The following comes from a July 2 post on TheCatholicThing.com by Amherst jurisprudence professor Hadley Arkes.
In his book What I Saw in America, G.K. Chesterton recounted his experience in seeing Broadway at night in New York. He marveled at the uses there of God’s gift of color and lightening (light), and the garish advertising. “What a glorious garden of wonders this would be,” he said, “to anyone who was lucky enough not to be able to read.”
The same thing could have been said by those of us who were there in the courtroom of the Supreme Court this week, as the decisions on marriage were read from the bench. The dignity of the place, the rules of civility and decorum, were so evidently in the air, and so firmly respected. And yet the reasoning in the cases offered a parody of the principles of law that this building was designed to frame and enhance.
In the aftermath of the decisions this week, I wrote in this space on one of the decisions, U.S. v. Windsor, where the court struck down Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (1996). In Section 3 the Congress had stipulated that every reference to marriage in the federal code would refer only to the legal union of a man and a woman.
Justice Kennedy wrote for the court in striking down a law that, he claimed, demeaned and “humiliated” gays and lesbians by implicitly refusing to accord, to their relations, the dignity of a marital union. Kennedy affected to offer a judgment limited in its reach: he would not reach Section 2 of the Act, which sought to shore up the authority of a State to refuse to recognize same-sex marriages coming in from other states.
But if it were judged to be morally wrong, unjustified, to bar gay and lesbian couples from marriage, the same understanding would have to spill over to the cases sure to arise in challenging Section 2. Surely it had to be quite as wrong then for a state to cast an adverse moral judgment and refuse to recognize the legitimacy of homosexual unions.
In the companion case of Hollingsworth v. Perry, the majority affected there too that it was acting with the refined sense of limitation, offering a virtual model of judicial restraint. For the court was deciding here not to decide.
The case involved the famous Proposition 8 in California. The voters of California brought forth a referendum to amend their constitution to affirm marriage solely as the union of a man and woman. But of course that measure (Proposition 8) was challenged in a federal court, and a friendly judge, openly gay, struck down that amendment to the constitution.
At this point the plot thickened. The executive in the state (Governor Brown) refused to defend the amendment in court. The proponents of the measure stepped forward, seeking to stand in his place to defend that amendment in the courts.
The Supreme Court of California agreed that, when the executive refused, the proponents would have standing to defend the measure they had helped to frame and pass. For otherwise, the process of “initiative and referendum” would become a nullity.
But that is essentially what has happened now as the Supreme Court refused to accept the standing of the proponents to defend their own measure. Chief Justice Roberts insisted that the federal courts had to be governed by their own, distinct rules, and those rules sought to limit the power of the courts by confining them to a “case in controversy.” The litigants would have to show a direct material and “personal” stake in the outcome.
The proponents of Proposition 8 had invested themselves deeply in the cause with the concern of “citizens,” but they would not be deprived of anything in their own lives if the court failed to sustain their policy.
There was now a new asymmetry: The governor of any state now could overturn a part of his own constitution – or indeed any part of the laws of his state – by refusing to defend them if they were successfully challenged in a federal court.
All it requires now is a gay or lesbian couple to come forward to challenge the constitution in a state in which the constitution does not accept same-sex marriage. If the state now has a liberal governor who refuses to defend that part of the constitution, that will be enough to make it into a nullity.
The Supreme Court decided that the Windsor case then was not “justiciable.” All decisions would be swept away, leaving possibly only that first decision in the District Court. In that case, the judgment would apply only to the litigants in the case, with no authority binding any other court.
But Governor Brown made it known right away that he would direct registrars to accept same-sex marriages all over the state, and couples have already come forward to marry.
Beyond the tragedies of this week, then, there is a further lesson for our friends doing conservative jurisprudence. They wish to believe that the judges take seriously the limits in positive law – that Kennedy is striking down only Section 3, not Section 2; that Roberts is leaving the issue to be contested in the separate states.
But they do not see that the moral judgment at the core of these decisions has a dynamic of its own, which will sweep past all of these barriers of the positive law.
Brown ate one too many moonbeams, and it cost him his mind.
The dynamics of these executives usurping their authority is the denail of God by those in the legislative and the judicial branches. An executive only has authority to execute the law, not change it. But, as many people realize, when one denies God, then one craves for what is called a “strong man”. Brown is stepping up to the challenge, as has Obama stepped up to it moreso than his predecessors. Who ultimately is responsible for the public denial of God? You guessed it, the bishops who are unholy and refuse to become holy. Without holying up a nation, that nation is an “anything goes” nation; and there is nobody else on the planet who can disciple any nation but the Church; yet, the Church cannot do it without holy bishops. It is better to have no bishop than to have unholy bishops. Note that I’m saying “un” holy and that “un” means the opposite of “pro”; thus, what I’m saying is that many of the bishops are anti-Christs. This claim is supported by the Pope’s statement about the Church overwhelmed with gay lobby and hypocrite bishops. Does anyone actually believe that a hypocrite bishop is going to become holy? I didn’t think so; although it is possible. What does history say about the percentage of hypocrite bishops who become holy? Zip? Ah, c’mon, there’s gotta be some, right? Oh wait, just like sodomites being born that way, hypocrite bishops are born that way also … duh, how could I have not seen this?
Skai, bishops are not impeccable. They are human beings like the rest of us and have their faults and failings. Yes, they are called to be holy. We are all called to be holy. But this is something to aspire to and few ever achieve holiness. You state the “many bishops are anti-Christs.” This is a complete falsehood and is anti-Catholic speech. Just because someone is not without sin does not make them an anti-Christ.
PA, what is it you don’t get about the meaning of “holy”? Your rationalization for sin is “everyone is human”: This flies in the face of the Sacraments of the Catholic Church … against all Her Sacraments, especially that of Confession, Eucharist and Ordination. Your humanist religion is not Catholic, PA, but mocks God and His Church. Your posts consistently make Confession meaningless in that you always post that this Sacrament covers over the sin … well, this is Martin Luther’s heresy too, PA. Then you have no clue that the Sacrament of the Holy Eucharist unites man … including bishops … with God; the implication that is easily derived from your posts, PA, is that these Sacraments serve only to dress up men of sin, not to change them to men of holiness. And then there is Ordination: God guarantees His Church through the priesthood, PA. So you mock God and the priesthood by providing the implication in your posts that impenitent priests and bishops can shepherd God’s little ones from the ravishes of evil. You are talking like the “man of sin”, PA.
MarkfromPa writes…”Skai, bishops are not impeccable. They are human beings like the rest of us and have their faults and failings. Yes, they are called to be holy.”
The Gospel of Matthew Chapter 5 Douay Rheims Catholic Bible
5:46] For if you love them that love you, what reward shall you have? do not even the publicans this?  And if you salute your brethren only, what do you more? do not also the heathens this?  Be you therefore perfect, as also your heavenly Father is perfect.
Well Catherine, I see that you did not admonish Skai for stating that many bishops are anti-Christs. It seems that you spare some of the posters here your disapproval.
Skai, I don’t disagree with your statement that bishops are called to be holy. I am admitting that pretty much everyone, myself included, is a sinner. I am not disagreeing with most of what you are saying just what I mentioned in my post of 8:47 AM.
PA, you admit to being a non-repentent sinner; but those of faith profess to being repentent sinners. Gays seem to have no capacity to comprehend this difference … dulled down minds apparently from all the gay activity both physical and mental and imagetic.
The today’s Bishops are suppose to be like the Apostles after Jesus’s Resurrection. Just imagine if Saint Peter did not go to the Colosseum, by himself mind you, and tell the crowd and Nero about who Jesus Christ is and what is expected of the people in society. He was crucified up-side down, upon his request, so as not to be equated to Jesus Christ Himself. Peter did this in a Pagan society that was Ruled with an Iron Fist by the ‘Objectively Disordered’ Emperor Nero. The political situation in the Untied States and California and NY are mirroring the Emperor-ship of Nero. America was a Free Country, however, the Freedom was not preserved by Congress, the Administration, and the Supreme Court. Had the Bishops all spoken-up in unison, even as recent, as last year the moral and political situation would be different. As it stand now, Obama, Biden, Cuomo, Jerry Brown, all four are ‘Objectively Disordered’, due to their mindless and deprived mindsets. Three out of the four, claim they are Roman Catholic and used it in promoting their political positions. It is time that the Bishops in unison ‘Publicly Excommunicate’ these (3) Three , Biden, Brown, Cuomo, objectively disordered politicians until they ‘Publicly Denounce’ their total erroneous thinking by putting egregious burdens on the American people and taking away their Freedom.
Let us never forget that Brown is a product of a Jesuit education.
Moonbeam is old enough that Jesuit theology used to be in line with the Doctrine of the Faith at that time (before 1960).
Again Moonbeam has NEVER been CORRECTED or DISCIPLINED through Canons 915 and or 1399 – due to certain Bishops not doing their jobs.
In fact Brown was honored by being publically acknowledged by the new Bishop of Oakland, Bishop Barber at the Bishop’s Installation Mass this year.
Therefore, continue to expect sacrilege, heresy, schism, and relativism from Moonbeam.
The same is true of the “Catholic” US Supreme Court justices.
The Supreme Court has given us on a NATIONAL level – abortion, OBAMACARE (which includes the ability to dictate the people violate their Religion, and now same sex Marriage.
The appropriate Bishops have done nothing to correct and discipline bad Judges in a timely manner.
Maybe Jesuit bishops and laymen all have a secret handshake and special magic ring.
The Supreme court has declared that same-sex couples can “marry” the same as men and women. A group of fundamentalist Mormons in Arizona have announced that they will petition the court to be allowed to marry multiple wives. Why not? It seems the only criterion is that people love each other. If they are allowed to have multiple wives, that would mean that Warren Jeffs, their leader, would be freed from prison. Why not? It seems that nowadays anything goes. If so, that would be the end of society as we know it.
Homosexuality and polygamy are two different orders of thing, Sarah: Polygamy is not intrinsically evil; whereas, homosexuality is intrinsically evil. As Jesus says in the Gospel, God allowed polygamy until His Advent, but never never did God allow homosexuality.
God did not allow polygamy. Men allowed polygamy. Read your Old Testament.
God created one man, and one woman as man’s partner. – Genesis.
Read Jesus Gospel, Roger, that God was ok with polygamy although He preferred monogamy. God’s first command to man was to marry and make babies and raise families. He did not say anything about how many wives one might have. And what with men killing one another, there were more women and thus for them to marry meant polygamy. Solomon was regarded by God as a great leader of His people and Solomon had 300 wives and 600 concubines. So, Roger, next time you read the Old Testament try to keep your eyes open.
Skai, you are wrong about Solomon. He was considered a great leader until his multipling of wives and concubines. They led to his idolatry and the downfall of Israel. Some of his pagan wives and concubines brought their idolatrous practices into his palace. It gradually led to pagan practices in the Kingdom of Israel and its downfall. He became as one Jewish writer put it, “Nothing more than an oriental despot.” The kingdom later became divided over the idolatrous practices of some leaders in Israel which Solomon’s foreign women had encouraged, King Ahab and Queen Jezebel for one. In the Book of Proverbs, which supposedly was written by him, he laments his womanizing and praises the wife of his youth. He repents the taking of foreign wives but too late for Israel. Also, we all know the terrible fighting and wars that have come from Sarah, previous to Solomon, convincing Abraham to take Hagar as his concubine. The descendants of the two sons, one from Sarah and the other from Hagar, have been fighting ever since over about just everything, including territory and religion, all because Sarah refused to believe that God would give her a son in her old age. As I have said before, “If you want to create hell on earth, just give a man two wives.”
Skai, obviously God allows homosexuality or it wouldn’t exist. Polygamy is something that people chose to do. Some men in biblical times chose to have more than one wife. If persons have a homosexual orientation, this is something innate. It is not something that they chose. They may choose to tell others that they have this orientation but the orientation itself is not something they chose.
No, PA, God does not “allow” homosexuality, but wills against it. As St Paul tells us clearly, homosexuality is the consequence of sin. This does not mean that bishops become homosexuals because of all the sin in their diocese, which idea is the logical conclusion from what you rant about all the time, a pretense of sensitivity, a pretense of concern for others, a pretense of empathy.
Gays, and you admit you’re gay, have extraordinarily weakened consciences, PA… see St Paul for this clear dogmatic, magisterial teaching of the Church. Bishops are meant to be shepherds, PA, keeping the faithful out of the clutches of the world, the flesh and the devil. They cannot accomplish this without being holy, as Pope Francis just recently proclaimed to all the world, PA: Your ears are clogged? Your heart is hardened against what the Church teaches, because no matter how clearly or for how many years on this site it is explained to you by both providing magisterial documentation and also clear explanation by those who believe what the Church teaches, yet you still defy the magisterium by insisting that homosexuality has no negative effect on the salvation of souls.
Gays who are caught up in it but have not rationalized it by denying its evil are caught up in the world; but you, PA, rationalize it by changing what the Church teaches.
Mark from PA, God allows all temptations. By giving us a free will, God allows us to choose mortal sin rather than His will (with us paying the consequences when we die).
In addition, there are many who do CHOOSE a life of sin – including but not limited to that of being a homosexual.
***All temptations for mortal sin is EQUALLY difficult for the tempted. *** SSA is NOT SPECIAL, nor is it more difficult than other serious temptations.
Those with SSA (same sex attraction) are NOT Homosexuals – learn the difference between temptation and sin.
Stop playing the “woe is me” maryter. All sin can be addictive regardless of the the type.
On temptations to sin Jesus said: Mt 18:5-9.
KEN P., your post was ok to almost the half way point, and then you morphed it into rumor, such as all sins are equal. Also, to note, sin brings consequences in this world also. When you get finished reading the CCC2ndEd, and find no real answers, then try the Bible and the doctors of the Church.
PA, I forgot the short answer to your dilemma of always talking against Church doctrine. In a sense, yes, God “allows” homosexuality; however … and this is crucial, PA … God also allows pedophilia, mass murder, black masses, demoniac politicians and Monsanto executives. So, maybe you should spend some time reading about “allows” and God … but find a book that is not recommended by the gay lobby.
Homosexuality is not innate. The DNA is set upon conception, either you are a Male or Female. The Male DNA dictates the characteristics, such as male attraction to female , that is innate. Male innate also is in the protective mode as a Father would be. The homosexual mindset and attitude is definitely groomed through the environment, whether intentionally or not by some adult or several traumatic experiences during the maturation of the baby, after birth, to preteen, to teenager to, adulthood. It appears that the homosexual never reaches passed the Third stage of maturity. The well adjusted adult reaches the Fifth stage of maturity. The homosexual fixation which is mental and emotional is not innate. God ‘Makes’ no junk
Intellectone: Your hypothesis has some flaws. The conclusion is correct that sodomy is a choice not a chance. But the flaw is that only Adam and Eve were created in the undamaged image and likeness of God; after that, man was conceived in pain and sorrow and not in the full image and likeness of God. Some people are conceived with faulty dna and come out as hermaphrodites; studies suggest 4 or 5 out of a thousand births are hermaphrodites. But this does not make them sodomites; it makes it difficult for them. What PA seems to rant about is a continuum from male to effeminate or gay: the only thing that makes sense with this, despite his twist, is a continuum of testosterone and/or testosterone and estrogen proportion. But nevertheless, God does not make any of us with imperfections; rather, the imperfections are due to the Fall, because of Original sin. This blows PA’s idea totally out of the realm of reality.
God fixes the junk caused by the Fall, and He does it through Jesus Christ.
How much longer we will tempt God? How much longer will we ask for His wrath? How much lower in debauchery will we descend? Domine, misere nobis. +JMJ+
Then if a governor decides not to enforce part of the state constitution, he or she can just nullify it. But does it remain nullified if the next governor elected decides to defend it ?
The Supreme Court has made a habit of handing down some very weird reasoning. I’d hate to see what will happen if Obama gets to name another community organizer to the court.
ted, the governor cannot nullify the caconstituion
What Ted said, YFC, is that a de facto nullification can be effected by the governor by means of refusing to enforce some provision. The governor is the chief executive of the government and rules over all government enforcement agencies; thus, for example, if the governor tells all state enforcement agencies to stop writing no left turn tickets, then that would effectively nullify all traffic movement to the left.
CATHOLIC WORD NEWS ON “HOMOSEXUALITY”:
(JULY 5 FROM THE PAPAL THEOLOGIAN…)
Practicing homosexuals “have to be treated with dignity, everybody has to be treated with dignity, even sinners have to be treated with dignity, but the best way of treating people with dignity is to tell them the truth,” the theologian of the papal household said in an interview with LifeSiteNews.com.
“Homosexuality is against human nature,” said Father Wojciech Giertych, OP, who has served as papal theologian since 2005. “Now, there are many things that people do that are unnatural – smoking cigarettes is also unnatural. You can live with the addiction to tobacco, you can die of it, but there are people who are addicted to tobacco, yet they live and we meet with them and we deal with them and we don’t deny their dignity. So certainly people with the homosexual difficulty have to be respected … And so the important thing is how to pastorally help such people to return to an emotional and moral integrity.”
“We began talking about contraception, and homosexuality is tied with it because since contraception destroys the quality of relationships amongst the spouses, and it generates sexual license outside marriage, and it reduces sexuality to an easy source of pleasure with no responsibility, that pleasure without responsibility is never satisfying, and it generates like a drug. It generates a hunger for even more pleasure, which is even more not truly satisfying, not giving ultimate happiness, and so there is a search for more perverted types of sexual pleasure, which can never fulfill the human person.”
The promotion of homosexuality and same-sex marriage, said Father Giertych, is “a distortion of humanity which is being proposed as an ideology, which is being supported, financed, promoted by those who are powerful in the world in many, many, countries simultaneously.”
The Catholic Church does not define tobacco smoking as unnatural, nor even a sin: Catechism of the Catholic Church 2290 The virtue of temperance disposes us to avoid every kind of excess: the abuse of food, alcohol, tobacco, or medicine. Those incur grave guilt who, by drunkenness or a love of speed, endanger their own and others’ safety on the road, at sea, or in the air.
This papal theologian, if quoted accurately, needs to be replaced with one who knows Catholic theology. This statement of Father Giertych, ““Now, there are many things that people do that are unnatural – smoking cigarettes is also unnatural”: CCC 2290 “The virtue of temperance disposes us to avoid every kind of excess: the abuse of food, alcohol, tobacco, or medicine.” The irrational statements coming out of the Vatican hierarchy are getting worse and worse, or maybe more and more illuminated. How can someone in a position as papal theologian make such an incredulous statement?!?!?!
To equate – even obliquely – sodomy with smoking is — pace Father Giertych — frivolous. If this manner of reasoning reflects the current quality of theological thinking in Rome, we are indeed in poor shape.
I suspect that the priest was misquoted, or mistranslated … hopefully that is the case. Translators often do horrendous (moronically stupid, not to mention idiotic and deranged) jobs of translating, and then the translated quote gets further misinterpreted.
Skai, your comment does remind me of when the Italians translated the YouCat, and in THEIR version said contraception was just fine and dandy.
When that mistranslation was discovered, all those books had to be yanked from the shelves and burned.
The German (original) and English versions were more orthodox, saying “no” to contraception.
Anton, maybe this Polish theologian is saying that even as homosexuality is bad for the soul, pumping smoke into your lungs is bad for your body.
In other words, NEITHER is ever good.
Homosexuality is always ‘Intrinsically Evil’. That is a far cry from smocking, which in many instances may keep a person from sinning. such as getting too mad. If the person pulls out a cigarette that gives them time to think straight that is a benefit of smocking. Did not Jesus say, “It is better to have one arm or one hand” (or even one lung) going into Heaven than having a complete body, that caused you to Sin and go to Hell ?
However, according to society in today’s world, it is better for a man and woman to commit adultery or kids committing fornication and that is celebrated, whereas, smocking is looked up-on as the worst sin a person can commit in life and the smokers have become second class citizens. Yet, society wants ‘Marijuana’ legalized as medicine? What is wrong with smocking cigarettes being a medicine?. For some people it is the best medicine for the nerves. A lot safer than pills. If second hand smoke is so bad, how is it that people stand in- front of barbecue pits inhaling smoke and now they have these fire pits in their back yards. There is a lot of smoke coming out of those barbecue pits and fire pits. Also, being stuck in traffic with other cars and trucks and buses. Smoking may be a bad habit, but good for the nerves.
The Homosexual mindset is ‘Objectively Disordered’ and active homosexuality is ‘Intrinsically Evil’ and it always involves another person’s Soul being drug into Hell. In many cases an under-age boy or if it is a Lesbian, an under-age girl.. The homosexual is selfish, very envious, and possessive. The most heinous serial murders and abusive crimes to minors are committed by homosexuals.
Homosexuality is more than a ‘Bad Habit’; it is a Dangerous Lifestyle, as well as, an Intrinsically Evil one.
Ted, smoking is not bad unless done to an extreme, just like over-eating, or too many foods such as coffee containing caffiene, etc.
In order to be free of error, when you quote something for “Catholic” purposes it is always best to quote the Bible, CCC, Code of Canon Law, GIRM, or an Encyclical from the Vatican web site.
(This avoids personal opinions which can contain error, or non-Church teaching.)
With the CCC, do not pick and choose. It must be taken in entirety.
Randall, you really can’t compare smoking to eating. People need to eat, everyone eats. Only a certain number of people smoke. It is bad for people’s health. Even second hand smoke is harmful. For many people smoking is an addiction, they are addicted to nicotine. I have never smoked because I always thought it was stupid and kind of gross.
PA, although smoking tobacco may be harmful to health on a long term basis, it seems to be often important to short term needs for survival. Many people, PA, value survival over a few more years at the end of their lives. There are many occupations that bring home the bacon and put bread on the table that contribute to long term health problems or even sometimes to short term health problems. You need to repent, PA, because your knees are shaking at the thought of eternity.
Skai, I have never smoked. How in the world would smoking be important to my short term needs for survival? Would you actually tell young people that smoking seems to be important to short term needs for survival?
Randall, I should have made it clearer, but I simply was quoting an article from CATHOLIC WORLD NEWS, about the words of this Papal Theologian. He’s against homosexuality (obviously), and against smoking (rather amazing for a Polish priest living it Italy!), and is, I guess, trying to make a point that certain things are natural (such as marriage between a man and woman; or eating food) whereas other things are unnatural and also harmful (such as homosexual acts; or putting a toxic substance like smoke into your lungs).
Ted, I’ll smoke maybe a half cigar a couple times a year … Now, let’s find the Magisterial dogmatic doctrine spoken ex-cathedra and repeated by all popes in history that smoking tobacco is akin to sodomy.
“Half a cigar” because by that point I run into the feeling that some describe as “green”.
The Supreme Court has taken us from a government of the people, for the people and by the people – into a tyrannical system of Dictators and Kings.
The electorate/people have “no standing”. (Prop 8 is only one example.)
You must have forgotten to vote. If you don’t like your “dictator” and “king”, then vote next time.
Yes, we all voted for proposition 8 and see where that went!
Democracy on this continent is dead.
The world has had its variations of dictators in the past but this time, in America, they wear black robes and legislate from the bench. Some even claim to be Catholic.
YFC – I’ve voted with an informed Cathplic conscience for the last 45 years.
You should try it sometime. Your help in adhereing to the CCC would be appreciated.
Although normally I not only cannot stand but also detest the use of the word, “adhere”, in conjunction to the CCC, in this case involving YFC, I strongly second the proposition that he adhere with all his might to the CCC2ndEd. Adherence is a word used at the lowest level of faith, just above the drop off into Hell. The Law serves to keep people notified when they are in danger of Hell. Faith is the grace to raise souls beyond this danger and thus beyond having to deal with the Law. (No doubt poor readers will once again demonstrate their penchants for construing reality according to their sentiments and emotions, but once again it can be used as a teaching moment for poor readers who do little but jump the gun on every point they encounter).
YFC, why are you preaching naiivete’, instead of digging at the corruption that has overwhelmed the voting of citizens in the USA? What about the media which manipulates the public by exploiting weaknesses and blindspots due to immorality?
Voting is only as good as the Second Amendment, YFC. Are you willing to stand up for your right to vote?
The first Encyclical of Pope Frances has been released today, and can be found in entirety on the Vatican web site. It’s called ” Encyclical Letter LUMEN FIDEI
of the SUPREME PONTIFF FRANCIS to the BISHOPS PRIESTS and DEACONS
CONSECRATED PERSONS and the LAY FAITHFUL, ON FAITH.”
* * * * * *
” The Church never takes faith for granted, but knows that this gift of God needs to be nourished and reinforced so that it can continue to guide her pilgrim way.”
” Read in this light, the prophetic text leads to one conclusion: we need knowledge, we need truth, because without these we cannot stand firm, we cannot move forward. Faith without truth does not save, it does not provide a sure footing.”
” These, then, are the four elements which comprise the storehouse of memory which the Church hands down: the profession of faith, the celebration of the sacraments, the path of the ten commandments, and prayer. The Church’s catechesis has traditionally been structured around these four elements;
this includes the Catechism of the Catholic Church, which is a fundamental aid for that unitary act with which the Church communicates the entire content of her faith: ‘all that she herself is, and all that she believes’. ”
So when are the CA (and all US)Bishops going to require that ALL literate Catholics read the “CATECHISM of the CATHOLIC CHURCH, Second Edition”?
There should be links to the CCC on all Diocese and Parish web sites; the CCC should be sold in all Parish offices; and Priests should quote from the CCC as it relates to the specific Gospel from the pulpit; and perhaps there should be a CCC Sunday to promote it’s reading/study at home.
These Bishops have been disobedient to our 3 latest Popes – each of whom has told us to study the CCC – not only in public statements, but in official Church documents.
Catechesis has been lousy over the past 40 years. There is no excuse.
Ask your Diocese Bishop and your Parish Priest why more is not done to promote the Faith and Unity of Faith through the active and public promotion of the CCC.
Perhaps we should hope this type of nullification spreads. We all protest when the Supreme Court makes the rules. However, since all of those rules must be enforced by the Executive with funds provided by the Legislature, nullification by one party or another might be the best alternative.
The more “rules” imposed by the government – the less freedom of the people.
Big Brother has arrived. Big Brother makes the rules, and enforces the rules.
(See George Orwell’s “1984” – a work of fiction that is just around the corner.)
Not enough non-democrats in Calif govt to nullify anything.
The legislature seems to have no objections to the executive office issuing all the funny money it chooses to issue.
On the net check out the California State Constitution.
If the people have “no standing” in a Court of Law, its passed time to RECALL elected officials (and elected judges).
One good recall – perhaps the Governor – and then the rest of them would pay more attention to the will of the people.
The CA Supreme Court is elected.
Sally, the US Supreme Court is not elected. In CA state law, the people have standing. In Federal courts, the people who put the initiative on the ballot have not standing, because they are not harmed by an injunction against Prop 8.
The article the CCD wrote is horribly misleading. The title is flat out wrong. The governor cannot overturn any part of a state constitution. It didn’t happen that way, and it can’t happen that way. Its just flat out wrong.
YFC, that is a whole false line you’re supporting that says that we the people are not harmed by sodomite court decisions. We are indeed harmed. Get used to harming your neighbor, YFC, because that is the gay agenda. The delusion that sodomy is private and does not harm others is a lie of satan and lucifer.
One good recall, perhaps the “government”, Sally, not merely the “governor”, thankyou.
Has anyone read the “DECLARATION of INDEPENDENCE” lately?
It was adopted by the Continental Congress on July 4, 1776.
“That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, – that whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it and constitute a new government….”
The US Supreme Court made a very BAD decision, and were wrong.
The people approved the CA State Constitution, which was amended by a popular vote of Prop 8.
Government works for people; not the other way around.
What were the Justices really thinking ? ? ? ? ?
Is the US Supreme Court advocating an overthrow of the State Government by their decision, that goverments are supreme over the people ?
Maybe another state with a governor and legislators who are not certifiable idiots will pass similar proposition. Such governor and state officials would then find the guts and moral fiber to drive it into the face of the impotent and driveling supreme court, and hammer them into a Constitutional corner until they stop voting like fools.
The US SUpreme COurt justices were just interpreting the hightest law of the laand, which is the US Constitution. It trumps the CA Constitution, even as amended by the citizens of CA.
Not so, YFC. The US Constitution defers to limitations within itself, and has to respect states rights. Ask yourself why there are states, if the federal govt has total authority?
“What were the Justices really thinking ? ? ? ? “: You’re kidding, right, MAC? Liberals think?!#*&! These people are crafty but really are strangers to reason.
Too large a portion of the voters are not very wise and are easily swayed by the media manipulators. They think they are voting but they are merely walking to the polls and putting the marks where the media tells them to put them.
No Standing with Stooges
The analysis of the failure of ‘Der Arnold’ (and other elected leaders) to defend the State Constitution is lacking in discussion of a basic (albeit completely censored) fact about the loss of Prop. 8 for lack of ‘Standing’.
The Governot of CA – ‘Der Arnold’ was being Blackmailed while still in office by the Gaystapo – over his not so ‘secret’ Extra Son, and in addition to many other wrongs deliberately bailed on Defense of the Citizens Rights.
Having betrayed his own ostensibly ‘catholic’ (small ‘c’) marriage to maria shriver (aka Skeltor) ‘Der Terminator’ was facing his own total recall over his lies, which were known to an ever increasing group of (mostly Demicrat / Pro-Homosex) insiders…
As Part of the Payoff Arnold surrendered the confidential files of the Republican party to his New Chief of Staff – Dyke Icon suzi kennedy (Demicrat chief of staff to ousted governot gay davis, who had been ‘married’ in Hawaii) and threw Marriage under ‘Der Bus’ by refusing to defend the Constitution…
As part of the deal to save his scalp Arnold kept “$5 Smidgen – Carole Migden” (who as Chair of the Senate Appropriations committee once boasted that: “Anyone who wants $5 is going to have to come to this Dyke and Beg for it.” (M&R Rpt.) and Pals in the Tax supported Pork pipeline.
However – it is also virtually certain that Moonbeam Brown, A.G. Kamala Harris, Senator mark “Kiddie Porn King” Leno and many others Knew about the Extra Son and the Blackmail Going On – and either tacitly or directly assisted in keeping the cover up going.
Even Shriver was in on the ‘Secret’ – as the Day After Arnold left office, Skeltor confronted the Terminator, who like the damage he did to the Constitution and Citizens was by then beyond any recall.
At any time during his term of office, Jerry Brown could have enforced Prop 8 in the CA Constitution.
Neither the Federal, State, or Local Governments have the authority to: advocate for, promote, or participate in immoral activity.
Abortion (killing of babies),
Sodomy (same-sex marriage);
Obamacare (forcing everyone to pay for immoral activitity such as abortion, contraception, voluntary sterilization, etc.)
have all been approved and forced upon US Citizens by the US Supreme Court.
What adults do in the privacy of their own homes is their own business. However, forcing States or the rest of the Citizens in the Country to participate in immoral conduct – whether being forced to pay for it through insurance, or in any other manner is beyond the authority of Government.
The US Supreme Court by over-riding the American citizens in favor of immoral conduct has done grave damage to this Country.
Not so, MAC: government makes its own authority and does what it presumes it can do without being throttled back by the people.
Authority might be God ordained or otherwise. Sometimes God gives authority to do evil for His purpose of chastising an immoral society.
s = Skai
Government will only do what the people let it get away with.
Americans have been basically lazy.
My post of July 7, at 2:33 am stands.
(SKAI, why don’t you ever encourage people to do something positive. You are one of the most negatives posters on this site. You complain without providing solutions for everyone’s consideration.)
MAC, I have posted so many solutions that I can’t remember them all at one time … Oh wait, yes I can: I like the acronym, “ASK”, for Ask and it shall be given, Seek and you shall find, Knock and it shall be opened unto you (Jesus). MAC, Catholicism is a mystery more than a step by step process. How many times do I post about the Holy Eucharist uniting the faithful with God? What more of a solution is there than unity with God? Neither is the Bible a solution, nor the CCC2ndEd a solution: These are directives, study guides, etc, meant to move the faithful soul towards the answer to the question, MAC. I was taught early on by my father that if I wanted to fix my bike so I could ride it, then I’d have to figure out how to put the nut back on the bolt myself. It is a very simple lesson, MAC, and so difficult for people to learn: Ask, Seek and Knock. So, in the emotional tither of frustration, I succeeded in getting the danged nut threaded onto the bolt and the seat secured, and off I rode. There is also something about teamwork to be learned in this example. My father was busy with some other task, and he considered it more important to teach me than do let me wallow in babyhood where every cry is met with supply. Pope Francis has just told us all to help him fix the Church by getting rid of the corruption: Do you see that he is not waiting for our cards, letters, and cyber posts asking him what we should do? He, instead, is teaching us that we have to do it. You can dig up all sorts of solutions from history books, MAC, but none of them fit the problem today. Now what? Are you going to beat your head against a wall because you cannot find the answer? They have just the wall for you over in Jerusalem, called the wailing wall. Or are you going to resort to what Catholicism has always resorted to, namely the Sacraments, Prayer, Charity, and then acting in union with God? “Union with God”: What does this mean? It means that all divine resources are available to the Church, if only we would act on these resources. Jesus told St Peter to walk on water, and he did. Have you tried it yet, MAC?
MAC, the positive/negative way of thinking was condemned by St Augustine, as it derives from several sources and was worked up into a religion by the Manicheans. Also, the “Loki” god, aka “luck”, is a black and white, either or, positive negative mindset … it works in horse racing but not well in Catholicism. Some big name Protestant pop philosopher mind control dude a half century ago popularized what is called “positive thinking” … seems to work well in some business applications. This mindset also works well in the digital age where binary systems are critical and foundational to much of technology. Freud brought forth the pleasure/pain psychology which much has been made of for more than a century now by psychologists. But as a basis for seeking truth, the positive/negative way of thought sucks. What I’m doing is not negative, MAC; rather it is extreme, pushing the problems to the limits … you’ve got all eternity to rest in the joy of the Lord, right? So, right now as I see it the motivation should focus on resolving conflict with the Will of God. Happiness is not such a conflict and so I don’t dwell on it. Where there is no happiness, we should maybe plough the field enough for seeds of faith to take root, no?
MAC. thank you for this post.
It’s something for Americans to think about.
MAC, look at the news again, and then tell us that the federal govt does not have authority to do evil.
And here’s more about the Papal Theologian, from LIFE SITE NEWS DOT COM:
“Speaking of practicing homosexuals Fr. Giertych said, “of course they have to be treated with dignity, everybody has to be treated with dignity, even sinners have to be treated with dignity, but the best way of treating people with dignity is to tell them the truth.”
“And if we escape from the truth we’re not treating them with dignity,” he added.
“The papal theologian drew an analogy to smoking saying that helping people stop smoking is not denying their dignity.
“Homosexuality is against human nature. Now, there are many things that people do that are unnatural – smoking cigarettes is also unnatural. You can live with the addiction to tobacco, you can die of it, but there are people who are addicted to tobacco, yet they live and we meet with them and we deal with them and we don’t deny their dignity. So certainly people with the homosexual difficulty have to be respected … And so the important thing is how to pastorally help such people to return to an emotional and moral integrity.”
Sodomy and tobacco use have nothing in common, either healthwise or spiritually. This line being handed to us by Giertych is reprehensible. He sounds gay. What other type of soul would try to pan off sodomy as something as morally inconsequential as smoking cigarettes? Is he sponsored by Nambla? When Pope Francis asked us all to help get rid of the gay lobby infecting the Church, this Gyrtich character seems to fit the bill.
” Sodomy and tobacco use have nothing in common, either healthwise or spiritually.” Skai – we agree. :)
Cigarettes kill those who smoke them and those around them. Isnt’ that murder? Isn’t murder a mortal sin?
It is not a sin to smoke, any more than it is a sin to work for fifty years, which also causes early death and injury and illness not infrequently: But, hey, this is the reason liberals want a welfare state, so that no one will die or hurt from working.
YFC, let’s start a political movement to make it unlawful for anyone to be at a beach or in the sun without fully protective clothing … one year in jail and $10,000 fine for first offense … because sun exposure ratchets up the socialist medical costs.
YFC, there is some incidence where tobacco smoking leads to death, but overall it does not seem to do this. Also, many smokers find that it helps them through the day both productively and emotionally. It is also none of the business of government … the only interest of which is the dent in their socialist medical programs, which they use to manipulate people.
YFC, 35 thousand people die from car wrecks each year in the USA. We need to outlaw cars, trucks, buses, trains, planes, motorcycles … we need to outlaw fuel plain and simple. Let’s start a movement, ok.
Skai, have you ever read the consequences of smoking? Hundreds of thousands of people die annually due to the harmful effects of smoking. The effects are hardly inconsequential. Is it sinful for a pregnant woman to smoke, knowing what we know about the effects on an unborn child? Is it sinful for parents to continue to smoke in the home, even if they have a child that suffers from asthma? Was it sinful for the tobacco industry to put additives in cigarettes that made them more addictive and to try to hide the facts on how harmful their product was? In my opinion, the reason that smoking isn’t considered a sin is that so many people do it.
PA, the only reason govt is hammering smokers is because of the socialist medical system that is dinged by the ailments of the smokers. Get rid of the socialist medical system and let people decide for themselves if they want to risk the suffering later in life for the benefits of smoking earlier in life. Why should govt socialize us and then tyrannize us?
“The benefits of smoking earlier in life?” What exactly are those? What benefits does smoking have for young people? When I was a teen I thought smoking was a stupid habit. How was I mistaken? I have a friend who was a heavy smoker and died of lung cancer at the age of 43. I don’t see that she got any benefit from smoking.
PA, there is a whole lot that you do not see. The solution to your vision problem has been clarified to you over and over for years by many posters on this site, yet you’re still morally blind.
We as a nation need desparately to cut reading programs for kids because it would cut the cost to the government and society for eye glasses. Also it would cut the costs later in that a public that does not read is more easily manipulated by govt and thus the budgets for swat teams would be much lower.
And, PA, the change in society that would really be best is making sure that only gay activists run the government, because they are much much more capable than anyone else. Are you with me on this, PA?
PA, people sometimes die or become gravely ill or injured by the work they do. Let’s advocate for the end of work … make work illegal because it leads to poor health and death. A lifetime of work leads to old age as well, PA. Old age is a death sentence, so let’s make it illegal … oops, they’re already beginning this process in secret in hospitals and obamacare programs.
Skai, Smoking has killed millions and millions of people, without any discernible benefit in exchange, in nearly every country of the world, over more than a hundred years. It kills regardless of the system of medicine employed. And it kills the non-smokers around them.
If a person undertakes an activity that results in the premature death of another, in any other system of law or morality, that would be considered murder. We don’t call it murder, because it happens slowly over a period of years, but it is a very slow form of murder.
YFC, the discernible benefit is determined by the people who smoke, not by a bunch of gays in the govt bureaucracy, who hype it up because it brings them job security and pads the govt employment roles.
YFC, the gay agenda which attempts to offset its own guilt onto every other possible thing such as tobacco is a feeble and dim witted ruse (sodomy sears the conscience according to St Paul, which means gays are dim witted, a magisterial dogma of the Church).
Comparing homosexual acts to smoking is nuts. One is a mortal sin, the other is not a sin at all (unless done to excess like over-eating, or getting drunk on alcoholic beverages, or abusing prescription drugs.)
Sounds like the author needs to read the CCC, and stop making up his own religion.
By comparing a mortal sin, to something that is not sinful at all – sounds like he is making an excuse for homosexual acts.
Governor Brown and any other state governor should be prosecuted for any state laws or the constitution they do not uphold. This applies equally to Obama, he and his attorney general Holder not defending the law of the land or the Constitution of the US. As a minimum, for their failures, they should be impeached. One way or other, whether in this world and/or the next, God will ensure they get what they justly deserve!
Impreachment is merely an official reprimand. They are so arrogant that they would continue with their own social engineering of society.
I agree that impeachment should be done, but a recall campaign would be more effective, and would reenforce a government of the people, by the people and for the people at all levels – rather than a government of tyrants, dictators, and kings.
Chris – tyrants dictators and kinds are not elected. Our Governor was elected. Our next governor will be elected. Please stop with the ridiculous claims of tyranny. You are lucky to live in a democracy. Please start appreciating that fact.
YFC, democracies never work for very long. The US Constitution defines the USA not as a democracy but as a republic. Republics last way longer than democracies. The problem with democracies is mob rule, which we’re witnessing. Part of this problem is how easily the public can be fooled and manipulated by tyrants. The key and critical ingredient in a republic is enough people having the intestinal fortitude to organize and stand up to tyrant wannabe governments … this intestinal fortitude is the first victim of the gay agenda.