As reported here, 2 million homosexuals flooded the streets of Sao Paolo, Brazil and preformed a mock crucifixion of Jesus. A transgender actress played the part of dressing up like Jesus, being whipped until she bled, and then being crucified.
As the world opts for sin and madness, we will witness more and more cases of demonic obsession, infestation and possession. And blasphemies will multiply.
As New Advent Encyclopedia explains: "Blasphemy, by reason of the significance of the words with which it is expressed, may be of three kinds.
1.It is heretical when the insult to God involves a declaration that is against faith, as in the assertion: "God is cruel and unjust" or "The noblest work of man is God".
2.It is imprecatory when it would cry a malediction upon the Supreme Being as when one would say: "Away with God".
3.It is simply contumacious when it is wholly made up of contempt of, or indignation towards, God, as in the blasphemy of Julian the Apostate: "Thou has conquered, O Galilaean".
Again, blasphemy may be (1) either direct, as when the one blaspheming formally intends to dishonour the Divinity, or (2) indirect, as when without such intention blasphemous words are used with advertence to their import.
The malice of blasphemy
Blasphemy is a sin against the virtue of religion by which we render to God the honour due to Him as our first beginning and last end. St. Thomas says that it is to be regarded as a sin against faith inasmuch as by it we attribute to God that which does not belong to Him, or deny Him that which is His (II-II.13.1). De Lugo and others deny that this is an essential element in blasphemy (De just. et jure caeterisque virt. card., lib. II, c. xiv, disp. v, n. 26), but as Escobar (Theol. mor., lib. xxviii, c. xxxii, n. 716 sqq.) observes, the contention on this point concerns words only, since the followers of St. Thomas see in the contempt expressed in blasphemy the implication that God is contemptible--an implication in which all will allow there is attributed to God that which does not belong to Him. What is here said is of blasphemy in general; manifestly that form of the sin described above as heretical is not only opposed to the virtue of religion but that of faith as well. Blasphemy is of its whole nature (ex toto genere suo) a mortal sin, the gravest that may be committed against religion. The seriousness of an affront is proportioned to the dignity of the person towards whom it is directed. Since then the insult in blasphemy is offered to the ineffable majesty of God, the degree of its heinousness must be evident. Nevertheless because of slight or no advertence blasphemy may be either a venial sin only or no sin at all. Thus many expressions voiced in anger escape the enormity of a grave sin, except as is clear, when the anger is vented upon God. Again, in the case where blasphemous speech is uttered inadvertently, through force of habit, a grave sin is not committed as long as earnest resistance is made to the habit. If, however, no such effort is put forth there cannot but be grave guilt, though a mortal sin is not committed on the occasion of each and every blasphemous outburst. It has been said that heretical blasphemy besides a content directed against religion has that which is opposed to the virtue of faith. Similarly, imprecatory blasphemy is besides a violation of charity..."
In their zeal to justify the homosexual lifestyle and inclination, many homosexuals will stop at nothin, including blaspheming against the Lord Jesus.
And so I call upon all Catholics who read this Blog post to offer prayers of reparation to the Sacred Heart of Jesus.
Let us begin with this prayer:
"O Jesus, my Savior and Redeemer, Son of the living God, behold, we kneel before Thee and offer Thee our reparation; we would make amends for all the blasphemies uttered against Thy holy name, for all the injuries done to Thee in the Blessed Sacrament, for all the irreverence shown toward Thine immaculate Virgin Mother, for all the calumnies and slanders spoken against Thy spouse, the holy Catholic and Roman Church. O Jesus, who has said: "If you ask the Father anything in My name, He will give it to you," we pray and beseech Thee for all our brethren who are in danger of sin; shield them from every temptation to fall away from the true faith; save those who are even now standing on the brink of the abyss; to all of them give light and knowledge of the truth, courage and strength for the conflict with evil, perseverance in faith and active charity! For this do we pray, most merciful Jesus, in Thy name, unto God the Father, with whom Thou livest and reignest in the unity of the Holy Ghost world without end. Amen."
Showing posts with label Mock. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Mock. Show all posts
Tuesday, June 30, 2015
Tuesday, January 31, 2012
Update on Clark University's "Freethought Society"...It's "okay" to mock Christianity
It was brought to my attention by a student at Clark University that Paul Agne, a Clark Student and member of the Christianophobic "Freethought Society," wrote the following:
"Even if we do criticize/mock Christianity, there is nothing wrong with that. If I see irrational dogma, bigotry, intolerance, etc it is not exempt from criticism/ridicule just because it is someone's religious (or political/cultural/etc) be...lief. And furthermore, as Christianity is the dominant religion in the US, and inserts itself into our lives daily it will of course be more relevant to us, and we will have more to say about it than, say, Jainism."
There you have it. Members of the Clark University "Freethought Society" have such a hatred toward Christianity that they justify mocking the religion. Christian dogma is presented as "irrational," "bigoted" and "intolerant."
Ironically, many who commented in the discussion thread of a previous post, asserted that Clark University is "tolerant" toward religious viewpoints. Yes, I can see that. An individual who posted a comment as "Dr. Halpern" wrote: "As a Clark University alum, I can honestly say that in my 4 years there I did not encounter any anti-Christian sentiments. I would describe the atmosphere at Clark as supportive, intellectually stimulating, and encouraging of healthy, thoughtful debate... As an alum concerned with investing in the future of the institution, I would like to counter BostonCatholic by ENCOURAGING Christian parents to send their children to Clark. It is through inclusiveness that we learn about the world we live in, and everyone's viewpoints are equally important in that learning process."
Oh boy.
Molly Burman wrote, "I am a Catholic student at Clark University. I learn and live in an accepting environment. This acceptance includes people of all faiths, sexualities, and races. One of our mottos is "Categorizing is not something we do here." This means not judging a person based on his or her sexuality OR religion."
Unless of course that religion is Christianity. Then it's "okay" to mock.
Yesiree, healthy, thoughtful debate is alive and well at Clark University. That's why I was called an "ass...." for simply challenging Clark University professor Abbie Goldberg.
With friends like that...
"Even if we do criticize/mock Christianity, there is nothing wrong with that. If I see irrational dogma, bigotry, intolerance, etc it is not exempt from criticism/ridicule just because it is someone's religious (or political/cultural/etc) be...lief. And furthermore, as Christianity is the dominant religion in the US, and inserts itself into our lives daily it will of course be more relevant to us, and we will have more to say about it than, say, Jainism."
There you have it. Members of the Clark University "Freethought Society" have such a hatred toward Christianity that they justify mocking the religion. Christian dogma is presented as "irrational," "bigoted" and "intolerant."
Ironically, many who commented in the discussion thread of a previous post, asserted that Clark University is "tolerant" toward religious viewpoints. Yes, I can see that. An individual who posted a comment as "Dr. Halpern" wrote: "As a Clark University alum, I can honestly say that in my 4 years there I did not encounter any anti-Christian sentiments. I would describe the atmosphere at Clark as supportive, intellectually stimulating, and encouraging of healthy, thoughtful debate... As an alum concerned with investing in the future of the institution, I would like to counter BostonCatholic by ENCOURAGING Christian parents to send their children to Clark. It is through inclusiveness that we learn about the world we live in, and everyone's viewpoints are equally important in that learning process."
Oh boy.
Molly Burman wrote, "I am a Catholic student at Clark University. I learn and live in an accepting environment. This acceptance includes people of all faiths, sexualities, and races. One of our mottos is "Categorizing is not something we do here." This means not judging a person based on his or her sexuality OR religion."
Unless of course that religion is Christianity. Then it's "okay" to mock.
Yesiree, healthy, thoughtful debate is alive and well at Clark University. That's why I was called an "ass...." for simply challenging Clark University professor Abbie Goldberg.
With friends like that...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)

