is, rather, a shining example of everything a Catholic deacon should be.  I am honored to count him as a friend.


ShrewsburyCatholic said...

More evidence that liberals have no claim to being "Vatican II Catholics." For Vatican II's teaching is crystal clear to anyone capable of thought:

"When there is a question of harmonizing conjugal love with the
responsible transmission of life, the moral aspect of any procedure does not depend solely on sincere intentions or on an evaluation of motives. It must be determined by objective standards. These, based on the nature of the human person and his acts, preserve the full sense of mutual self-giving and human procreation in the context of true love. Such a goal cannot be achieved unless the virtue of conjugal chastity is sincerely
practiced. Relying on these principles, sons of the Church may not undertake methods of regulating procreation which are found blameworthy by the teaching authority of the Church in its unfolding of the divine law." (Gaudium et Spes, 51).

Mark said...

The invention of the internet has been a key element in the downfall of the liberal destroyers. They are yesterday's men. Now people can read for themselves what Vatican II really said.

jac said...

You are right in saying that the problem isn't about the VatII's teachings although some are controversial or subject to interpretations.
The problem is about the use that the modernists made with this council, in distorting, twisting and clouding it or even introducing novelties in the name of that hollow word that I hate: "The spirit of the council".
In fact, since VatII wasn't dogmatic it couldn't do more than to repeat previously defined dogmas by the Magisterium or former councils.
In that sense, VatII couldn't be wrong in itself, but it trigerred the confusion, the relativism, the disobedience and the controversies the Church is erring in now.
In my humble opinion it would have been better if that council never was called.

Josephus said...

Mark said...
The invention of the internet has been a key element in the downfall of the liberal destroyers. They are yesterday's men. Now people can read for themselves what Vatican II really said.

Then it must be anomalous that Protect the Pope has been consigned to the dustbin and Deacon Nick urged to desist and take some time out for prayer and reflection. The same term used for Cardinal Kieth O'Brien.

Paul Anthony Melanson said...

Deacon Nick has still fared much better than me. I am not permitted to even APPLY for the diocesan priesthood in my diocese because of my orthodoxy.

So much for any discernment process.

But a Day of Judgment approaches. The Dies Irae. Why, do you suppose, is it referred to as a Day of Wrath?

Site Meter