"From man in regard to his fellow man I will demand an accounting for human life..."

INDIANAPOLIS, Indiana, May 2, 2016 (LifeSiteNews) – Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton promised this weekend to “defend Planned Parenthood” from Indiana’s new law banning abortion on the basis of a baby’s race, sex, or disability diagnosis.

“I will defend a woman's right to make her own health-care decisions,” said Clinton at a campaign stop Sunday.  “I’ll tell ya, I’ll defend Planned Parenthood against these attacks.  And I commend the women of this state, young and old, for standing up against this governor and this legislature.”
The law, which is scheduled to take effect on July 1, makes it illegal for doctors to knowingly abort babies because they have a disability, such as Down syndrome, or because of their race, sex, national origin, or ancestry.

Around 90% of babies diagnosed with Down syndrome in the United States are killed in the womb.
Investigations by the pro-life group Live Action reveal that abortion facilities in Texas, New York, Arizona, Hawaii, and North Carolina are complicit in aiding the abortions of baby girls because of their sex.

Indiana’s new law, House Bill 1137, also “prohibits an individual from acquiring, receiving, selling, or transferring fetal tissue” and requires that aborted and miscarried babies’ bodies be cremated or buried.  Under the new law, women whose babies are diagnosed with fetal anomalies must be given information about prenatal hospice care and abortionists with hospital admitting privileges must renew them annually.

“Accounts of the bodies of aborted babies being found in dumpsters, left on loading docks, and being ground up in garbage disposals in abortion facilities are being reported across the nation,” Cathie Humbarger of Indiana Right to Life testified in support of the bill.  “Indiana Code must address the respectful disposition of the bodies of babies aborted here and prevent the bodies of babies being aborted in other states from being sent to Indiana landfills.”

The American Civil Liberties Union is suing Indiana over the law, which it claims limits women’s freedom to abort babies for any reason.

“Repeatedly the U.S. Supreme Court has said that a woman may get an abortion within the first trimester for whatever reasons she deems best, based on her circumstances,” said Jane Henegar, the Executive Director of the ACLU.

Throughout the primary election, Clinton has repeatedly defended her far-left support of abortion on demand.  “We need a president who is passionate” about expanding abortion, she said in March.
The Indiana primary is Tuesday.




"Man's life comes from God; it is his gift, his image and imprint, a sharing in his breath of life. God therefore is the sole Lord of this life: man cannot do with it as he wills. God himself makes this clear to Noah after the Flood: "For your own lifeblood, too, I will demand an accounting ... and from man in regard to his fellow man I will demand an accounting for human life" (Gen 9:5). The biblical text is concerned to emphasize how the sacredness of life has its foundation in God and in his creative activity: "For God made man in his own image" (Gen 9:6).

Human life and death are thus in the hands of God, in his power: "In his hand is the life of every living thing and the breath of all mankind", exclaims Job (12:10). "The Lord brings to death and brings to life; he brings down to Sheol and raises up" (1 Sam 2:6). He alone can say: "It is I who bring both death and life" (Dt 32:39).

But God does not exercise this power in an arbitrary and threatening way, but rather as part of his care and loving concern for his creatures. If it is true that human life is in the hands of God, it is no less true that these are loving hands, like those of a mother who accepts, nurtures and takes care of her child: "I have calmed and quieted my soul, like a child quieted at its mother's breast; like a child that is quieted is my soul" (Ps 131:2; cf. Is 49:15; 66:12-13; Hos 11:4). Thus Israel does not see in the history of peoples and in the destiny of individuals the outcome of mere chance or of blind fate, but rather the results of a loving plan by which God brings together all the possibilities of life and opposes the powers of death arising from sin: "God did not make death, and he does not delight in the death of the living. For he created all things that they might exist" (Wis 1:13-14).

The sacredness of life gives rise to its inviolability, written from the beginning in man's heart, in his conscience. The question: "What have you done?" (Gen 4:10), which God addresses to Cain after he has killed his brother Abel, interprets the experience of every person: in the depths of his conscience, man is always reminded of the inviolability of life-his own life and that of others-as something which does not belong to him, because it is the property and gift of God the Creator and Father.

The commandment regarding the inviolability of human life reverberates at the heart of the "ten words" in the covenant of Sinai (cf. Ex 34:28). In the first place that commandment prohibits murder: "You shall not kill" (Ex 20:13); "do not slay the innocent and righteous" (Ex 23:7). But, as is brought out in Israel's later legislation, it also prohibits all personal injury inflicted on another (cf. Ex 21:12-27). Of course we must recognize that in the Old Testament this sense of the value of life, though already quite marked, does not yet reach the refinement found in the Sermon on the Mount. This is apparent in some aspects of the current penal legislation, which provided for severe forms of corporal punishment and even the death penalty. But the overall message, which the New Testament will bring to perfection, is a forceful appeal for respect for the inviolability of physical life and the integrity of the person. It culminates in the positive commandment which obliges us to be responsible for our neighbour as for ourselves: "You shall love your neighbour as yourself" (Lev 19:18).

The commandment "You shall not kill", included and more fully expressed in the positive command of love for one's neighbour, is reaffirmed in all its force by the Lord Jesus. To the rich young man who asks him: "Teacher, what good deed must I do, to have eternal life?", Jesus replies: "If you would enter life, keep the commandments" (Mt 19:16,17). And he quotes, as the first of these: "You shall not kill" (Mt 19:18). In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus demands from his disciples a righteousness which surpasses that of the Scribes and Pharisees, also with regard to respect for life: "You have heard that it was said to the men of old, ?You shall not kill; and whoever kills shall be liable to judgment'. But I say to you that every one who is angry with his brother shall be liable to judgment" (Mt 5:21-22).

By his words and actions Jesus further unveils the positive requirements of the commandment regarding the inviolability of life. These requirements were already present in the Old Testament, where legislation dealt with protecting and defending life when it was weak and threatened: in the case of foreigners, widows, orphans, the sick and the poor in general, including children in the womb (cf. Ex 21:22; 22:20-26). With Jesus these positive requirements assume new force and urgency, and are revealed in all their breadth and depth: they range from caring for the life of one's brother (whether a blood brother, someone belonging to the same people, or a foreigner living in the land of Israel) to showing concern for the stranger, even to the point of loving one's enemy." (Pope John Paul II, Evangelium Vitae (The Gospel of Life) Nos. 39-41).

The sexual morality popular in the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah brought them to complete and utter destruction.  Today we are building a New Sodom, a Moloch State which offers not law and justice but an oppressive demonic order which claims total jurisdiction over man and defies God and His plan for humanity.  So it is no surprise that many politicians such as Hillary Clinton openly promote both abortion and same-sex "marriage." Rousas Rushdoony exposes the nature of the demonic Moloch State which so many politicians now willingly serve:

"The Moloch state simply represents the supreme effort of man to command the future, to predestine the world, and to be as God.  Lesser efforts, divination, spirit-questing, magic and witchcraft are equally anathema to God.  All represent efforts to have the future on other than God's terms, to have a future apart from and in defiance of God.  They are assertions that the world is not of God but of brute factuality, and that men can somehow master the world and the future by going directly to the raw materials thereof."
The Devil seduces men through the deceitful tactics of pseudo-saviors.  And ours is a perverse age in which many pseudo-saviors pretend to offer liberation through sex without love, violence and drug abuse as well as the occult.  As Fr. Miceli, S.J., warned: "In the name of its new secular gods, Progress and Liberty, titles that are false fronts for Rebellion and Licentiousness, many formerly Christian nations are driving their sons and daughters through the demonic fires of sacrificial murder.  Thus..so-called Christian nations, having legalized abortion and while preparing to legalize euthanasia, have become Moloch states."

 

The day is fast approaching when the haters of God will demand that Christians be killed for opposing their immorality

In his Encyclical Arcanum Divinae (On Christian Marriage), Pope Leo XIII wrote, "...Our wish is rather to speak about that family union of which marriage is the beginning and the foundation. The true origin of marriage, venerable brothers, is well known to all. Though revilers of the Christian faith refuse to acknowledge the never-interrupted doctrine of the Church on this subject, and have long striven to destroy the testimony of all nations and of all times, they have nevertheless failed not only to quench the powerful light of truth, but even to lessen it. We record what is to all known, and cannot be doubted by any, that God, on the sixth day of creation, having made man from the slime of the earth, and having breathed into his face the breath of life, gave him a companion, whom He miraculously took from the side of Adam when he was locked in sleep. God thus, in His most far-reaching foresight, decreed that this husband and wife should be the natural beginning of the human race, from whom it might be propagated and preserved by an unfailing fruitfulness throughout all futurity of time. And this union of man and woman, that it might answer more fittingly to the infinite wise counsels of God, even from the beginning manifested chiefly two most excellent properties - deeply sealed, as it were, and signed upon it-namely, unity and perpetuity. From the Gospel we see clearly that this doctrine was declared and openly confirmed by the divine authority of Jesus Christ. He bore witness to the Jews and to His Apostles that marriage, from its institution, should exist between two only, that is, between one man and one woman; that of two they are made, so to say, one flesh; and that the marriage bond is by the will of God so closely and strongly made fast that no man may dissolve it or render it asunder. "For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife, and they two shall be in one flesh. Therefore now they are not two, but one flesh. What, therefore, God bath joined together, let no man put asunder." (No. 5).


Men might actually believe that they have the right to change the definition of marriage, but this is merely symptomatic of an illusion which is rooted in pride. As such, it represents a form of insanity. Men are not free to change God's eternal law to suit their own pleasures. Recall the teaching of Pope Pius XI in his famous Encyclical "On Christian Marriage":

"First of all, let this remain the unchanged and unshakable foundation: Matrimony was neither established nor restored by man but by God. It has been protected, strengthened, and elevated not by the laws of men, but by those of God, the author of human nature, and of Christ who restored that same nature. Consequently, these laws cannot be changed according to men's pleasure, nor by any agreement of the spouses themselves that is contrary to these laws. This is the teaching of Sacred Scripture (see Gen 1:27; 2:22f.; Mt 19:3ff.; Eph 5:23ff.); this is the constant, universal tradition of the Church; this is the solemn definition of the holy Council of Trent, which in the words of Sacred Scripture teaches and reasserts that the permanent and indissoluble bond of matrimony, its unity and strength, have their origin in God."

The Catechism of the Catholic Church, Nos. 1603-1605, explain marriage in the order of creation:

"The intimate community of life and love which constitutes the married state has been established by the Creator and endowed by him with its own proper laws. . . . God himself is the author of marriage." The vocation to marriage is written in the very nature of man and woman as they came from the hand of the Creator. Marriage is not a purely human institution despite the many variations it may have undergone through the centuries in different cultures, social structures, and spiritual attitudes. These differences should not cause us to forget its common and permanent characteristics. Although the dignity of this institution is not transparent everywhere with the same clarity, some sense of the greatness of the matrimonial union exists in all cultures. "The well-being of the individual person and of both human and Christian society is closely bound up with the healthy state of conjugal and family life."

God who created man out of love also calls him to love the fundamental and innate vocation of every human being. For man is created in the image and likeness of God who is himself love. Since God created him man and woman, their mutual love becomes an image of the absolute and unfailing love with which God loves man. It is good, very good, in the Creator's eyes. And this love which God blesses is intended to be fruitful and to be realized in the common work of watching over creation: "And God blessed them, and God said to them: 'Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth and subdue it.'"

Holy Scripture affirms that man and woman were created for one another: "It is not good that the man should be alone." The woman, "flesh of his flesh," his equal, his nearest in all things, is given to him by God as a "helpmate"; she thus represents God from whom comes our help. "Therefore a man leaves his father and his mother and cleaves to his wife, and they become one flesh." The Lord himself shows that this signifies an unbreakable union of their two lives by recalling what the plan of the Creator had been "in the beginning": "So they are no longer two, but one flesh."

Again, we may choose to reject these truths. But in so doing, we lose our grip on sanity as it were. In the words of the late (great) F.J. Sheed:

"..if we see anything - ourself or some other man, or the Universe as a whole or any part of it - without at the same time seeing God holding it there, then we are seeing it all wrong. If we saw a coat hanging on a wall and did not realize that it was held there by a hook, we should not be living in the real world at all, but in some fantastic world of our own in which coats defied the law of gravity and hung on walls by their own power. Similarly if we see things in existence and do not in the same act see that they are held in existence by God, then equally we are living in a fantastic world, not the real world. Seeing God everywhere and all things upheld by Him [such as marriage, my note] is not a matter of sanctity; but of plain sanity, because God is everywhere and all things are upheld by Him...To overlook God's presence is not simply to be irreligious; it is a kind of insanity, like overlooking anything else that is actually there." (Theology and Sanity, p.6).

Americans have, for the most part, embraced this insanity.  It is a madness which results from living in grave sin. Increasingly, the mind of those who reject God's Commandments becomes immersed in darkness until such point that they can no longer hear or discern the Word of God.

Having embraced a Theology of Lust, these haters of God will soon turn to violence.  The day is coming when anyone who opposes their filth will be killed.

Lying and homicide are the two chief marks of the Devil and those who serve him.  Having embraced the lie (Romans 1:25), servants of the Father of lies will soon embrace murder.

Chilean priests demand resignation of Bishop alleged to have covered up for sexual abuser

The Associated Press is reporting that:

"A group of Chilean priests on Thursday demanded for the resignation of a bishop, accusing him of covering up for a prominent priest who sexually abused altar boys.

The priests and deacons in the southern city of Osorno made their request to Ivo Scapalo, the papal nuncio in Chile. They said newly appointed bishop Juan Barros Madrid covered up for the Rev. Fernando Karadima.

Victims have said Karadima began abusing them at his residence at the Sacred Heart of Jesus church in Santiago about 20 years ago, when they were between 14 and 17 years old."

Not long ago, speaking to a papal audience, Pope Francis  asked people to think about how they approach the Mass and what difference it makes in their lives and the lives of their parishes.

Do you go to Mass because it's a habit or a time to see your friends? the pope asked. "Or is it something more?"

"When we go to Mass, we find ourselves with all sorts of people," the pope said. "Does the Eucharist we celebrate lead me to consider all of them as brothers and sisters? Does it increase my ability to rejoice when they do and to weep with those who weep?"

Pope Francis told those present that, "it's not enough to say one loves Jesus; it must be shown in love for those he loved."

There are many who view Pope Francis' decision to appoint Rev. Robert J. Geisinger to be his chief prosecutor of serious church law violations, including child sexual abuse to be utterly insensitive and even despicable. See here. This because the Jesuit was himself one of several Catholic officials who allowed a notorious abusive priest to remain in ministry for years after learning of his long history of sexual abuses, legal documents show.

It's not enough to say that one loves Jesus.  Our love must be shown in love for those He loves.  Amen Pope Francis. Perhaps you could set the example here by offering more than lip service to the victims of sexual abuse?

Entertaining a distorted notion of forgiveness, some demand a license to perpetrate wrongs on others...

"..Zacchaeus stood there and said to the Lord, “Behold, half of my possessions, Lord, I shall give to the poor, and if I have extorted anything from anyone I shall repay it four times over.”b 9* And Jesus said to him, “Today salvationc has come to this house because this man too is a descendant of Abraham. 10* d For the Son of Man has come to seek and to save what was lost.” (Luke 19: 8, 9).


So many people today, including sadly those who profess to be Catholic, possess a distorted notion of the Christian spirit of forgiveness.  There are those, for example, who want nothing less than a license to perpetrate wrongs on others while demanding forgiveness from those they have offended without first repenting of their wrongdoing.

But where there are bonds of friendship or love, as D. Dietrich von Hildebrand explains, "..it is strictly required by the logos of the relationship that our partner shall recognize and regret the wrong he has done to us....Most certainly we must forgive him..but here we must desire that he recognize and repent of his wrong, not merely for his own good but for the sake of our relationship itself - of the restoration of that intimate union of hearts which essentially demands the clearing up of all misunderstandings and the healing of all disharmonies.."

We can never achieve true peace by ignoring objective evils.  Dr. von Hildebrand explains that, "the attitude of rancorous enmity is not the only antithesis to the Christian spirit of forgiveness.  Another attitude opposed to it is that of simply ignoring the wrong inflicted upon us, as though nothing had happened.  This aberration may result from laziness, from faintness of heart, or from a sickly, mawkish clinging to outward peace.  We hold our comfort too dear to fight it out with our aggressor; or again, we feel terrified at the thought of any tension or hostility, and fear lest a sharp reaction on our part should exasperate the adversary; or perhaps we yield just out of respect for the abstract idol of peace.  This is  akind of behavior far remote from the genuine love of peace or from a genuine spirit of forgiveness.  It can never achieve the true harmony of peace, but at best a superficial cloaking of enmity, a mood of false joviality which drags our souls towards the peripheral...Also, people who behave thus fail to consider the moral damage that their supineness is likely to inflict on others.  It is very often necessary to draw a person's attention to the wrong he has done to us - in fact, necessary for his own good.  To pass over it in silence may easily encourage him in his bad dispositions."

This used to be understood by nearly all Christians.  But today, ignorance of the Scriptures has infected even many of our clergy.  In the Gospel of Luke, Our Lord says, ",,if your brother sins, rebuke him, and if he repents, forgive him; and if he sins against you seven times in the day, and turns to you seven times, and says, 'I repent,' you must forgive him." (Lk 17: 3, 4).

If he repents.  The word "if" in this sentence makes this a conditional statement.  Those of you who have studied philosophy or mathematics know that a conditional statement is often used to assert a connection of some sort between the antecedent and consequent.  For example, an equation which states "if X = 5 and Y = 3, then X times Y = 15 represents a conditional statement.  When Jesus says, "If your brother sins [against you] and if he repents, forgive him," He is saying that authentic reconciliation involves, first of all, repentance for wrongs committed. 

Reconciliation is not possible otherwise.  Only what Dr. von Hildebrand so eloquently refers to as a "superficial cloaking of enmity."  As Christians, we are called to an authentic Christian spirit of forgiveness.  We are not called to live a lie.  While we must always forgive those who have wronged us, glossing over wrongs committed or pretending they never happened is not the road toward authentic reconciliation.

Victoria Kennedy supporters are angry and demand that Bishop Robert McManus explain himself to her

The Worcester Telegram & Gazette is reporting that:

"Two national religious organizations today will formally ask Bishop Robert J. McManus to reinstate Victoria Reggie Kennedy as the commencement speaker at Anna Maria College.


The small Catholic liberal arts school in Paxton withdrew its invitation last month after the bishop raised concerns with college officials about positions taken by the widow of former U.S. Sen. Edward M. Kennedy on abortion, gay marriage, contraception and other social issues of interest to the church.

The school has yet to announce a new speaker.

Representatives of Catholic Democrats are expected to deliver a petition to the chancery on Elm Street requesting the bishop to reverse his decision. The petition has about 20,000 online signatures.

The petition drive was organized by Faithful America, an online interfaith organization concerned with moral and social justice issues.

'We’re glad to receive the petition, but I can’t comment on it since I haven’t seen it,' said Raymond L. Delisle, the diocesan spokesman.

Those scheduled to deliver the petition include Steven D. Krueger, the national director of Catholic Democrats; Maureen McCullough, an Anna Maria alumnus, and George Shea of Uxbridge, who worked for Mr. Kennedy in his 1994 re-election bid.

Petition organizers charge that the bishop has associated Mrs. Kennedy with political and social organizations that promote points of view that are contrary to fundamental church teachings, but they said he has not substantiated those claims.

They said the bishop — through two intermediaries — has declined to speak to Mrs. Kennedy to explain his opposition.

Mr. Krueger said Bishop McManus’ action is just another example of a political tilt to the right by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops.

'This issue affects the public square beyond the Diocese of Worcester,' said Mr. Krueger. 'Basically, she’s not being allowed to speak because her last name is Kennedy.'"

Got that?  Supporters of Victoria Kennedy, angry that Bishop Robert McManus will not permit her to speak at a Catholic college, are demanding that he explain himself to Ms. Kennedy.  Now popes and bishops serve God's revealed word, which they are commissioned to hand on (see Lumen Gentium, No. 25 and Dei Verbum, No. 10).  Their teaching is not their own.  Rather it is a teaching which has been received from the Lord and which they must guard as inviolable and expound with fidelity.  A bishop answers to the Holy Father.  He answers to God.  He does not answer to politicians or certain individuals who happen to have a famous (or infamous) last name.

As the Telegram & Gazette article notes, the petition drive to reinstate Victoria Kennedy as the commencement speaker at Anna Maria College was organized by "Faithful America."  This organization, is anything but faithful.  It is rather, a liberal ultra-leftist organization which supports the radical homosexual agenda.  The organization has referred to the Family Research Council as a "hate group" because of its opposition to the homosexual agenda.  It has also worked with homosexual Episcopal Bishop Gene Robinson, a rabid anti-Catholic bigot, in an effort to get MSNBC to take Family Research Council President Tony Perkins off the air.

A domain registrant search shows that the website for "Faithful America" is maintained by Rev. Jennifer Butler, the Executive Director of Faith in Public Life who has served as the Presbyterian Church (USA) Representative to the United Nations.  Rev. Butler, referring to Catholic Rick Santorum, has said that, "few politicians exhibit greater hostility toward gay and lesbian Americans."  This because he opposes same-sex "marriage."

Should the Bishop pay any attention to a petition organized by Catholophobic individuals who are bent on promoting the radical homosexual agenda and progressive policies which are not consistent with Catholic moral teaching?