The following comes from a Jan. 14 story in the Valley Catholic.
Always Our Children, the 1997 document of the U.S. bishops, formed the basis of a Faith Formation workshop, Pastoral Message to Ministers and Parents of Homosexuals.
The workshop was sponsored by the diocese of San Jose Office of Pastoral Planning Resource Committee and was facilitated by Father John Curran, OMI and David Kennedy of the archdiocese of Los Angeles.
The presenters’ message was that “the Good News is that God loves us all unconditionally.” Kennedy noted that “being in the closet is unhealthy” but many homosexuals, especially Catholics, feel safer not to reveal their identity.
Sometimes, he said, “when their child comes out, the parents go in! It is especially difficult to be gay and Catholic. Some remain Catholic but in the closet; some reject religion but find out they are missing something and want to reconcile. How can we keep them and/or welcome them back?
Father Curran said Catholic gays “have been taught self-hate. Many years ago there was no such thing as ‘coming out.’ They did the ‘right thing’–married, had kids, but, some realized they were living a lie.”
He said that ethnic cultures vary as to how they handle homosexuality and that, combined with family, church and school connections are the most influential aspects of the issue for individuals.
Father Curran said that “coming out is a lifelong process and it’s starting earlier and earlier.” If not accepted, he said, homosexuals can become victims of alcoholism, drug abuse, depression and even suicide. “Even mild acceptance will cut these statistics substantially.”
He pointed out that Always Our Children was a pastoral letter that was approved by the Vatican. “One of its main messages,” he said, “is to say to parents that they are not at fault as parents. Their children, and their sexuality, are gifts from God.”
Kennedy said that it is possible to reconcile the pastoral letter with people’s different views. “The Church condemns certain actions,” he said, “and asks people to wait regarding sexuality. Psychological and spiritual intimacy must come first. Don’t rush into anything.”
Several people at the workshop had questions regarding “primacy and freedom of conscience,” and related personal family situations.
Father Curran’s advice was that it is the “duty of Catholics to know Church teaching” as a basis for making any decisions. Everybody has his or her individual journey. People are living different realities.”
He added that today there “are many different manifestations of gender with challenging relationships. I think keeping a sense of humor is very important in dealing with all this.”
As a priest for 36 years, Father Curran noted, “Primacy of personal conscience is very important. The Church is not your conscience.”
To read the original story, click here.
The US Bishops have not told people to read the “Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition” as our Popes have requested.
If they did, people would know that same sex attraction is not sinful, but a temptation.
Sexual acts by all persons outside of marriage (between on man and one women) is grave sin.
In fact the CCC teaches that we must treat all persons including those with same sex attraction with respect.
For more info on Dcotrine of the Faith regarding homosexuality see: CCC #2357 2358, 2359 & 2396.
Self loathing is rediculas. God loves each of us. If we repent of our sins, go to Confession, and make a firm purpose of amendment not to commit those sins again, God will forgive our sins.
That goes for all of us.
Thanks Dave for this even handed comment.
Gods Grace
It is difficult to separate the sinner from the sin…temptations are just what they are : a temptations. Even attractions can be considered a temptation. When those attractions are put into actions, they are set upon obsessions, pride, lust, or envy.
I do not agree with Fr. Currans relative assumptions about how to handle homosexuality. The Catholic Church’s Teaching is explicit which has Scriptural emphasis upon the immorality of homosexual acts. ANY type of sexual relations outside of marriage is mortal sin. So, does that mean that those who delve in same-sex relationships outside of marriage have a greater propensity of alcoholism, drug abuse, or suicide as well? Or have we become accustomed to the Culture of Death that “that type of relationship is OK” while the other is not.
We still have to adhere to Church Teaching. Yet, it is of importance of HOW it is taught, received, then applied.
Correction: So, does that mean that those who delve in opposite sex relationships outside of marriage have a greater propensity of alcoholism, drug abuse, and suicide as well?
Quite often they do. Alcohol is often used to block out a guilty conscience. Often it is a catch twenty-two. People first drink too much for “fun”, do things while drunk that they are later ashamed of, then block it all out with alcohol instead of finding help to turn their behavior around.
Jesus never taught us that temptations are a gift from God.
I would like to know exatly where the Priest in the article got that.
Further, it sounds like he is telling people to do their own thing if their conscience says its OK – – – WRONG.
Fr. Curran please do not help send Souls to Hell.
It does not sound like Fr. Curran has read the CCC either regarding conscience. And he probably should not be teaching if he teaches error.
CCC: “1783 Conscience must be informed and moral judgment enlightened.
A well-formed conscience is upright and truthful.
It formulates its judgments according to reason, in conformity with the true good willed by the wisdom of the Creator.
The education of conscience is indispensable for human beings who are subjected to negative influences and tempted by sin to prefer their own judgment and to reject authoritative teachings.”
CCC: ” 1791 This ignorance can often be imputed to personal responsibility.
This is the case when a man “takes little trouble to find out what is true and good, or when conscience is by degrees almost blinded through the habit of committing sin.”
In such cases, the person is culpable for the evil he commits.”
The answer is the “Lords Prayer.”
Someone needs to contact Fr. Curran’s Bishop so that he does not continue to teach error.
LETTER to the BISHOPS of the CATHOLIC CHURCH on the PASTORAL CARE of HOMOSEXUAL PERSONS
” 15. We encourage the Bishops, then, to provide pastoral care in full accord with the teaching of the Church for homosexual persons of their dioceses.
No authentic pastoral programme will include organizations in which homosexual persons associate with each other without clearly stating that homosexual activity is immoral.
A truly pastoral approach will appreciate the need for homosexual persons to avoid the near occasions of sin.”
https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_19861001_homosexual-persons_en.html
Why was a dissenting theologian who has been told by the Vatican that he can’t teach theology hosting this? This post is very confusing at the end. It sounds as if Father Curran is saying that your conscience can trump the Church’s moral teaching. It can not.
“This ignorance can often be imputed to personal responsibility. This is the case when a man “takes little trouble to find out what is true and good, or when conscience is by degrees almost blinded through the habit of committing sin.”In such cases, the person is culpable for the evil he commits.
1792 Ignorance of Christ and his Gospel, bad example given by others, enslavement to one’s passions, assertion of a mistaken notion of autonomy of conscience, rejection of the Church’s authority and her teaching, lack of conversion and of charity: these can be at the source of errors of judgment in moral conduct.
1793 If – on the contrary – the ignorance is invincible, or the moral subject is not responsible for his erroneous judgment, the evil committed by the person cannot be imputed to him. It remains no less an evil, a privation, a disorder. One must therefore work to correct the errors of moral conscience.
1794 A good and pure conscience is enlightened by true faith, for charity proceeds at the same time “from a pure heart and a good conscience and sincere faith.
Anonymous, you may be confusing Fr. John Curran, OMI, with Fr. Charles E. Curran, now of Southern Methodist University, who in 1986 was declared by the Vatican to be neither suitable nor eligible to be a professor of Catholic theology.
Thank you. I did confuse the two.
Perhaps these people need to be evaluated for perpetually echoing the Rocky Horror Picture Show’s dance musical number “Let’s Do the Timewarp Again”.
The first edition of the Catechism of the Catholic Church stated “They do not choose their homosexual condition….”
“The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. They do not choose their homosexual condition; for most of them it is a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God’s will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord’s Cross the difficulties they may encounter form their condition.” [Catechism of the Catholic Church, # 2358, 1994 First Edition]
On September 8, 1997, Pope John Paul II promulgated the Second Edition of the English Translation of the Catechism of the Catholic Church. It includes 103 changes (corrections/amendments) to the English text. This was to ensure that it harmonized with the official Latin text that was promulgated by Pope John Paul II on the same date.
The corrected text of paragraph # 2358 states:
“The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided.
Well, just because the Catechism was updated doesn’t mean that the prior catechism contained errors. And certainly removing a statement that one does not choose to be homosexual cannot mean that the original was in error, because it is indeed the truth.
All paragraphs in the CCC must be taken in entirety.
You cannot leave out the sinful part of homosexual sex.
All those who wish to be Catholic must adhere to the teachings in the ‘Catechism of the Catholic Church’ in entirety.
” This catechism is conceived as an organic presentation of the Catholic faith in its entirety. It should be seen therefore as a unified whole. ” (CCC pg 11)
CCC: “2396 Among the sins gravely contrary to chastity are masturbation, fornication, pornography, and homosexual practices.”
WHEN LEFT UNCHECKED, –
SIN BECOMES INSTITUTIONALIZED.
I don’t believe being ‘gay’ is a choice. But neither is alcoholism, drug addiction or a perference for other disordered inclinations. But we can choose to not act on these inclinations and be set free….
Rod … FYI, for me it’s a pretty small trial. For others it’s a horrible trial, often caused by others sinning against charity. I mean … how big of a sin is driving someone to suicide?
Who is driving someone to suicide?
I don’t buy that argument that just because others are opposed to those engaged in same-sex behavior they are responsible for the suicide of a gender confused person… Maybe it’s within them, that it’s their conscience, that is being confronted and they are in despair over their sin….
Ronnie, there is actually pretty good data showing that when an LGBT child is raised in an unapproving family, the child is often beset with depression and suicide ideations. But when that same LGBT child is raised in an accepting family, the outcomes are far far better.
Site the data. I don’t buy it and as a matter of fact the truth might be closer to just the opposite. Of course, we must always love unconditional but with the truth and seek her for our love ones so that they might be on the road to healing from this inclination…
Correction: seek help for our love ones…
Your Fellow Catholic pulled that quote right out of the Advocate. You know, the publication with Pope Francis’ picture on the cover!
Ronnie way to go! You are reasoning well…God bless you! God’s graces sure are shining on you!
C & H, humm.? I am opposed to sin. So let me get this straight. Imagine that I raised my kids with the notion that a particular sin, let’s say for example, murder, is the worse sin in the world. One of my kids then chooses to act out on his murderous impulses by actually murdering someone. After committing the murder, he now believes that he can’t bear the notion of facing me along with my disapproval of his actions. He now has an overwhelming feeling that he is unloveable. Ultimately he commits suicide.
C & H would you think that I were now responsible of the “grave” sin of “driving (my son) to suicide”?
Tracy – The problem is that sex acts not approved by the Church, hetrosexual or homosexual are not on the same level as murder. Please consider that perhaps most sexual acts, by most people, worldwide each day are per the CCC sinful. Does that mean that billions of people commit something as bad as murder each day?
Consider this case. Two college girls in a bar have a few drinks and decide to “experiment” After they’ve left, a guy walks into the bar to rob it and shoots and kills the bartender. Do all three have the the same level of culpability?
“Does that mean that billions of people commit something as bad as murder each day?” Yes, C&H. Because they murder their soul and that of the other person with whom they are experimenting. As that ‘experimentation’ is not done innocently, but rather intentionally to discover what it would be like to break certain barriers.
You are trying to rationalize God’s law by human standards, C&H, which change depending upon what the majority has been led to believe. So whereas you may believe that private mortal sins in the bedroom are the lesser, you are mistaken as mortal sin is mortal sin. Sodomy on the other hand, especially in this day of pride parades and the attempt to sanitize it via marriage, now often carries the stigma of public scandal.
How about comparing one who commits and promotes the homosexual lifestyle as compared to one who promotes abortion? Both are impeding God’s plan for the transmission of life. Both are saying non servium to the Creator.
C&H that is not true…allow me to correct you. Homosexual acts are considered worst or equal to/than murder acts….doctors of the church have said they were and warned us about them. Because they go against the natural law that God has placed upon mankind. It is church teachings whether you choose to believe them or not but they are. I believe I have posted some of those teachings from some of the doctors of the church here in the past…sorry you keep missing them or avoiding them…which ever does your fancy.
C & H, I understand you being emotional about all of this. Your question is really the same one the Jews had in Jesus’ day. Man has continued to ask the same question ever since. Is God fair? Ann answered you well. “mortal sin is mortal sin.”
This is why the heresy of Relativism is so dangerous to the one who accepts it. Jesus established His Church to guard against the human tendency to act as he or she sees fit. Jesus gave the Church the authority to absolve sins, not you nor I. I myself find comfort in this. That being said one of the Spiritual Works of Mercy is “To admonish the sinner”. I must admit that when I am on the receiving end of that Work of Mercy, it doesn’t usually feel great, but as I am determined to “Be perfect as my Heavenly Father is perfect.” Matt. 5:48, I am always grateful to the one who points out to me my folly. I do hope you see my response to you as being one of mercy and not of judgement, because only God can judge the state of one’s soul at death.
OK well, AM, if you equate consensual sex to murder, then that just goes to show how silly and obsessed the anti-gay right has become. Would you also equate people who use birth control to murderers?
Insofar as those who willing use birth control are knowingly committing mortal sin, yes, YFC, I would equate their actions to those of murderers. For it is not human respect or reasoning that determines the maliciousness of any particular sin, but rather the turning away from God inherent within it. The non servium.
You’ll notice that neither you nor C&H refer to the offense given to God, but rather to the human emotion easily evoked with regard to these issues. God has been removed. And yet it is precisely God, the love of Him and the serving of Him, who should be central in the discussion.
It isn’t *me* equating consensual sex with murder either. I am merely passing on the Faith as I have received it. You seem to judge wholly on human perspective. What you see. What you don’t see. Logic. By your rationale, it would seem that we humans could have come up with the revelation of God and His laws without His communicating them to us.
But that is not so. That’s why I’ve taken the stand on CCD, that it is much thanks to the non-servium of heterosexual Catholics that we have those within the Church wanting to welcome same sex couples. For God has been pushed from the equation, leaving the sin of hypocrisy amid one’s fellows as far more damaging than the mortal sin which offends God.
I also take issue with your continual misrepresentation of the supposedly ‘anti-gay’ right. Nobody is anti-gay, YFC, as a person is not ‘gay’ per se, that is defined solely by sexual attributes. (Such intense narrow mindedness must be maddening.) But you are not part of a special group, despite your desire to be cast as such. You’re a sinner just like me. And it is not ‘silly and obsessed’ to hold what the Church has always taught even though it’s a great slogan.
If anything it is silly and obsessed for a supposedly devout Catholic, who purports to love God, to shove his ways down God’s proverbial throat. Like logically pressing that Moses must have died on Sinai in order to coerce Aaron to fashion the golden calf so that we can worship God the way WE want.
It’s all very neat and political and highly logical. But it doesn’t take God into consideration. And He is the one who set the guidelines out of love…. not me or anybody else.
Ann Malley writes : “That’s why I’ve taken the stand on CCD, that it is much thanks to the non-servium of heterosexual Catholics that we have those within the Church wanting to welcome same sex couples. ”
“Like logically pressing that Moses must have died on Sinai in order to coerce Aaron to fashion the golden calf so that we can worship God the way WE want.”
Those are excellent posts Ann!
Ann Malley, It was non-servium disobedience by those in authority and the heterosexual couple’s rejection of Humanae Vitae that were one of many factors that provided and enabled the welcoming mat for those wanting to welcome same sex couples and other errors that are often hidden and protected under the banner of social justice. Please read CCD’s reprinting of this excellent and informative article that was first posted in 2008.
This article was made available to CCD through the courtesy of Catholic News Agency and you can see where the Editors of CCD chose to run this excellent and informative article two times. May God bless Cardinal James Francis Stafford for his leadership!
The title of the article is ‘In 1968, something terrible happened in the Church’
FEBRUARY 27, 2012
Cardinal reflects on how dissenters to Humane Vitae tore the Church apart – and how rift left scars that remain to this day.
Thanks for the reference article, Catherine. Just read it. Wow. Underscores in writing the dichotomy experienced via 12 years of ‘Catholic’ school and subsequent disillusionment.
How refreshing it is to actually hear/read the truth! With all the ‘phobe’ talk that goes on these days to distract from the rightful loathing of sin, I opt for a new word – Christophobe – that is one who is afraid of Christ. Afraid of Truth…. or rather loathes it.
These articles are somewhat like happening upon your mother’s diary after her death. A diary that explains all of the rampant dysfunction that had you confused as a child, feeling superior as a teen, and determined to be different as an adult. Only after death does the truth come out. Too bad.
I wish those in authority would have more faith in their children…. or rather in the beauty of Truth.
God bless.
Sado-masochist, zoophile or whatever deviate behavior must be tolerated because Junior was born that way. And if you express disgust with his unnatural tendencies you are the bad guy because you may tweak his delicate little conscience-free psyche!
And while you are at it you may cease referring to judgmental, reactionary, pre-Vatican II Church documents on Faith and Morals.
C&H writes: “… how big a sin is it driving someone to suicide?”
Correlation does not prove causality, C&H. People commit suicide for myriad reasons. Laying blame on those who quite rightfully call out a disorder and/or inappropriate behavior is not at fault although saying that is the problem is a great tool to guilt people into silence.
People need to take accountability for their own actions, not always seek to blame others.
You might want to check out the work of the Family Acceptance Project which shows that there is an alternative to life-threatening familial environments, instead of just blathering on about things you don’t really know anything about. You might just save a few lives in the process. Instead you just pretend to be the expert.
Great advice from YFC the blathering expert. Yes, we should save lives. But what of souls? That doesn’t seem to mean anything to you as your focus seems purely horizontal despite your advertisement of ‘fellow Catholic’. Talk about your pretenders.
As to the ‘Family Acceptance Project’ there are many behaviors that, if unaccepted, lead to suicide, YFC. The worst part being that the victim in question does not understand the true value of their soul. This is due to the breakdown of not transmitting Truth in context, not lack of acceptance, YFC.
But hey, the martyrs might have saved a few lives too by sacrificing to idols and just giving the various Caesars what they demanded, but I know you know that. It could have been a real John Lennon song…. Imagine all the people.
“Christophobe!” Great word, Ann! When someone is called a “homophobe,” he should call the accuser a”Christophobe.”
Catholic Sexual Abuse Scandal- John J Study
Published: 11/18/09
New Catholic Sex Abuse Findings: Gay Priests Are Not the Problem
By David Gibson – Politics Daily
copy and paste to google search……… CatholicSexualAbuseScandal, gay priests
We’re going to believe someone from the Huffington Post? First, the original John Jay Study confirmed over 81% of all abuse was same-sex and less than 5% pedophilia. That leaves the rest of the abuse was what exactly? The majority involved post-pubescient boys and young men so this certainly sounds like homosexual abuse to me….But that latest 1.8 million study underminsed it’s own data. It was a whitewash and a waste of money…Of course not every homosexual is an abuser but in this case the evidence is overwhelmingly so…
Gay priests are supposedly not the problem only because it is politically incorrect that they should be found guilty of anything. What a load of malarky.
If any of my children “came out,” I would tell them to get on his/her knees, ask for help and forgiveness, and return to the sacraments of the Church.
I would NOT march in a parade celebrating that lifestyle, tell my friends and neighbors how happy and accepting I was of his/her decision, or praise him/her for being honest.
In other words, I would not “love” my child into Hell by accepting that lifestyle. Period.
Nellie .. how old are your kids? I ask, because while most of us realize we’re “different” in or before high school some, particularly women, come to terms with it as adults. If your child were “SSA” would you want them to hide it from you for fear of an unloving reaction. If your child were “SSA” why would they need any more forgiveness than the next (straight) sinner? Whether your child found a partner or not, would you hide it from the neighbors. Suppose your gay child said something like “Mom, I don’t need to return to the sacraments because I already receive them.” How about if their “lifestyle” was a fully Catholic one but after examining their consience made their life with a partner who also loved you and your family? I hope all your children are straight, but if you ever find out one of them isn’t, please think long and hard, maybe with some pastoral help before you react.
If my child came out as gay I would seek counseling immediately from the Church by an orthodox Catholic (this is exactly why the gay agenda pushed that law prohibing counseling for gender confused youth) and love him/her unconditional but firmly tell the truth about this. I would contact othr Moms and Dads who are involved (can recall their organization) and recommend ‘Courage’ as other support….
God bless you Ronnie! A sure hero!
What is taught in practice is not always in conformity with the Catechism—a fact, which when it comes to topics favored by Traditionalists, is something people on here immediately recognize. However, most people on CCD conveniently forget that reality when it comes to recognizing the poor treatment homosexuals have historically received from the Church and, until recently, society in general.
JonJ, don’t you mean previous preferential treatment for the gays ? – What about the gay mafia within the Church and at the Vatican ?
“Primacy of personal conscience is very important. The Church is not your conscience.”
This borders on heresy. The Church clearly teaches that your conscience must be formed “guided by the authoritative teaching of the Church” (CCC 1785).
In other words, just because you think it doesn’t make it right; what you think must conform to the “authoritative teaching of the Church” (Id.).
What should be taught to everyone is that those who have the most difficult temptations – if they turn away from them for the will of God (rather than their own will) will have a higher place in Heaven.
Learn from Jesus and his temptations.
Mt 4:1-11
Most of our canonized Saints did not have sexual activity.
Those Saints that sinned repented and promised not to commit those sins again.
‘Always Our Children’ was composed by a select group of dissidents, including the oft – censured, now recently deceased Fr. Robert Nugent, and chaired by the now – disgraced and retired Bp. Thomas O’Brien of Phoenix. It never was submitted to the full bishops assembly for a vote—wisely for its proponents, because it would never have passed. I am not aware of any ‘Vatican-approval’, certainly never by the CDF nor any papal office, because it is in obvious conflict with the Catechism C C over trying to ‘anoint’ same-sex orientation per se as holy and good. Fr. Curran is engaged in the usual sophistry and deception with which their statements reek, but I am sure he would ordinarily be opposed to any letter such as ‘Always’ that was not actually approved by a bishops’ conference (since I am sure he is a Vatican-2 ‘collegialist’ to the core).
I’ve heard lots of stories about people being rejected because they were gay or lesbian. Most of them were NOT from Catholics, but rather grew up in fundamentalist or non-religious families, The worst was from a girl in college who was abused by her – what one of my brothers calls a “holy roller” family.
Her father tried to “beat the gay out.” A friend’s mother accepts her daughter but is quiet about her being a lesbian. That had to change when she and her partner had twins! I’m not “in the closet” but I don’t talk about being gay unless it comes up in conversation. When it does, it’s usually because I mentioned the death of my girlfriend. Sometimes I get a shocked reaction and yes, an older man once responded with the classic “but you don’t look like a lesbian.” I’m out to people I know in our parish. A women needed a caterer for a wake and called the rectory asking for the number of “the little lesbian girl from the 11:00 mass” :-) I think what Fr. Curran is talking about isn’t particularly a Catholic problem, at least not in the Church today. Other gay people here Mark F, YFC are you out to your family and parish?
I am out in my family and my parish.
YFC are you out as someone who has same sex attraction (temptation) or out to your family as a sodomizer?
Josh a person who is out as a person who has same sex attraction usually are seeking to honor God and live a chaste lifestyle. They are a few and i am grateful for them, especially since they obey God, I admire their zeal to please God even with their struggles. They express it in the way they speak, live and edify God’s holy commandments, they will not mislead others into grievous sins. Some may even suffer in secret too but still are aware of God’s love and forgiveness.
A person who is out as a sodomite is out as a homosexual and or as a “gay”, as the modern agenda’s use that word for their advocacy.
Those who seek to be holy will not identify themselves as a homosexual or “gay” but will admit to suffering with same sex attractions or some may say that they are a homosexual but are not practicing and choose to live a chaste lifestyle. But for them to turn away from homosexual sins, they must reject the ideals of this world about their sexuality. They must admit in humility their weaknesses, it shows humility on their part and they must be meek enough to admit that they need Jesus to help resist immoral temptations because they do not want to separate themselves from God and His salvation plan.
C&H writes, ” I’m out to people I know in the parish. A women needed a caterer for a wake and called the rectory asking for the number of “the little lesbian girl” from the 11:00 mass’
C&H, I think that a lot of people reading your posts on CCD have your number too! Sadly, you are only interested in selling the desensitization of sin on a Catholic website. Your post reminds me of the warning that Carol Everett once gave to a Catholic pro-life packed audience. Carol Everett was once the director of four abortion mills and owner of two of those killing centers before she repented and became anti-sin and anti-abortion. Carol said that in order to get individuals to accept something that is not within the accepted mores of society then you have to work hard to chip away and break down all barriers of decency and morals in a societal sense of what is right and what is wrong. Carol said that was why they loved to sexually educate children as young as kindergarten in order for these children to be future players and future clients at her abortion mills.
You are selling a different product but the concept is the same. You are trying to deceive women and men by letting everyone know just how cool it is for even the rectory and a few parishioners to know about the “lesbian caterer” at the 11:00 Mass.
C&H, Has any faithful Catholic priest ever let you know that not only are you “out there” but that you are also very much out of line with Catholic Church teaching in the notion that it is necessary for others to be constantly informed about your disorder. Just as Carol Everett wanted to desensitize children you are seeking ways to desensitize others in order for your lesbianism to be just as accepted and just as welcomed as a heaping platter of nachos at a Cafeteria Style Catholicism catering event. You are really not fooling anyone but yourself. You are methodically selling the decline in decency and morals which leads to the acceptance of sin. continued…..
Continued from January 26, 2014 at 2:34 pm
Carol Everett was once asked some questions regarding her particular style of deceitfully selling the acceptance of artificial contraception which eventually lead to selling another sin called abortion. Carol Everett was asked:
Q. In what way is the woman deceived?
A. Every woman has two questions, “Is it a baby?” and Does it hurt?” The abortionist must answer “NO.” He/she must lie to secure the consent of the woman and the collection of the clinic’s fee. The women were told that we were dealing with a “product of conception” or a “glob of tissue.” They were told that there would be only slight cramping, whereas, in reality, an abortion is excruciatingly painful.
Q. What type of counseling was offered at the clinics?
A. We didn’t do any real counseling. We sold abortion.
C&H, Artificial contraception, abortion and homosexual acts are all mutually destructive components of the culture of death. You are selling the desensitization of sin and trying to desensitize others so they will also be anesthetized in recognizing the diabolical disorientation that is taking place. You never defend or uphold “all” Church teaching on this issue.
Continued from January 26, 2014 at 3:31 pm
C&H, Please stop your catering business to the wrong cause. Pick up your cross C&H like the rest of fallen mankind where we are all in need of the Redeeming Mercy of Jesus Christ and the teachings of his Church too. You have been given the opportunity to receive that incredible gift so please stop selling the catering of schmoozing lies that desensitize others right into eventually committing and justifying mortally sinful acts, just like Carol Everett once did by purveying the schmoozing the broad road of catering lies that ended up in committing the goal of the sin of abortion. Your goal is not the full on acceptance of the individual but the acceptance of the objective disorder of same sex attraction so even same sex acts will eventually be viewed by all as just another norm. Your van’s advertising logo at this time sadly reads……C&H’s Party Food & Delivery… Our Food Display On This Van May Look Appealing But We’re Still Catering to the Wrong Cause!
Yes, we have her “number”, Catherine and Tracy. It is obvious that the caller said that to get the receptionist’s reaction. More than likely it was a set up to get the secretary or receptionist in trouble if she gave the wrong answer. Had she given the caller a snarky answer, the caller would have complained to others about her. I would have told that person that I had no idea whom he/she meant. If C&H wants customers, she can advertise just as every one else does without telling everyone about her temptations or any other bad behavior. Otherwise, people will be callingl and say, “May I have the name of the caterer at the eleven o’clock Mass who is cheating on her husband?”
Anne T., What an excellent post. Thank you!
“I would have told that person that I had no idea whom he/she meant. If C&H wants customers, she can advertise just as every one else does without telling everyone about her temptations or any other bad behavior.”
“May I have the name of the caterer at the eleven o’clock Mass who is cheating on her husband?”
Excellent points Ann T.
C&H, recently a lesbian couple who is supposedly “married” was on the computer news. One of them was impregnated by a male donor artificially. She had a daughter by that situation. It was with the understanding that the male donor would have no part in the child’s life or support the child. I assume it was the understanding that the “husband” (other lesbian in the relationship) was to help support this child. Well, the mother of the child sued the donor for child support. The judge ruled against him because they had not gone through a proper legal process for that state. It seems some women want to act like men but do not want the same responsibilities as men. In this case at least one of them seems to have used the man for what she selfishly wanted, probably both women did. Who knows what will happen to this poor girl. In saner times she would have been taken away from all three., and put up for adoption in a decent two parent heterosexual family if possible.
C& H, the Anonymous post today at 10:46 am was mine.
Anne … Just for your information there is no “husband” in a lesbian relationship. Most refer to “my partner” or if married, to “my wife.”
Anne T. the couple separated and when one could not work because of illness, she tried to get help from the state who refused her and found the sperm donor and demanded he pay child support. It was not the woman. It was the state of Kansas who sued him. The reason he lost was because the paperwork which absolved him of all responsibility for the child was not considered official because there had been no doctor involved in the artificial insemination which is a requirement in Kansas.
You are right, Anonymous, the state did sue him — I had forgotten that part — but it just proves that the donor and the women were very foolish and immoral for doing such a thing in the first place. None of them really had the child’s right to a father and his support in mind at all.
And there are many people who were rejected for other reasons too.
Of course, people panic when they find out that their child is confused about their identity but today there is more help available (if only the gays stop using fascist tactics and cencoring those who believe change is possible). But you’re right we must always love the person unconditional but also always proclaim the truth…that Jesus can set you free from this trial….
C & H, I have heard a lot of stories of girls who were kicked out of their homes or dragged to “abortion professionals” by one of their parents because they were pregnant. I have even heard of stories where the baby’s father “tried to beat the baby out of her”. I know of some women, who as pregnant teens were silently taken somewhere, before their pregnancy was obvious, and had their baby placed for adoption. Should all pregnant teens and women, therefore, “come out” to their families? Should a woman who had placed a baby for adoption as a teen, be outraged, if after revealing her situation to someone, is responded to with a comment like “You don’t look to me like someone who would have gotten pregnant as a teenager”?
Tracy … I think it’s an individual choice to be out or how out to be depending on circumstances. Certainly I’d counsel a gay kid who would be abused to not. Also … any pregnant woman or girl being pressured to abort out to run to her local Catholic Social Service or other helper agency.
C & H, I agree with you that it is an individual choice to “be out”. But so that I know you and I are on the same wave length, may I ask for some clarification? Does your understanding of “acceptance” include the accepting of the BEHAVIOR of a daughter or son who is engaging in sex outside of legitimate Marriage, (no matter the gender of their sexual partner)? What would you suggest a parent,who is genuinely worried about the eternal salvation of such a son or daughter, do? Which parenting style would you endorse in such a case: authoritative, permissive, authoritarian, or hands-off?
” A women needed a caterer for a wake and called the rectory asking for the number of “the little lesbian girl from the 11:00 mass” Isn’t that cute, NOT!
Please let me know what AmChurch parish you attend so that I can avoid it like my salvation depends on it, because it DOES!
May God have mercy on an amoral Amerika!
Viva Cristo Rey!
God bless, yours in Their Hearts,
Kenneth M. Fisher, Founding Director
Concerned Roman Catholics of America, Inc.
Oh Kenneth … Are you talking about the American Catholic Church..that breakaway splinter group? My parish is part of the Roman Catholic Church, “Faithful and Reasonable Since 1 AD”
Kenneth, yes, many of the faithful in the Roman Catholic Church have lost some sensibilities while others have outright embraced heresies, but C & H is correct, she is in the ark and you are outside of it.
Contrary to what you may believe, Tracy, Kenneth is not outside the Church just because he attends the SSPX.
I also want to clarify with you that I do not believe you (or the Holy Father as you asserted in a previous thread) to be in a position of grave error because you are where you are. That is in a parish/situation in which you are surrounded by those who have lost many of their Catholic sensibilities and/or are embracing outright heresy – to include many a priest as evidenced by this article.
For whereas you are capable of withstanding the scandal around you (and God love you for the strength He has given you) others find it to be a demoralizing occasion of sin and must avoid it in good conscience. If not for themselves then, most assuredly, for those under their charge.
God bless.
Ann, I feel for you an Kenneth with regards to this issue. I know our Lord will be the final judge, but as far as I know, we are supposed to be under the umbrella of the Pope. I believe we live in difficult times and just as people throughout the centuries, have fled their homeland often at great personal cost in order to practice their Catholic faith, so too are Catholic families fleeing their homes, oftentimes moving to other States, in order to practice their faith under the umbrella of the Pope, who is the head of the One Holy Apostolic Church. I do not see how leaving the fold altogether is ever the answer. Let’s face it, for every family who has justified leaving Rome to go to the SSPX, I am sure you can find equal amounts who now attend various Protestant sects: they are concerned about their souls and the souls of their children.
Tracy, thank you for your commiseration. Your assessment of the relationship between Rome and the SSPX is overly simplistic, however, as the Society is not outside the umbrella of the Church. The Society recognizes the Pope as the Pope and no other.
Granted, the situation is not regular, not by any means. But whereas Protestant sects reject certain doctrine and the Pope himself, the Society does not. The Society asks, rather, for the clarification of ambiguous writings that have resulted in the modernist nonsense that you yourself find so reprehensible. The same ambiguous teachings that “must be approached in the hermeneutic of continuity” but regularly are not. The same ambiguous ‘pastoral’ teaching that had the faithful believing erroneously that the TLM had been abrogated. It had not.
Ann, actually I am aware of the difference between your average protestant sect and the SSPX. My question then is this. Has the Pope given his dispensation to the faithful who choose to practice their faith under the guidance of SSPX clergy? If he has not, then how can the SSPX justify accepting the Pope’s authority and at the same time reject it? St. Catherine of Sienna and other great saints worked within the Church to bring her back to the full practice of the faith. Ann, we need you back in the Church!
Tracy wrote:
“Let’s face it, for every family who has justified leaving Rome to go to the SSPX, I am sure you can find equal amounts who now attend various Protestant sects: they are concerned about their souls and the souls of their children.”
If the above is what you believe, Tracy, then you are not aware of the differences between the average Protestant sect and the SSPX as you may think. Again, lack of clarity, transparency, and open communication is the issue. Not between Rome and the Society, but rather between faithful Catholics.
Regarding a Papal dispensation, no, the SSPX does not have a Papal dispensation. The Society draws its jurisdiction from the prevailing state of crisis in the Church. As the Church was instituted to save souls, that is Her primary purpose and so She supplies in time of necessity.
That said, yes, we owe obedience to the Pope, but not when what is decreed goes against that which the Church has always taught. That is codified novelty or ambiguity that degrades the Faith. No. Don’t kid yourself in thinking the modernism that has ‘crept in’ hasn’t done so without the full knowledge of those whose job it is to watch the store. The Church is led by highly educated theologians, Tracy. They know precisely what is going on. And they allow it.
To Tracy cont:
So yes, there are great saints who worked for reform within the Church, there are also saints who called for reform in adherence to God’s commandments while enduring the censure of the hierarchy. But the time is come for letting one’s yes mean yes and letting one’s no mean no. Clear speak, Tracy. Catholic speak.
At least that is the case for me and my family. That is where God has called us. And He is using the Society to spread the love of the fullness of Truth. It is precisely that LOVE that needs to be back in the Church.
I’ll end with a quote from St. Robert Bellarmine:
“…Just as it is licit to resist the Pontiff who aggresses the body, it is also licit to resist the one who aggresses the souls or who disturbs civil order, or, above all, who attempts to destroy the Church. I say that it is licit to resist him by not doing what he orders and preventing his will from being executed; it is not licit, however, to judge, punish or depose him, since these are acts proper to a superior.”
God bless !
The Society of Satin Pius X is a priestly fraternity that is not under the umbrella of the Church. In his letter of 10 March 2009 concerning his remission of the excommunication of the four bishops of the Society of St Pius X, Pope Benedict XVI reaffirmed: “Until the doctrinal questions are clarified, the Society has no canonical status in the Church, and its ministers – even though they have been freed of the ecclesiastical penalty – do not legitimately exercise any ministry in the Church.” They are suspended. They cannot licitly say Mass. There is no state of crisis in the Church that supersedes the authority of the Church herself. There is no quotation from a Saint that can give suspended priests faculties. It just does not work like that. Praying for the Pope does nothing to indicate whether someone is Catholic or not. I can pray for the Dalai Lama and it doesn’t make me a Buddhist. The person who posts here is very confused on this issue. The SSPX has refused, again-REFUSED- full communion with the Catholic Church. It is not a Catholic priestly fraternity.
God bless you, Anonymous, for your analysis of my confusion but it would seem you are confused with regard to your own name. And your own culpability when it comes to heaping confusion on dialogue streams because of your innocuous choice of anonymity.
So YES indeed the SSPX has refused full communion with ambiguity. She seeks full communion with the fullness of Faith. And the freedom to discuss the pitfalls of VII documents which specifically incorporate the ambiguity that gives rise to all of the nonsense that faithful Catholics are forced to endure. The same that results in many of their children chucking the faith as a joke.
As to the Dalai Lama, as a good Catholic, you should pray for his conversion. But likely you do not as the modern Catholic mentality – that preached and included in any number of documents – would have you believe that he is fine where he is and that prayer for him might be perceived as offensive. Especially if it is public prayer for his conversion because the Catholic Church is not to be perceived as abrasive – even though SHE HOLDS THE FULLNESS OF TRUTH. That same Truth that the SSPX clings to despite the smoke and mirrors of a hierarchy desperate to dress up VII as the Queen of all Councils.
God bless.
Correction to Anonymous:
You assert that, “There is no state of crisis in the Church that supersedes the authority of the Church herself.”
You are correct, Anonymous. That is why when positions are taken by the hierarchy that obfuscate the mission of the Church – that of saving souls via the transmission of the fullness of Truth – Holy Mother Church will supply the requisite jurisdiction. And She does.
God bless.
Ann Malley, your position that the Church supplies jurisdiction outside of the Church is not even slightly supportable. It’s just plain wrong. God is so powerless over His Church that He creates other Church’s when He can’t control His Own? Well, how would you ever know what the Truth is? Why should we trust Holy Scripture or Tradition? We would have no guarantee of it’s Authority since the only Authority that God has established on earth is not dependable. It is the mark of a loss of faith that you would suggest such a thing.
Anonymous, your position is uninformed as God supports the existence of the Church, His One True Church, in spite of men, not because of them. There have been bad Popes in the past, something you might not understand. And the notion of the Church supplying is not ‘my’ construct. It is Our Lord’s mercy as He well knows the sinful nature of us wee beasties.
That said, a review of Holy Scripture might be in order for you. It is written that….”… all the gods of the Gentiles are demons.” That is scriptural, Anonymous, as is the reality that Our Lord Jesus Christ is, “..the Way, the Truth, and the Life.” HE said it. Not me. Not the Pope. Not the Bishops.
That is why the attempted diminution of said reality is something that must be lawfully resisted. No Assisi I, II, or III can change that. No legislating by any hierarchy can transform Shiva or Buddah into Christ. (Such actions also go against the Church’s own holy traditions.)
It would be tantamount to Barak Obama by executive order declaring that those in Kenya are now official United States citizens because he is tired of working with congress to negotiate a vehicle to accept those Kenyans seeking citizenship. Or even tired of working with Kenyans themselves. Too time consuming. Can’t be done. Not without reaching beyond the powers of his office.
You give me no other choice but to say this:
*Also for the record it is her members from SSPX, and they are several, who are telling people that our Mass is not valid. Since Ann is pride filled she took my comments as war, just because I mentioned them. The reason it came across as war, was when she was attacking my person. When it comes to the SSPX she is double standard. There was hostility in her comments…judging my person for not knowing the roots of the Latin mass by judging ill by saying that I am not humble for not giving credit to her SSPX. I didn’t know that I had to? She complicates things…its a pity.
She could of been more informative than judging ill fully …. I tried to be charitable…..but its true admonishing she needs. Ann is in grave error to not be in full communion with Christ’s church. Grave error! No matter what the reasons are, nothing should separate her from being in full communion, for that is how I feel. I won’t have anyone scandalize my soul to cause me my full communion with Christ and His church. Those are the colors that have been exposed, that I am not easily persuaded to doubt that our church to be the truth! But its nothing new, I am faithful to my church. So no new colors, as she calls it have been exposed.
I am at peace….it is not what she assumes otherwise….I don’t let the left hand know what the right hand is doing…so you may fool yourself but God works wonders….only time will tell. But if you continue to carry that pride…you will not answer to God’s call.
To Tracy cont:
It is a matter of language, Tracy, and the manipulation thereof. So while you are comfortable where you are – and that is not a slam, but truth as you seem to have made your peace, others are not at liberty. We all have different crosses to carry. That of raising a family and or saving our own souls amid that which, as you can well see, has the power to corrupt. And all under the banner of Catholic.
Many of the progressive influences ascribed to VII are nothing more than ‘movements’ that pressed their agenda full bore despite being anathematized by previous Popes. IOW: They took the oath against modernism and then proceeded to embrace modernism despite their oath. Those ‘brave’ founders of new thought are not thought of as evil today. Oh, no. Quite the contrary as they are taught as great thinkers and innovators.
The Society conversely is embracing that which the Church has always taught – and embracing it openly instead of saying ‘yes’ to ambiguity and then practicing tradition under cover.
So said, I’m not worried about following Christ and what Holy Mother Church has always taught. Much like the TLM, that has not been abrogated despite what many would have us believe.
God bless.
Ann, actually I am highly uncomfortable where I am and I am greatly disturbed with much, if not most of what is happening in the Church. That being said, if Christ can remain faithful to his unfaithful bride, then so can I. This alone gives me hope! The faithful need to work together to restore Holy Mother Church. I must admit that this work is not for the faint of heart!
Tracy, again you seem to miss the point. Using terminology like ‘this work is not for the faint of heart’ or ‘if Christ can be faithful to His unfaithful bride, so can I,’ is attributing the grace to oneself, instead of giving praise to God for what you have.
It is just such terminology that places a divide between Traditionalists who are, despite what you believe, fighting the good fight. That is fighting the fight where God has placed them and with the cross He has given to them.
Again, I’ll say that wherever the SSPX is built up so the FSSP goes or a suddenly approved diocesan EF mass appears. And this is GREAT! And please, take particular note that when I say that you are comfortable where you are that is NOT to say that you are at ease with all the nonsense around you, it is that you have made peace in your conscience with regard to sticking firmly within your parish. And if you can maintain the fullness of faith therein, GREAT. But that does not diminish the cross or loyalty of others.
God bless
Ann we’ll agree to disagree but I do not agree with people leaving the church to join sects that are outside of the faith. If what you stand for is true then how different is it from a person joining a protestant church and holding the same arguments as you are trying to hold here. After all protestant follow the bible. That is what they say. An excuse that they use to not join an “organized religion” as some would have people believe so they can leave the Catholic church.
I don’t doubt that you hold many of the wholeness of the faith and its traditions. I don’t that is why I don’t get into it with those who are from the SSPX, but I silently stand back and pray for their union once again with Christ’s church. I try not to argue about this because its just something I don’t quite understand but I do know that wrong is wrong….it is wrong that your church is not joined with us…now as to the “Why” and who’s at fault…I will leave to a great judge….our Lord, so I don’t judge you because I know your heart is in the right place…..well that is something I stay out of it and pray for a change of heart for both sides.
Ann you would of loved to chat with Larry, he use to be a regular here…he understand this a little bit better and knew how to defend it. Me, well what do I know? Not my time I guess….
God love you, Abeca, I do not want to get into this with you either. And yet I do not agree with people leaving the Church to organize their own religion. But I do not agree with those in authority hijacking, by way of their positions and bullying intimidation and threats, the transmission of the fullness of the Faith. And that, Abeca, is what has happened in far too many instances to count. (You are always asking ‘why’ something or other has happened. Well, there are reasons. Root causes. And it takes looking at these roots to understand why.)
Vatican II has a lot to do with it, not the council itself, but rather that spirit which was allowed to come out of it (to include misconceptions gone uncorrected) and from there be foisted upon the faithful. An attitude of supposedly new freedom that, in reality, scandalizes the poor sheep left and right who do not know what to believe…. or who to follow as not all Bishops are faithful.
You might want to reread the article that Catherine suggested to me: https://cal-catholic.com/wordpress/2012/02/27/in-1968-something-terrible-happened-in-the-church/
You write, “It is wrong that ‘your’ Church has not joined with us.” Abeca, ‘our’ Church is the Church just as the Church in Rome is the Church. They are one and the same. The SSPX just cannot hide the fact beneath a bunch of ecumenical smoke and mirrors. We point to the Truth in Rome and say, yes, that tabernacle that you’ve shunted off to the back room – that is who we follow. The light is seeping through the doors that have ‘somehow’ been closed, but, yes, see, there It is. There! Let us bring Him out and worship Him in His rightful place.
To Abeca cont:
This is not intended to deride you, Abeca, or to say that your faith is any less faithful than anybody else’s. But it is part of the answer to your never ending ‘why.’
Or would you sign on board to ambiguous doctrine that puts all religions on an equal footing? If Christ were standing before you, in your home let’s say, would you give Him THE place of honor? Of course you would. Or would you advocate for setting up a ‘head table’ ala Assisi I, II, or III which outwardly proclaims by its very nature that Christ is one among many so as not to upset your neighbors who believe Christ to be just some guy.
That’s the issue, Abeca. And that is precisely why the Society didn’t ‘reunify’ with Rome. Because the Society asks for the liberty to speak the full truth, letting yes mean yes and no mean no. Knocking down idols, not out of a sense of arrogance or superiority, but rather to do what the Church has always been called to do – preach the Truth without fear and without confusing compromise.
God bless.
Ann, I am sorry that my leaving out the phrase; “there for the grace of God go I”, gave you the impression that I think my staying in the Church, as messy as it is, is all my doing. So let me be on record as saying that I am deeply aware that EVERY good aspect of my life comes from the Lord. I also understand that EVERY sin I choose to commit and of which Christ does not immediately rescue me from is in His good will as well.
abeca, I trust that you will recognized slander of the Church when you read it. Stand firm in the Faith. St. Michael the Archangel, protect her.
Thanks for your clarification, Tracy, of what keeps you in the Church. That said, it is also God’s grace that sees me in the Church as well… me and my family who would otherwise be lost.
God bless.
Why do you view truth as slander, Anonymous? Be not afraid was Pope John Paul II’s slogan was it not? So why be fearful? Why not answer questions and explain these issues.
Nobody is advocating leaving the Church, Anonymous. But answer the questions. The biggest conversion tool I could imagine would be the Church answering forthrightly that which is put to her …. and without having to file a lawsuit. That and correcting spun up misconceptions at the bud and from the top instead of allowing the ‘good cop, bad cop’ ambiguity of Pope Francis vs. Cardinal Mueller to reign.
Ann Malley thank you for your reply to me. Don’t fret, I am sorry that I put you in a situation where you felt the need to defend yourself. Its not my intention but it is my moral obligation to remind you of your moral duty, which is to stay or return to mother church. I did hear of the things you mentions and the complicated situation of why the SSPX won’t re-unite. (still hard for me to get it through) I still come to the same conclusion, regardless of the reasoning, which is for them to humble themselves and trust God more and re-unite.
To be honest, a lot of things from the Vatican II have been corrected. When a friend who use to attend the SSPX, she gave me information of how bad the church is, it was so negative, that it only scandalized me. It broke me for a short period. It was then that I decided to not be like her because I knew deep inside it would be wrong to join her church outside of our church. I would betray my faith, NO WAY. What I did was just remained her friend and carried my cross as I secretly kept praying for her to return to Rome. Which she eventually did. She kept asking me to pray that the Latin Mass, the Tridentine Mass to have its own parish someday. Well we prayed and our prayers were answered. Here in San Diego we have one. Sometimes we have to carry our cross and wait for our Lord to bless us and hear our prayers. Its trusting in a supreme God for all our needs, even when we feel it’s dry out in the land of those important needs we have.
Ann Continued: So I decided to learn apologetic’s, and I did, then I discovered Catholic Answers which actually helped correct the many abuses that continue to occur. Today there are many church lay faithful militants defending the faith. Which I like to consider myself one of them in little ways. I hope to do God great honor, as best as I can. I hate my sins because they do not help but with God’s graces, He helps me persevere. All the good I do comes from Him.
As much as people try to explain to me the complicated mess with the SSPX. I may not understand it all but I still feel in my heart that leaving this church, is not the right thing. Its scandalous.
We have the Latin Mass through the Tridentine Mass, we have other rites in union with the church, they are very reverent and there are no abuses there, so if they joined (the other rites from other countries) I feel that they are humble and meek of heart enough to recognize that they need to continue their obedience and still stand up in their traditions and reverence. So I think that SSPX can do the same, they are not excused. But I have nothing against the SSPX, its just their refusal to reunite is what bothers me but I ALSO am not happy with our church leadership for not doing ALL to save souls by helping the SSPX re-unite. I do appreciate Benedict for trying, he is a holy man for continuing that dialogue, I hope that this Pope does more, it will show us if he really continues to walk in humility by how he dialogues with charity and works towards re0uniting the SSPX church. It will be interesting to see what comes of that within the next few years…..May God’s will be done and our church truly seek to save souls, and that would be by their working with the SSPX church because the SSPX church does keep its traditions and have great qualities that our NO churches can learn and grow more humbly with.
God bless you, Abeca, for your response. I appreciate your position for that is what you have been led to understand. Something reinforced by apologetics training that anchors itself in VII. Please do not confuse me with your other friend who perhaps tried to encourage you toward going to the SSPX or in any other way to take sides. That is not my intention. I have never advocated that anybody should leave their parish to attend the SSPX.
That said, it is my duty to let you know the error you promote by declaring the SSPX ‘another Church’ is highly damaging. And false. She is not another Church, Abeca. The SSPX doesn’t have ‘its’ traditions like Anglicanism or Southern Baptists. The SSPX holds Catholic Tradition, that is Catholicism pre-delusion with the ambiguity that led to ‘full communion’ clergy openly advocating birth control in 1968.
This kind of dissent was encouraged by the vagaries of VII documents, Abeca, and errors that were not swiftly corrected by way of action instead of voiced displeasure. In reality, the SSPX is in closer communion with the actual teachings of VII than you realize. It is the small percentage of teachings that aren’t teachings precisely because they leave the door wide open for misinterpretation that the Society refuses to be mum about. The very same that would have Cardinal O’Malley submit in supposed ‘humility’ to a divorced, Methodist minister for baptismal whatnot.
To Abeca cont:
That said, I applaud your studies to become an apologist, but an apologist that does not have the background in Vatican II and the lead-up to it, while well intended and capable in some instances, is not equipped to dialogue fully with regard to those issues that pertain particularly to the attempted twisting of Church teaching – and that has nothing to do with abuses. It has to do with wording that specifically gives the freedom to twist and obfuscate or disregard. This leads to you asking ‘why’ about that which seems confusing in the Church. The why is because Bishops and priests have been given the leeway to be ‘pastoral’ instead of transmitting Truth. And they are being ‘pastoral’ or at least use that as a cover for teaching all manner of error.
You state: ” …the SSPX church does keep its traditions and have great qualities that our NO churches can learn and grow more humbly with.” This is precisely the mentality that is erroneous when discussing the Catholic Church, Abeca, because the Catholic Church has ALWAYS had the fullness of faith. She has ALWAYS had the tools to spread the Faith.
The fullness of Truth does not need to learn from say Buddhism, Pentecostals, Anglicans, or Wiccans (that is ‘other churches’) how to transmit truth – to say as much is not humility, it is error. (Is 1+1=2 error? Is it arrogant to stick to it?) Truth is objective, not subjective.
To Abeca cont:
The Church is the Bride of Christ, not His girlfriend who has to learn from other women how best to get her man’s attention or tend His children. She needs to keep a constant eye on Her Spouse. She needs to WHO SHE IS and proceed to act like it – speaking Truth without compromise in imitation of Her Spouse. Not seek to avoid Jerusalem. (Do you think Our Lady was anything but humble in her Magnificat? She proclaimed that all generations would call her Blessed. That’s a pretty BOLD claim. And yet it is simple, unvarnished Truth as it is GOD who deigned that She should be what and who She is. Same thing with the Catholic Church.)
Our Lord didn’t learn from other religions, per se, Abeca. He spoke the full Truth without compromise or false humility. The humility you describe is more political in that one should defer to the ‘wisdom’ of others so as to get along and perhaps move forward together. That’s great when you’re groping in the dark and don’t know your way. But that “I don’t know” approach is completely foolhardy and a lie when one has the map, the flashlight, the keys, etc and knows precisely where they are going (or should). It is wandering in the desert for an extra 40 years because we don’t trust in God to carry through with His promise to make us triumph. It is getting scared because the Canaanites look pretty scary. It is not trusting in the Holy Ghost to give us the words to say when faced with contradiction. (IOW: Too much human planning and agency instead of, say, just reading the Third Secret of Fatima in 1960 as requested by the Mother of God.)
To Abeca cont:
If such were not the case, why didn’t Our Lord beg the forgiveness of the elders for rebuking them? Why didn’t He sit down with the adulteress and ask the circumstances of her adultery and then learn from her? Why didn’t He appease Caiaphas and negotiate a ‘humble’ solution that would be peaceful so as to avoid bloodshed. Much like Judas suggested with the proceeds of selling the nard, much ‘good’ could have been done by Christ avoiding the crucifixion and just going out dialoguing with the folks.
No, Jesus humbly spoke Truth even at the cost of His own life. (That is true humility, Abeca, as the Truth doesn’t come from us… or even from the Church. She merely transmits what She has received.) When Our Lord spoke, however, He likely sounded really arrogant. A single man-no wife, no fortune, no property, no EDUCATION-proclaiming to be God. Wow! (Kind of like Holy Mother Church used to do before She was gagged.)
Jews must have thought – Who does He think He is!? No wonder the Jews tried to stone Him. What pride, what disrespect for the ‘elders.’ Unconscionable. But consider, if Christ wasn’t speaking the Truth from GOD, what He said would have been outrageously triumphalist and arrogant.
So Our Church leaders have a choice to make – humbly speak the Truth that comes from God. That is humbly proclaim that which He has imparted for the salvation of souls while man derides Her as arrogant and elitist. Or seek false humility before man by lying or obfuscating God’s message so as to not put off human beings. (Be a good Muslim, that kind of rot nonsense.)
To Abeca cont:
Remember, Abeca, the deposit of the Faith is received from God, not invented by man or the Church, so there is no doubting. No deferring from God’s truth. It is Truth or it is not.
This whole focus on the ‘humility’ of the Church in learning from others is disordered as true humility is knowing the truth of one’s situation. Did the disciples go seek knowledge from the Pagans when they had Christ in their midst? No. So while you may become disheartened at what you have learned (Assisi I, II, III being just a few examples) there is still the need to ask why and seek understanding. Yes, trust in God, but trust in all His words and promises.
You mention, “…still hard for me to get it through.” Yes, these things are hard for me to get through as well as they bespeak outwardly of the teaching of the equality of religions. That is why I trust in God, and say YES when He leads me to that which is what is needed to save my soul and the souls of my family and countless others within the confines of HIS CHURCH, Abeca.
So while you trust in God where you are, that is beautiful, but He has placed my family and I in a position to fight for and worship that Truth that powers inside the Church would rather hide out of false humility.
God bless
Interesting Ann Malley….but it just sounds like all excuses. I agree with this “The Church is the Bride of Christ” Yes I know that our church is the bride but your church still refuses to re-unite and for what? So what does it make your church since it is not in union?
Well yes you are right, about SSPX upholding it’s traditions from the get go, yes and I’m sorry I didn’t mean to sound insulting when I said that the NO churches can learn from that but believe it or not they can. Its the elders that can teach the young right? After all the SSPX upholds its traditions that are unknown to many in the NO right? Remember many are like me, not raised before VII nor during the beginning times of the Vatican II. So SSPX is doing a disservice by separating itself and not reaching out to this generation through the Magisterium that always was, is and will continue. But I am not concerned anymore about this, because we have the Latin Mass now, the Lord answered my prayers and now we are seeing more embrace and be exposed with the wholeness of the truth.
Regardless of all the negative stuff reported here, there are many faithful priests. Even if Jesus is wounded by traitors from within, the good Lord is still here, that is real humility. What I found most disturbing is when I was told by someone who attended the SSPX, they said that our Mass was not valid! That was horrible Miss-information from them. They are in grave error to say such a thing and to me that put them in a prideful manner that it just spelled warning to me. For them to preach that. They felt comfortable to tell us that but they did not feel the moral obligation to warn a parent within their church what would happen if her 18 year old would move out and dishonor her parents. Even the priest from the SSPX did not advice the rebellious teenager well. And I thought they were more traditional. Teaching to undermine parents is wrong.
Jesus is my life. I am no apologist but I did decided to learn apologitics more to defend our faith and to guard myself from more scandalous heresies or other information that may try to confuse me or break my loyalty. But with great love I also acknowledge that even our protestant brothers and sisters, some uphold holy scripture more faithfully than many current Catholics. We can learn from their zeal and qualities and it can wake up Catholics who are taking for granted these treasures from our faith.
Ann Malley in conclusion I don’t want to upset you. I am sorry if our dialogue may have caused some discomfort. That is not my intention. Just know that I have a special soft spot of admiration for the SSPX for keeping to Tradition, I admire that zeal. That is why I pray that our Pope will continue dialogue and hopefully a miracle would take place and we can see the SSPX in union once again. I am powerless regarding of my lack of or of some understanding of the situation, I am powerless.
Only our Lord can heal this relationship. Christ suffers and we should all suffer too when the SSPX and our church are not in union. We all suffer. I have nothing against the SSPX, I would consider them to be a great asset if they re-join. It would be a blessing. Even with or without the SSPX our church still continues to hold the wholeness of the faith, If God can open my heart to those beautiful traditions at a very young age, then He has and continues to do so under even the VII……The truth still shines through and errors are always corrected!
This reminds me of when a friend of mine who is Orthodox. She tried convincing me that the her church is the true catholic church, that it came before the Catholic church. We almost had an argument but I decided not to argue….she even went as far as calling her church the Rock…I knew she was in great error….
I also pray for the Orthodox church to re-unite as well. I have relatives too who are Orthodox too. They do not appreciate the Latin Mass as much as I do. I feel like they are missing out on a lot!
Ann, can you refer to any precedent for the actions of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre consecrating bishops without the approval of the Holy Father? Was he the first Archbishop, in the history of the Church, to take such an action?
4. The root of this schismatic act can be discerned in an incomplete and contradictory notion of Tradition. Incomplete, because it does not take sufficiently into account the living character of Tradition, which, as the Second Vatican Council clearly taught, “comes from the apostles and progresses in the Church with the help of the Holy Spirit. There is a growth in insight into the realities and words that are being passed on. This comes about in various ways. It comes through the contemplation and study of believers who ponder these things in their hearts. It comes from the intimate sense of spiritual realities which they experience. And it comes from the preaching of those who have received, along with their right of succession in the episcopate, the sure charism of truth”.(5)
But especially contradictory is a notion of Tradition which opposes the universal Magisterium of the Church possessed by the Bishop of Rome and the Body of Bishops. It is impossible to remain faithful to the Tradition while breaking the ecclesial bond with him to whom, in the person of the Apostle Peter, Christ himself entrusted the ministry of unity in his Church.(6)
Ecclesia dei
Abeca, I am very surprised at the lack of humility you have shown in not acknowledging the part played by the SSPX in facilitating the diocese of San Diego offering Latin Mass. You say you are ‘not concerned because you have Latin Mass now.’ Well, that’s great for you and your friend, truly, as I’ve stated in numerous posts. But contrary to what you’ve been told, not everyone has that option, Abeca.
That ‘wholeness’ you seem delighted to see more and more folks embracing thanks to the Latin Mass is purposefully withheld in other diocese which is why there is so much @#$% reported right here on CCD. That is also why there are so many faithful Catholics that have heartburn over VII. Not because they do not understand it, but because they DO.
These are not excuses, Abeca. No more than you are using full communion as an excuse to ignore all manner of nonsense that offends God. Saying as much is trivializing the very wholeness you say you love so much. It is grossly unfair of you to dismiss the true unity of other Catholics so cavalierly…. Just because your needs are met.
Do not think for one moment that those who attend the SSPX do not pray for union with Rome, but at what cost, Abeca? At the cost of allowing those horrible things that shook you and almost broke your loyalty?
To Abeca cont.
That said, you slander the SSPX when you imply that her priests undermine parents. That’s a flat out lie. Using common sense to not interfere with the way someone else raises their children when said someone else is FULLY AWARE of the consequences of an 18 year old girl moving out on her own is not dismissing one’s duty. It’s called not rubbing salt into an open wound, Abeca. It is also called accepting the reality of free will.
That said, there are good priests in the NO, but there are solid priests in the SSPX as well. Those who reach out and mentor all manner of young people. So please do not spread the untruth that the Society does not reach out to younger people. The Chapel in Veneta was graced by God to meet a Protestant young man at the local faire where they had a booth and that young man has just passed his third year in the Monastery.
You also wrote that ‘errors are always corrected.’ Not always, Abeca. Many times they are glossed over until folks forget about them. But before the forgetting happens, there is fallout of lost souls. Especially when said errors are not acknowledged and repented of.
Sorry if this note is in any way upsetting to you. But if you truly believe that the SSPX could be so very helpful specifically because she sticks to the What the Church Has Always Taught, please don’t fault the Society for doing just that. As to the Latin Mass in San Diego – you’re welcome on behalf of those you would otherwise ignore, the SSPX. Grace builds on nature, Abeca, and God makes use of what He wills when answering our prayers.
Tracy, there is a long story associated with the Archbishop’s consecrating bishops. It begins with JPII giving his permission and then a process of delays over the ‘who’ those bishops will be. There was a lot of foot dragging and red tape and that while the Archbishop was getting weaker, older, etc.
You can check out the Society website if you want accurate answers.
That said, if BXVI can go ahead and accept all the Bishops of Communist China as suddenly a-okay letter, Bishops elected by the Chinese to enforce their state policies, I have no problem with the state of crisis invoked by the Society in the the consecration of her Bishops. Raised to the episcopacy to ensure the continuation of Catholic tradition.
Perhaps after a hundred years or bloodshed or some-such persecution, Catholic Tradition may get the same pass of that which is passed off as an attempt to reach the young people. What dumbed down nonsense.
God bless:)
Anonymous. If you truly believe that:
“…There is a growth in insight into the realities and words that are being passed on. This comes about in various ways. It comes through the contemplation and study of believers who ponder these things in their hearts. It comes from the intimate sense of spiritual realities which they experience.” Then you should EMBRACE the Holy Ghost’s using the SSPX.
But no. The touchy-feely reference intended to make the faithful ‘feel’ important by somehow intimating that ‘their’ pondering and the ‘spiritual realities’ they experience only seems to apply to that which is against what the Church has always taught. That’s why, Abeca, there is so much absolute nonsense going on. There’s your answer.
Perhaps, Abeca and Anonymous and Tracy, the Holy Ghost is saying ENOUGH! That is cut the novelty and ambiguity and get down to preaching the Gospel. Even the best of Fathers has His limits.
Let your yes mean yes, and your no mean no.
The circular logic of post Vatican II ambiguity validating itself in the novelties it introduced via the imprecise language of – gee – Vatican II is something that time will test.
God bless you all for your fidelity.
In the present circumstances I wish especially to make an appeal both solemn and heartfelt, paternal and fraternal, to all those who until now have been linked in various ways to the movement of Archbishop Lefebvre, that they may fulfil the grave duty of remaining united to the Vicar of Christ in the unity of the Catholic Church, and of ceasing their support in any way for that movement. Everyone should be aware that formal adherence to the schism is a grave offence against God and carries the penalty of excommunication decreed by the Church’s law. (code of Canon Law 1364… an apostate from the faith, a heretic, or a schismatic incurs a latae sententiae excommunication; …)
Blessed John Paul II Ecclesia Dei
To give clarity before I get accused of lacking humility in giving acknowledgement, this is what I am aware of only and please excuse me if I am ignorant of anything else:
When we didn’t have a Latin Mass parish, the only priests providing the Latin Mass in San Diego were the the Fraternity of Saint Peter and the Norbertine priests and even Father Dillard, a Roman Rite priest also said the Latin Mass, Mass was said in a cemetery but now we have a parish at St, Anne’s. They have their own parish. These are the only ones that I know of that have been approved by our previous and current Bishop. I’m so sorry for the misunderstanding.
Dear Abeca,
Think. The only lack of humility that is being leveled against you is your own dismissal or willful lack of acknowledgement of the part the Society has played in advancing the Traditional Latin Mass. (In addition to your spurious slanders of the SSPX. Based on your own, very limited experience. For just as you tell us always not to be put off by the actions/misdeeds of one, that is precisely what you are doing in drawing conclusions about a Society of deeply faithful Catholics who love the Truth, pray for and love the Pope, and do their darndest to raise faithful children.)
To give clarity, the Traditional orders you mentioned were able to maintain the Traditional priestly formation thanks to Archbishop Lefebvre. (He was the one who trained the founders of the FSSP) You should look to the history of who continued the traditional priestly formation, Abeca, before taking the supposed moral high ground of reminding others of their ‘moral’ obligation. So if you have those offerings in your area – good for you. They also have their roots, something you may wish to look into. Or not as it may upset or confuse you. That is okay as you know yourself and what tempts and or does not tempt you to sin. But the ‘just trust and join us’ is the exactly type of pious nonsense that Pope Francis is warning against.
God bless you, Anonymous, in your zealous pushing of heterodox, confusing nonsense. So we can have ‘schism’ of heart and practice within the Church, but the ‘schism’ of actually holding to what the Church has always taught – no, that is evil.
Thank you for your clarification. God bless you and wishing you the best with that.
Anonymous its noble of you to defend our church…I don’t know which anony you are? But if you were consistent in your loyalty to the faith then what you just declared would hold water but because there were some questionable inconsistencies coming from you(if you are the same Anony, now see why anony name is hard to pinpoint if its the same person or not but for now you may very well be a troll too, who knows, how can I defend you when I don’t know which anony you are?), calling a lay faithful a witch, judging Ann so harshly and wrongfully etc….
Even if the SSPX is not in union with Rome, I can tell you that I find more insulting that someone from the inside our precious church, who promotes gay agenda’s, they have personally already excommunicated themselves and for them to judge someone from the SSPX would be hypocritical. At least in those who post here from the SSPX, they have been consistent in upholding the truth in matters of teachings from our faith and remain consistent except for that one person who once posted a while back that seemed a little “gay” friendly just because his son came out and is conflicted but I’m sure him being a member of the SSPX, their priests are solid and hopefully will guide him away from heretical views on homosexuality.
I’m sorry Ann for failing you. I failed you and I failed our Lord for not conveying better. No matter what, I find it more alarming that bad willed members from our church have been so self righteous, so holier than thou attitude. Its not you Ann but all those who betray our faith, they betray Jesus just like Judas did. They say they are Catholic but the truth is, they are far from it. Many have excommunicated themselves long ago with their ugly pride and public promotions of “gay” agendas and murder of the unborn.
But Praise God, there are many souls who remain faithful dear one. We are not perfect and have many flaws but we persevere with fortitude in Him, who gives us courage and strength. Jesus came to heal the sick…..praise God He uses us to spread His gospel.
PAX CHRISTI
No Ann it is you who is the only one labeling me as what you say against me for not agreeing with you. You are now displaying self righteousness and i prefer to walk away from it. Its not unreasonable to do so. You still did not answer then why do your church members say that our Mass is not valid? You keep throwing insults at me, I am now obligated to defend what I hold to be true. It is still wrong to attend any SSPX, especially since some of their members are slandering our faith by saying that our mass is not valid! I’m faithful to my church, why would I feel comfortable attending when they have resentment against us. At least I give credit to the Orthodox, I haven’t heard any of them say that to me but they sure do not want to attend a Latin Rite Mass, I don’t know why but they are OK if we attend theirs. Theirs is still valid you and so is yours…but why attend when issues with the SSPX and Orthodox have no been resolved?
Continued So I choose for myself not to attend but keep them in prayers for our church to work with them and hopefully when this is resolved, if its in my life time. We can put this division aside.
It doesn’t matter what you think of me, I don’t have it complicated as you, you read into too much….its simple Ann, I am not out of my church to be immersed in all those views you hold. That is it.
My faith is simple and not tarnished by so much resentment. The troubles we have, we always have had since man decided to sin. We correct those from within because that is our moral duty, we are our brothers keeper. Those outside of the church, can also take care of their own.
I’ve failed you because I’m wondering if their is anger in your comments, you have already judged my person but I have not judged you, I tried to be charitable and to be honest, you best look at your own self first because you bear more false witness against me. You will not change my loyalty to Christ’s church. You mentions stuff that I am not immersed fully in yet you feel that my ignorance deserves to be labeled as lack of humility. But I’m sure its because of all the negative information you know that may have scandalized you. I failed you so its best I cut off this conversation. But I will not tolerate people spreading information that seems to break the real mission of the church.
Abeca, not to worry. You haven’t failed me by not conveying better. You have been honest in your assessment of what you believe. That is okay as I appreciate your honesty. And honesty and truthfulness is what is very much needed. That and transparency.
That is why this conversation was a long time coming as you hold very interesting positions regarding VII and what constitutes Church unity and faithfulness. So God bless you and reward you. And do not call out those who are ‘… casting out demons in His Name,” as you may not believe they are with you, Abeca, but they are for you. And most assuredly, for Him.
God bless.
Think what you will. I don’t care.. : )
Its your ugly pride speaking! I’m still the same person as before…its you whom I wanted others to see your true colors and they will not be deceived by you. I am still the same person as before and will always be. Your insults don’t concern me, I do feel sorry for you though.
I rebuke your comments, you are in bad will and I exposed it because of your dissent from Rome. Your personal attacks against me, fine, its a blessing and it shows that I am doing right because I’m under the protection of our Lord because of my loyalty to His church of Rome! No matter what you think you pointed out, it only showed how angry you get and your pride just made this friendly dialogue turn into the mess that you have in your heart for the slander you have embraced that keeps you from being in full communion!
God bless you, Abeca, and good journey to you. I am pleased that you are under Our Lord’s protection. But, despite your disagreement or inability/unwillingness to understand, I am also under His protection as I am united to His Church despite false persecutions. Including yours.
As for pride inside of ‘friendly’ dialogue, look to what you say, Abeca. Wasn’t it your priest friend who said it is not about being right, but about saving souls? Take some measure of responsibility for the supposed mess – and that doesn’t mean an apology for your lack of conveying properly. It goes for what you actually say.
God bless.
Abeca, if anybody told you that the SSPX believes the NO to be invalid they are wrong. That is not what the SSPX teaches. And that is why I’m trying to dispel your confusion – but no matter. You do not want to know and that is okay. I wish you had just been honest from the get go.
I am sorry that my writing and answering the questions you posed proved so damaging as to shake your Faith to the point of earthquake. God love you. If I could hop on board with your mentality of ‘just join’, I would. My conscience won’t allow it, Abeca. Neither would my husband. And that’s after my 12 years of Novus Ordo Parochial school and having been raised Catholic. Go figure. (And I *DO* FEAR God, with a filial fear, that of not wanting to ever offend Him again. And that includes submitting to blind compromise with that which desires to KILL Him. So digest that. It’s a hard one, Abeca.)
You can chalk that off to Satan or whatever you’d like. God demands an accounting of me, not you. And your stubborn insistence that it is pride, pride, pride for everyone is a huge mistake. You cannot read souls, Abeca. And you should look to yourself for the pride you take in proclaiming your so called “*I* love the Church. Jesus is MY life. I am faithful. WE have the fullness of AUTHORITY.”
You should be grateful for the grace you have received instead of shouting your supposed superiority from the proverbial roof tops.
You have nothing to prove, you know. But then, Abeca, neither do I.
The “Whichever-Anonymous” quote of Ecclesia Dei, posted Feb 3, 2014 @ 1:24pm is highly misleading: Ecclesia Dei was the motu proprio of JP 2 in 1988 which has been conditioned by, now, over 25 years of subsequent history of research principally byf the Ecclesia Dei Commission.
It is misleading to quote JP2’s now-dated statements of 1988 that Abp. Lefebvre’s ordinations were “schismatic”, first of all, because Lefebvre went to great length to explain he was not separating himself from the CC, but that he was forced to act when souls are in extreme peril, to save those souls. That right has long been enshrined in canon law and the moral law. In fact, as a result of much research and study in the matter, Card Dario Castrillon Hoyos in many interviews over the past decade has repeatedly observed that the SSPX is “not in schism”, but that “their status remains within the Church.”
Cardinal Edward Cassidy, President of the Pontifical Council for Christian Unity, in a written statement dated May 3, 1994, that “The situation of the members of this Society is an internal matter of the Catholic Church…Of course the Mass and Sacraments administered by the priests of the Society are valid. The Bishops are validly, but not lawfully, consecrated.”
These are the experts that have studied the SSPX situation with a fair and open mind for years [notice I will exclude Card. Gerhard Mueller from the list, who now calls Gustavo Gutierrez “orthodox” (interview, Jan, 2014), and the SSPX ‘schismatic’] , during which time (between 1988 and the present year 2014) we have come to discover that the Traditional Mass of Trent was never abrogated and never actually suppressed.
Thank you, Steve, yet again for your clear headed logic. So sad when those inside the Church work like busy little bees to hide the truth and misguide souls.
Steve Phoenix you made lovely comments. I really appreciate your wisdom in this matter. What you posted is what I have heard to be true, (well at least some of the main points you made)I don’t recall who told me but I was told that a few years ago or so. That is why I try to remain neutral in regards to the SSPX because I am praying for a solution, It was unjust for our church leadership to have been so harsh with the SSPX. I hope that it will be corrected someday but it also depends on the SSPX too if they are willing to work with the church.
Last time I heard anything else as well was when “back then” Pope Benedict was having dialogue with them. I keep praying to Jesus to speak to Pope Francis heart about this matter. Little do people understand me, but I do have a soft heart for those who felt scandalized by the many changes. My papa was one who was affected, and even though I didn’t understand him growing up, I saw much hurt in him. Especially when he didn’t attend Mass as often but did visit Orthodox priests.
Also, regarding the SSPX, it is important to note that the FSSP (Fraternal Society of St Peter, the “officially approved” N.O. organization that is permitted to celebrate the TLM) celebrated their 25th year of their institution in Nov, 2013. (They were founded by former SSPX members July 18th, 1988.) Obviously, their foundation was finally instituted as a response to the June 30th, 1988 consecrations by Abp. Lefebvre of 4 new traditional bishops. Isn’t that interesting? That which officialdom in the Roman congregations wouldnt approve for Lefebvre they quickly ok’d for the FSSP—provided they could control their puppet-strings. And they do keep them on tight strings (I dont say this as a hostile criticism of the FSSP: but they are always walking on eggshells).
I don’t think the FSSP has their own Bishop yet, do they, Steve Phoenix. This is precisely how the leash is held and why those who attend the FSSP are subject to mixed boy/girl overnight retreats that are often required for the children to receive Confirmation. There are other ‘hoops’ they make the FSSP jump through too. And it is a suffrage to be sure.
Steve Phoenix, do you not know about the 1988 protocol agreement signed by Bishop Lefebvre and Cardinal Ratzinger? Do you not know about Ecclesia Dei?
Ann its not slander because my friend left the SSPX because of that reason…..its just a situation that she went through and it was a hard time for her family. Without getting more into this, its a fact that she went through. Without getting into it, its not slander. I was stating facts from someone I knew and what she went through. You hear a lot of bad news here because our church is not perfect. I’m not slandering our church for saying that…..like I know that I am not any better either but Jesus is still with us. That is what holds me up. You accuse me of slander just like Anony accused you of slandering our church. Its also slander to say that our mass is not valid. That is where I know that the SSPX is wrong. Something isn’t right when its’ members are telling me that our mass isn’t valid and tearing down the only church I know to be true!
Ann I actually am known to have defended SSPX many times here in the past in my own way but like I said I hold my own convictions and I honor my church.
Thank you for your time Ann, like I stated before, my dialoguing with you was not to bring discomfort and I see that it has because you may have assumed ill of me, which it is not in my heart at all. So I am deciding to not continue this conversation. Not out of spite or any malice, so please don’t assume negatively but because I know in my heart that in this conversation, I feel this does us no good, if I knew you, I would rather we would talk privately and i would not want to bring more scandal and show the enemy where we are divided because that is where he will feed off of. I rebuke him. So in charity I am so sorry that our conversation brought discomfort, I am sorry. Lets agree to disagree and not give the enemy more reasons to use this opportunity to divide us even more.
Please forgive me. Like a good priest once told me “Its not about being right its about saving souls.” He quoted that from a saint and I can’t recall which one, but since I hold you in high esteem, I wouldn’t be surprised if you knew who it was from. : )
God bless your friend, Abeca. But the SSPX is not teaching division between parents and children. Whatever your ‘friend’ might believe. Recognizing the reality of adult children is something we all must do. And things don’t always turn out right despite our best efforts – something you told a poster on another thread. So spreading such ill begotten assumption or misunderstanding is not playing fair to those who are being calumniated.
As to discomfort, the only discomfort Abeca is the lack of understanding that you have, that is your heart being closed to reason and reality and learning about the issues brought to bear by VII. Mores the truth it is sadness on my part that you cut yourself off from learning more – fearful of what Anonymous dubs slanders against the Church.
There is no slander in Truth, Abecca. The Truth shall set you free. That said, I do not assume ill of you. Far from it. I see blindness in certain regards. But that is okay. But please do not seek to admonish me on what you perceive if you are not willing to dialogue in truth with me, but rather compartmentalize my issues to ‘excuses’.
God bless! And keep up the good fight!
My heart is not closed to reason Ann, i just find all that information irrelevant and it is another distraction from spreading the mission of the church. I have scanned through most of that information. My heart is not tainted and that information has not changed my love for Jesus and His church. Division is what the devil wants. I don’t care. I hold little power over this type of division. I am only to live a prayerful life and act when the Holy Ghost commands….if Moses felt incompetent because he was a stutterer then imagine me, a no body to this world. Regardless of the negative stuff you read here, there are other healthier websites that share all the good our church continues in doing.
and for the record before things get more twisted…I did not say that the SSPX was teaching division between parents and children. Never said “teaching” nor insinuated that. One particular example I gave of a situation. I was trying to prove that while many magnify the errors in our church and find it to be OK to do so, it does not mean we have double standard here. We need to remove the rod out of our own eye before we can remove the splinter out of another.
We magnify the ill in our own church so often that it is now customary to do it because people think they are exposing the great evil. Yet they lack the understanding that we are going to far.
Thank you Abeca and Ann Malley and Tracy for your dialogue. I believe that with God’s will many good things have come from and will come from this open discussion. Thank you also Steve Phoenix for your zeal in educating others in particular facts. CCD has provided a good forum to be educated in many ways. There have not been many opportunities such as the unique forum of CCD to unite our hearts to Christ when discussing the devastation in the vineyard. CCD has also provided a very good insight into the methods that are being used to obfuscate the truth while claiming to be under the banner of being in full communion. There can be no doubt that there is a great schism of heart that is currently wounding the Body of Christ. There is no denying that good works should always continue while building up the Church but God often allows his servants to experience great trials and suffering when we stray from his truths.
The Gospel of Mark 10: [13] And they brought to him young children, that he might touch them. And the disciples rebuked them that brought them. [14] Whom when Jesus saw, he was much displeased, and saith to them: Suffer the little children to come unto me, and forbid them not; for of such is the kingdom of God. [15] Amen I say to you, whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child, shall not enter into it.” Douay-Rheims
Abeca writes:
“…I just find all that information irrelevant and it is another distraction from spreading the mission of the church. I have scanned through most of that information. My heart is not tainted and that information has not changed my love for Jesus and His church. Division is what the devil wants. I don’t care. I hold little power over this type of division. ”
1.) If you love someone, you shouldn’t consider that which describes the wound as irrelevant or a distraction. To ignore the wound means letting it fester. Looking to the problem/wound, doesn’t necessarily mean someone is cruel, mean, or poking fun or being unfaithful. It is done in a spirit of Love, Abeca, so that the wound and its causes can be healed. PRECISELY BECAUSE ONE LOVES.
2)One cannot spread the mission of the Church when those in positions of authority within the Church have divergent, dare I say, bipolar approaches/doctrines. I would love to evangelize, too, but just saying be happy and hop on board when we have mess to clean up is asking too much of the Faithful who are the ones who will get the hard questions. Catholics need to all get on the same page first – like the Apostles and not be afraid of speaking boldly. But muddy teachings make that near impossible.
The SSPX does not say that your mass is not valid, Abeca. If you want to know what the Society holds to, visit their website. If you don’t want to know, that’s fine too. But skimming over dialogue because ‘you know’ when the reality seems to be ‘you don’t want to know’ is not the best way to understand the issue.
If you don’t want to understand the issue, that’s okay too. But when you insert yourself into a dialogue stream I’m having with somebody else to assert my moral obligation to ‘join the Church’ you can expect a reaction. A visceral one. Especially as you have no notion of the depth of my love, conviction, the state of my conscience, the necessity of my situation, the size of my cross, or the number of attempts I’ve made to ‘just join!’ as you suggest. These are excuses to you because you do not understand. And, it would seem, you do not want to.
This whole mess was started because I came to the defense of Kenneth Fisher. So, hey, if you want to be on the same side, it is important that we really understand each other. And that we’re forthcoming and are honest and READ and try to really understand each other’s motives.
If you have heartburn about the SSPX dismissing the Novus Ordo – look into the reasons why they do.
But one thing for sure Catherine, we are the ONE true Catholic church and we hold the truth and the true authority, while there is a great schism, that should not intimidate us……we still need to remain faithful and obedient and defend what is dear to us. OR walk away and trust God. If we continue to make excuses or allow excuses for people to make as to why they do not unite with Christ’s church, then that is where we fail….yes I know Ann will hunt me down for these comments. I don’t care. I’m getting use to it….I guess my reverse Psychology didn’t work, it just back fired..since I only understand the purpose to shake her heart a bit…the rest is in God’s hands.
Catherine, thank you. I hope the dialogue will be fruitful. That is blow away the smoke of confusion and bias. God’s will be done either way.
God bless you, Abeca, for showing your true colors. I’ve noted your ‘reverse’ psychology in action which is why I am glad that the truth has come out. It would seem I shook your heart a bit. And I am glad.
But it is precisely this double-minded approach that I find disgusting in the Novus Ordo – that of coddling/flattering people into somehow falling into the Truth as if speaking it straight out were too harsh.
God bless you for being forthcoming. But watch out in your chats with YFC, because he calls on the very same ‘unity’ as you with regard to defending his position in the One True Church. Playing the innocent misunderstood and slandered victim isn’t your best tactic either. (That said, Abeca, I never said you should attend the SSPX so you may want to read over your own posts. And try Truth when you speak. So much for your passing on Kenneth Fisher’s apologetics. Is that a tactic, too?)
Think what you’d like about schism, Abeca. Go off on tangents of false accusation and decrying your communion – the very same your father seemed to reject. Embrace what you will. Use full communion and false loyalty as a cover to undermine the rooting out of filth within.
Your loyalty will be rewarded.
And p.s. Abeca:
I believe Catherine is well and able to judge her supposed failings and/or successes with regard to me and others. For her tactic is charity, not psychology.
God bless.
C8H its not rejection you see. See how sin complicates things. It puts people at odds, its like they have to choose Jesus or condone homosexual lifestyles. I remember a pro-homosexual therapist advising homosexuals to be sensitive to their parents when they came out. To accept the fact that not everyone will shake their hand and rejoice. With any sinful choices away from God’s holy plan, it just causes division. It is to be expected.
Sin is an ugly thing, C&H if you have read about St, Jerome. He use to read all kinds of books especially ones that would not help him spiritually, so the Lord came to him and told him not to waste time on those things and then instructed him to translate the bible etc….well I’m sure you can find more on his story but without going into a long posting, I want to kindly warn you that if you belong to Lesbian groups and or organizations that offend God, its not going to help you grow and those groups will only continue to mislead you and themselves.
Not sure where Fr. Curran is going, but it seems his intended direction will likely lead many to perdition. As other bloggers noted, “personal conscience” can never trump the laws of Christ and teachings of the Church. This liberal lie is the banner that seeks to eliminate many sexual sins: abortion; contraception; homosexual sex; premarital sex; and many other things that are clearly prohibited. Having a Vatican “approval” for a nutty tract like “Always Our Children” means absolutely nothing; there is little oversight from Rome, and particularly under a Latin American Pope like Francis. (Yes, Dear Reader, it has come to pass that the Faithful must take note of the differences — sometimes odd and sometimes overtly wrong — voiced by Latin American clergy, about sin; just look at the loony, and disrespectful, statements by Cardinal Maradiaga, who seems ready to recommend “more flexibility” on a good number of things regarding Church requirements.) These guys love to rely on the individual “conscience.” Like they said in the 1960’s: “If it feels good, do it!”
“He pointed out that Always Our Children was a pastoral letter that was approved by the Vatican.” This a blatant falsehood. “Always Our Children” (AOC) originated with the pro-sodomite concepts of dissidents such as Fr. James Schexnayder of Dignity/CALGM fame (check CalCatholic’s index for references to him) and the late Fr. Robert Nugent, silenced by the Vatican for his pro-sodomite teachings. AOC was prepared by a USCCB committee but was not even approved by the USCCB itself, much less the Vatican. I wonder which version of AOC they used. The original version stated that parents who were concerned about their child and his/her “sexual identity” should have a “wait and see” attitude. In other words, the parents should let the child continue with the same-sex acts. Let the child continue in the aberrant behavior was what AOC recommended. Is that Catholic? There was a revision of AOC which tempered this statement, but like the corrections to the Catholic Catechism which not really promulgated, it is likely that the original AOC is still out there doing terrible damage.
AOC and his puff Valley Catholic article is more pro-sodomite propaganda and has the diabolical goal of convincing the parents of those afflicted with same-sex desires that they should fully accept the vice as well as the victim.
It seems to me that people who use epithets to refer to their fellow human beings and their fellow catholics lose all credibility when it comes to pontificating on moral issues.
We don’t pontificate on moral issues. The popes do. And they’re unanimous that sodomy is a mortal sin. Those who reject this teaching are heretics.
Except that you do pontificate. Regularly. And often incorrectly.
Sodomy = Mortal Sin
He Who Rejects This = Heretic
Excuse me, Fellow, why is the word “sodomite” an epithet? You know the word is accurate. Check the Catholic Concordance to the Bible and you will see many biblical references to Sodom and Sodomites.
Yes, Laurette, the word “sodomite” IS an epithet. Those references to Sodomites do not refer to me. I was not in Sodom. Any reference to any living person as a “sodomite” is an epithet. And you very well know this. Stop pretending you think you are being charitable when you see it/use it/hear it.
Community organizer Saul D. Alinsky (1909-1972) put the importance of language quite concisely in his book “Rules for Radicals: A Pragmatic Primer for Realistic Radicals” when he wrote, “He who controls the language controls the masses.”
YFC, stop pretending that you are being charitable when you label someone as “pontificating”.
Fellow, do you refer to yourself as Caucasian? Unless you have been in the Caucasus you cannot be Caucasian. Are you Black and born in the US? If so you should not refer to yourself as African-American. Get my point?
Hiding the truth from victims of homosexuality is NOT charitable.
Here’s a quick test for epithet:
• is it used 100% of the time as a pejorative?
• is it used always by outsiders to refer to a group and never by by that group to refer to itself?
• have you yourself ever used it without a derisive or defamatory connotation?
• does it declare a negative bias in advance of anything that follows, making any elaborating statement redundant?
if yes, epithet.
So calling someone a pedophile would constitute an epithet? How about rapist?
Equating consensual adult relationships with acts of victimization demonstrates willful ignorance.
Not equating the logical progression of calling those who (albeit willfully) commit sodomy Sodomites is willful ignorance, Man Ray. Just because you want to remove the stigma from the word – that is imply that it is morally licit – doesn’t change reality of what it is.
Someone who pokes another in the eye, even if by mutual consent, could be logically referred to as an eye poker. It’s just reality, Man.
Well, if your intention is to convey stigma, epithets are appropriate. Rhetorically, it’s fallacious, and undermines or negates the validity of any argument you might make. If you wish to lead a statement with an admission that you are a prejudiced person, by all means continue. It’s efficient.
God love you, Man Ray, for that paragraph, but people who commit sodomy are still Sodomites. It’s easy. It you wish to remove the stigma from the word Sodomite, just say so. But there’s no need to abolish ‘the word.’ Then again, abolishing ‘The Word’ that is Our Lord is a lot of what’s going on here.
Have a great rest of the week.
Self called “YFC”, do you mean epithets like “depart from me ye vipers, full of dead men’s bones” or how about “get thee behind me Satan!” You know or at least should know who said those things.
May God have mercy on your sadly compromised soul!
May God have mercy on an amoral Amerika!
Viva Cristo Rey!
God bless, yours in Their Hearts,
Kenneth M. Fisher, Founding Director
Concerned Roman Catholics of America, Inc.
“The first edition of the Catechism of the Catholic Church stated “They do not choose their homosexual condition….”
Excellent post Rod McKuen. Many individuals are still clinging to that statement in order to justify their clear rejection of Church teaching. That statement is a past 1994 example of some individuals “anonymously” trying to pull or slip in a fast one that could lead to error, compromise and confusion. Thank you again Rod McKuen for that important clarification. Some posters who still try to promote that statement will consider this digging up old written statements of evidence but as you have clearly shown, the correction to the Catechism was to ensure that it harmonized with the official Latin text that was promulgated on the same date.
Matthew 7:12
New Revised Standard Version Catholic Edition (NRSVCE)
The Golden Rule
12 “In everything do to others as you would have them do to you; for this is the law and the prophets.
Rod.. while the “objectively disordered” line has been parsed and analysed to death, I wish the last two words were changed to something like “strongly opposed.” The “Kill the Gays” bill in Uganda is a good example of where to Church ought to try to protect the human rights of gay people, both Catholic and others.
Fr. Curran states – “Catholic Gays have been taught self hate”. This is typical of many gays – that they’re SO different and SO picked on, sob, sob. Fr. Curran, EVERY kid who ever went to Parochial school was taught self hate! We are taught that are bodies are essentially sinful, that we are predisposed to sin, and that despite our best efforts, we will sin. Jesus came to intercede for us, and is our Savior. Really, gay guys, if you would just stop posturing and playing the “we’re the victims” card, and look around, you might find that we are all in the same boat. So, shut up and row!
I love your post, Joe. Having attended 12 years of parochial school myself, I just had to say you are spot on.
Joe, I couldn’t find the best way to express this sediment myself. You are SPOT ON!
Most of those posting use the CORRECT EDITION of the “Catechism of the Catholic Church.
The ONLY edition that should be used in the USA states on the Cover.
– “Catechism of the Catholic Church”
– “Second Edition”
– “revised in accordance with the official Latin Text promulgated by Pope John Paul II”.
Every Catholic home should have one.
The COPYRIGHT page of the correct edition will state
– Imprimi Potest: Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger
– that the first printing was March, 2000 in the USA;
– that the Holy See holds the copyright.
In the USA the cover is dark green.
Catherine..
WOW! What a lot you wrote for me to think about. In no particular order here are some reactions.
Please don’t associate me with abortion. I am against it and have convinced one woman not to have one and helped get another the resources she needed not to have one! As I’ve said I don’t make a big deal about my sexuality, but I don’t hide it.
Do you think I should? Would it be really fair to lie to a woman at Church who really, really wanted to set me up with her nephew ? (I later met him. Nice guy. I’m sure he’ll make some woman very happy.)
Of course I’ve talked with priests about my life..in and out of the sacrament of Reconciliation. Haven’t you? Talking about the gay part of me, they all started with saying that the Church teaches that a homosexual orientation isn’t considered a sin, only acts are. This is what the CCC says.
As for my business, the only “gay cause” I cater to is donating food to a shelter for homeless LGBT youth. I suspect that some of these kids were eating out of trash bins before they came there I suspect God thinks it’s OK.
Again, please don’t compare me in any way to anything which is pro-abortion. Thank you.
C&H I don’t doubt that you are pro-life. I applaud you for that. God bless you. Especially since you helped someone choose life! Even more noble!
OK look if someone wants to set you up, well just kindly say ” I am choosing to live a chaste lifestyle, but thank you so kindly”. That is it. It’s just simple. If you advertise that you are a lesbian…maybe you are advertising huh?
I’m so glad that you are at least pro-life….then I can rest knowing that you didn’t vote for Obama? Right? Because someone who proudly states they are pro-life would not one bit consider voting for Obama, especially since he is the most pro-abortion president ever. : )
It is only the First Edition of the Catechism that is the “sure norm” promulgated by John Paul II. The second includes significant changes to the teaching on the death penalty. They both can’t be right.
This is heresy!
There is no SUCH THING AS Gay and Catholic! ….its like saying you are pro-choice and Catholic!
Fortunately, AC, you are not correct. Catholic Church teaching on this is quite clear. Being gay is neither a choice nor a sin, and therefore is completely compatible with membership in the Church.
Fortunately you are incorrect YFC, when we all die, we will have to answer to God and we will all know the truth….Let God’s will be done!
Abeca .. There has been a lot of discussion about what sources are authortative here. Many say AOC isn’t. However we all seem to agree that the CCC is. Please share how you get around CCC 2357-59. A fair reading says being gay isn’t a sin but gay acts are.
C&H when you reply to Tracy’s comments from January 27, 2014 at 1:18 pm….I will then try to remember to reply to yours ….
Identifying oneself as a gay is a sin in today’s modern day terminology and what it stands for…..because the word gay indicates one is embracing those ideologies behind that agendaized word. Now if you are speaking of those who suffer with same sex attraction, homosexuals, but choose to live within God’s plan of being chaste….then yes they are not committing a sin. First they must confess their sins. But homosexuals can also sin with their eye’s and thoughts too especially more if they follow through and the fantasying etc, also with their advocating openness about “gay” lifestyles.
Many forget that actions speak louder than words too. One can say they are not practicing homosexuality but if they are on websites promoting “gay” rights and such, then they are committing others sins as described in the CCC, the bible etc. Today many here would love to excuse their sins as being normal. If you lose the understanding of what shame is, then you have won in desensitizing the sin itself and how would anyone ever fear the Lord and seek His love in a healthy way. To seek God’s love and forgiveness one must understand what sin is and what it does…but desensitizing sin takes away from what really matters the most, God’s saving love and graces.
YFC, you can make up your own rules but in the end you will have to answer to God’s.
Not my rules, Ron. This is the authentic teaching of the Church, if you care to listen to it.
YFC its hypocritical of you to say that to Ron….
YFC, ok so you posted your sound bite “this is the authentic teaching of the Church”. Now site your source!
“The facts of life are conservative” – Margaret Thatcher
YFC and Abeca and C & H, please show me where the Church says that being “merry and lighthearted” is not a choice nor a sin? I am not sure She even has anything to say about this at all!
Tracy, you obviously are not seriously interested in the answer here or you wouldn’t continue to play with language the way you do. You know full well that nobody uses “merry and lighthearted” except you. The Church doesn’t, gay people don’t, psychologists and sociologists don’t, the media doesn’t. But YOU do, and you do it to mock and belittle gay people. So when you begin to have an inkling of respect for gay people, then we can dialogue.
So who was it who chose to redefine the word ‘gay’ to mean ‘sodomites?’ Playing with language is all over this issue, YFC. You seem to think that calling someone a sodomite should only refer to one who originated in the actual town of Sodom. (You’ve played that name game.) But the word gay which has always meant merry and lighthearted now *must* mean sodomite…. according to who? Those who desire respectful and forthright conversation?
This is part of the issue I believe Tracy is making as those who wish to change the hearts/minds/consciences seek to do so by changing language. When they cannot, then they opt for the next tactic – implying disrespect or viciousness. Anything to deflect from the attempt at normalizing sodomy.
Thank you Ann! You get it and so DOES YFC! This is why he mocks any attempt to reclaim the language.
“He who controls the language controls the masses”. – Saul Alinsky in Rules for Radicals
AM: I did not redefine the word gay. It happened sometime before my adolescence and in a place far from me. And “sodomite” is not an appropriate term for any number of reasons, not the least of which it is an epithet against gay people, and that is leaving aside all the indications that the inhabitants of Sodom were not anywhere close to what we think of today as gay people.
It’s true, Tracy. Language does matter which is precisely why many vehemently work to change it. That is also why theological progressives who wanted to change Catholic doctrine/morality/etc pressed for mass in the vernacular. Much easier to shift the nuance of words with a mind to alter their meaning and subsequently what people believe.
But those in favor will tell you, no, no, the vernacular was adopted out of thoughtfulness for the people because it was so tiresome to have to learn Latin. Tiresome because it is easier to shift direction when folks don’t have a complete education.
That said, I would venture that YFC is fully versed in this subject. And many others are as well but will opt to just read the black and do the red as that is easier than making waves.
God bless!
YFC Now you are mistaken the word Sodomite is actually a real word and not an agenda like your “gay” word. You can’t take away the truth about those sins….not at all YFC….you know deep down the truth but you refuse to reflect because its a hard thing for you to let down that pride of yours. Some day you will remember our words and our prayers for you will not go in vein…I just pray its not too late then.
Of course you didn’t invent or redefine the word ‘gay’, YFC. Rather you accepted what was passed down to you as it fits your narrative of life. That said, the word Sodomite has a very definite meaning too, one that those embracing your lifestyle do not like as they do not choose to view what they have embraced as anything but positive. That does not change the validity of the term Sodomite.
I could opt to redefine language to purport that I am young and vital and fresh, yet being middle aged, that would not be true. I could also say that the term ‘middle aged’ is an epithet against fully blossomed women, but the reality is, it is not. It is merely reality. Same goes for a terrorist who wants to be cast as a freedom fighter. Same goes for a ‘healthcare worker’ who is in reality a baby killer.
So while we’re busy renaming things to ‘feel’ better in the name of cognitive behavioral therapy, the sin and the damage and the disconnect in our heads will continue. That is we will still reap the rewards of gouging out our own eyes and stopping up our own ears. You may be into that, but I’m not.
God bless
Ann, actually middle age has been redefined! Maybe you haven’t heard the soundbite “40 IS the new 30”! :)
Please, Lord, don’t tell me I have to relive my 30’s. I greatly esteem every silver stand of hair and fresh wrinkle. I’ve earned them and have no desire to be ‘young’ again. The reward at the end of the ride is too good to go back to the vomit-inducing middle.
God bless :)
Tracy I know you mean well but please don’t try this tactic….it is isn’t working.
Abeca, I know you mean well, but it DOES work! Maybe you haven’t heard of Saul Alinsky. Every prominent Democrat you are familiar with, as well as those you are not, has learned his/her technique from him! Are you not aware that the Left controls the lexicon in our country? So how has this been working out for us and our children?!!!!!
“He who controls the language controls the masses”. – Saul Alinsky in Rules for Radicals
If it works why then is it the majority. Any way…notice I said “it is isn’t working.” Because it works for some and some not.
Yes that is true too…but are you saying then that we are the minority? In order to work, you need to have more on board, but like you said the left are now controlling a lot of things, the media, hollywood etc…they are so we need to outsmart them. I also know that we must get them at their game and teach about how that word was hijacked and how they succeeded. Also educating folks that “gay” is an activism word, it also helps people understand that if one lives a “gay” lifestyle, that they are not choosing to be chaste or happy.
It helps not desensitize the fact what that word represents TODAY. We can not be ignorant and be in denial of what is facing us today. What you just did, it only states that you deny what that word is representing today and I feel that you are rebelling instead of educating. Well I respect you and I hope you do not think I am lecturing, but I am trying to explain what I know to be true… I do understand you because I tried that tactic before,,,,,,didn’t work to turn things around
Abeca, It is true that the liberals control the narrative (in the media, schools, government agencies, girl scouts, etc) The liberal narrative consist largely of soundbites and slogans.
Why do you think most products you buy have slogans on their front labels? Because the average person does not want to bother reading nor deciphering the ingredient list! When you bother deciphering a liberal slogan you will see that what they are selling is a lie! Jesus had it right. We are like sheep! I am asking all of us to be like the women who go against the tide and choose to wear their mantillas in church regardless of how disconnected it may be with the times. :)
“The FACTS of life are conservative” — Margaret Thatcher
“Whoever Controls the Language Controls the Debate” — Gary DeMar
And you know, Tracy, to opt for modern speak. Mantillas rock! Black lace, that allure of what lays beyond the veil, beautiful eye-accenting color options and the hats! Don’t get me started.
WHY should Southern Baptist ladies have all the fun in the hat department? Why should Muslim women have all the mystique of a gold accented head scarves and demure expressions?
Okay, so now I’m using vanity as a sell for modesty. Good grief. :)
Self called “YFC”,
Being “gay” is a SIN, being one who has homosexual temptations and rejects them can actually be a source of great graces!
May God have mercy on your compromised soul!
May God have mercy on an amoral Amerika!
Viva Cristo Rey!
God bless, yours in Their Hearts,
Kenneth M. Fisher, Founding Director
Concerned Roman Catholics of America, Inc.
And may God have mercy on yours, Mister Fisher.
Abeca … You and I share an abhorance of abortion. However, how can you believe that because someone is attracted to their own gender rather than the opposite one they can’t be a Catholic? The CCC is real clear on that. Pro-Choice is an opinion. Homosexuality (AKA same sex attraction) is a state of being.
The first statement of a Church council on homosexual practices was issued by the Council of Elvira (305-306). The decree excludes from communion, even in articulo mortis (at the moment of death), the stupratores puerorum (corrupters of boys). The decree of the Council of Ancyra, held in Asia Minor in 314, strongly influenced the Church of the West, and it was often cited as authoritative in later enactments against homosexual practices. Canon 17 speaks about those “who . . . commit [acts of] defilement with animals or males.” The Council of Ancyra established for these crimes a series of punishments according to the age and state of life the infractor.
Abeca—look! The CCC,ed2 was formulated by a clergy of which a very significant number were themselves gay. Follow the teachings of the Church Doctors—forget the CCC which teaches watered down doctrine and is full of sophistry, and intentional ambiguity. If following the Doctors of the Church leads indeed to perdition, we are lost.
tom, I agree with you. You will only find 5 of the 7 Spiritual Works of Mercy in the CCC ed. 2. (this is only one example)
You are right Tom…God bless you…you too Tracy
C&H writes, ” Homosexuality (AKA same sex attraction) is a *state of being*.” = Still catering to the desensitization of sin so “gay” will be seen as just another norm. Like the comparison or not, the deceptive salesmanship tactic is the same tactic that was used by Carol Everett only Carol Everett sold abortions. YFC and C&H are desensitizing others while selling homosexuality as a *state of being* instead of promoting *being in the state of grace.* C&H, I did remember your post where you helped a woman. You may be against abortion and yes it is very good that you talked this mother out of killing her unborn baby but you are STILL catering, (to the *culture of death* which includes the evil of abortion, the use of artificial contraception and homosexual acts ) instead of promoting and upholding the Catholic Church’s teachings that lead to eternal life. These are the *inclusive sins* of the culture of death, so if you don’t like the comparison then stop desensitizing others by catering to and selling the one that you do like.
CCD Topic ‘Bishop Silva of Honolulu: there is just discrimination”
Think of school dances
SEPTEMBER 30, 2013 203 COMMENTS
C&H says:
September 30, 2013 at 7:45 pm
Tracy … Gay and lesbian people who want to get married – I’m not one of them personally – are not enemies of the Church. any are Catholics themselves.
By the logic proposed here, Catherine, pedophiles could be described as those in the ‘state of being’ that find children sexually attractive. No, they do not ask for such perverse thoughts/desire. One would hope not anyway. But if it is just the way things are for homosexuals, why not pedophiles?
I find this exclusionary distinction that the homosexual agenda pushes disturbing and arrogant. As if *their* group is the only special case that experiences deeply rooted ‘feelings’ ‘inclinations’ ‘early manifestations’ ‘intrusive thoughts’ or thoughts of suicide because of ‘societal’ rejection etc. Such narrow minded bigotry.
That said, why don’t serial adulterers ‘come out’ at their parish and with the whole church community so as to better enlighten fellow parishioners that if Old Married Joe hits on your daughter, she’ll know not to take his lies to heart. IOW: He’ll never leave his wife and kids, but hey, he just says he will because he’s a the parish adulterer. How cute!
How ’bout the parish Pedo? Oh, never mind Joe. He’s just the Pedo from the 10:00am mass. Isn’t it cute the way he passes out candy and loves to be with the kids.
Catherine it is about time you stop hurling false accusations. If you understood what the Church teaches on homosexuality you would not say that acknowledging the reality of being gay is a desenisitization. Your obsession with pounding gay people into the ground is getting old.
Your twisting of what the Church teaches is old as the hills too, YFC. Just like your denial of doing as much. It doesn’t, however, stop you from preaching.
I call for pounding equality!
BRAVO ANN M
C&H I am speaking of the homosexuals who promote their agenda, mislead others away from seeking a chaste lifestyles and say they are Catholic…come on dear one…I think you know that I am speaking of the ones who are in the church just to try to change the church, they are not here to seek out sanctifying grace but they are here to change it and desensitize sin.
Even the devil knows Christ but that does not make him a Christian.
Even if speaking of Catholics in mortal sin, that statement is not correct according to the teaching of the Catholic Church as spelled out in the Catechism of Pope St. Pius V:
Hence there are but three classes of persons excluded from the Church’s pale: infidels, heretics and schismatics, and excommunicated persons. Infidels are outside the Church because they never belonged to, and never knew the Church, and were never made partakers of any of her Sacraments. Heretics and schismatics are excluded from the Church, because they have separated from her and belong to her only as deserters belong to the army from which they have deserted. It is not, however, to be denied that they are still subject to the jurisdiction of the Church, inasmuch as they may be called before her tribunals, punished and anathematised. Finally, excommunicated persons are not members of the Church, because they have been cut off by her sentence from the number of her children and belong not to her communion until they repent.
But with regard to the rest, however wicked and evil they may be, it is certain that they still belong to the Church: Of this the faithful are frequently to be reminded, in order to be convinced that, were even the lives of her ministers debased by crime, they are still within the Church, and therefore lose nothing of their power.
Anony anony…geesh
SACRED SCRIPTURE SAYS . . .
“Thou shalt not lie with mankind as with womankind, because it is an abomination. . . . Defile not yourselves with any of these things with which all the nations have been defiled, which I will cast out before you, and with which the land is defiled: the abominations of which I will visit, that it may vomit out its inhabitants. . . . Beware then, lest in like manner, it vomit you also out, if you do the like things, as it vomited out the nation that was before you. Every soul that shall commit any of these abominations, shall perish from the midst of his people. . . . I am the Lord your God.” —Leviticus 18:22-30
There have been only two “Catechisms of the Catholic Church” adopted by the Magisterium..
1) Catechism of the Council of Trent 1566AD;
2) “Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition” ” revised in accordance with the official Latin text promulgated by Pope John Paul II.” (first printing was in March 2000).
All other catechisms are local catechisms and may not be complete. (Some could even contain errors.)
Local catechisms are only intended for: young age, lack of maturity, and social/cultural conditions. In the USA for the vast majority of those over age 16, do not need a local Catechism due to literacy and understanding ability.
“….the CATECHISM has raised throughout the world, even among non-Christians, and confirms its purpose of being presented as a full, complete exposition of Catholic doctrine,
enabling everyone to know what the Church professes, celebrates, lives, and prays in her daily life.” – Pope John Paul II (CCC pg xiv)
From the official CCC:
” 1861 MORTAL SIN is a radical possibility of human freedom, as is love itself. It results in the loss of charity and the privation of sanctifying grace, that is, of the state of grace.
If it is not redeemed by repentance and God’s forgiveness, it causes exclusion from Christ’s kingdom and the eternal death of hell, for our freedom has the power to make choices for ever, with no turning back. However, although we can judge that an act is in itself a grave offense, we must entrust judgment of persons to the justice and mercy of God.”
” 1037 God predestines no one to go to hell; for this, a willful turning away from God (a mortal sin) is necessary, and persistence in it until the end.
In the Eucharistic liturgy and in the daily prayers of her faithful, the Church implores the mercy of God, who does not want “any to perish, but all to come to repentance”.
“1035 The teaching of the Church affirms the existence of hell and its eternity. Immediately after death the souls of those who die in a state of mortal sin descend into hell, where they suffer the punishments of hell, “eternal fire.” The chief punishment of hell is eternal separation from God, in whom alone man can possess the life and happiness for which he was created and for which he longs.”
Paula quit insulting our intelligence we all know that the CCC is not complete either! It is only a tool to help unbelievers understand a portion of the faith, but it does not teach reason!
I assume, “Whichever – anonymous”, that when you are speaking of those that are excommunicated, that you are aware also that excommunication may also occur without a formal decree — for example, aiding or materially participating in an abortion (as have many ‘Catholic’ politicians), or participating in an ordination of a woman, or even a priest actively participating in a service with a woman-priest,as happened a few years back in Phoenix, automatically incurs ipso facto excommunication latae sententia. There is no need for a bishop or a sacred congregation (on behalf of the Holy Father) to issue a formal pronouncement. Which makes it all the more scandalous when yet another bishop gives communion to a pro – abort pol like Gov. Jerry or Nancy P.
Since the Pope speaks about gay Catholics, you should probably rethink your position.
Dave,
Thank God, not everything the Pope says is “ex-cathedra”!
May God have mercy on an amoral Amerika!
Viva Cristo Rey!
God bless, yours in Their Hearts,
Kenneth M. Fisher, Founding Director
Concerned Roman Catholics of America, Inc.
So the Wise Moral Teachings of the Catholic Church cause ‘Happy’ People to hate themselves (Kind of Like the charges thrown straight in the faces of those accused of ‘Ism-Obia’ – by said ‘happy campers’ – who gaily trash ‘Rigidly Linear & Unbending Narrow Types’ as a slur, only apparently somewhat different.
Homo-Anal Coprophile Behaviors are the leading cause of the vectoring of ever newer treatment resistant strains of (Aids, Gonorrhea, Syphilis, MRSA…) from nexus like the former City of Saint Francis – now better known to the world as Sodom by the Sea.
And those who don’t or won’t pretend it is all harmless ‘Happy Fun’ – are ruthlessly targeted and retaliated against.
BTW – regarding the Not So ‘Hate Crime’ of spray painting swastikas and slurs against the Pope on the Church where my parents were married (Holy Redeemer) –
Given that the Perpetrators are Known in the ‘Happy Community’ – why do you think that so many members are helping keep them as Kloseted and the Facts about their Behaviors Censored – as they did for former judge Von-Wanker during the mockery of a trial on Prop-8?
Of course the same bought and paid for ‘free press’ also completely Censors the largest Anti-Male Hate Riot in the nation- the Tax Subsidized SF Dyke March.
Could it be that truly – in an Age of Abomination – Such Tolerance Macht Frei?
Michael, I learned this weekend that a friend of a friend is, at this moment, in a hospital in critical condition in a New York hospital. He’s been through brain surgery to lessen the pressure on his brain. His chance of a full life is very much in doubt as I write this. He was a gay journalist. He was not robbed. His wallet and phone were still on him when he was found, having been left for dead. We don’t know if his assault was motivated by anti-gay hate, but that is still under investigation.
When I read hateful comments like yours at moments like these, when you compare over and over and over again spray painting of a Church with violent Nazi oppression, it reminds me how much hateful words inspire others to violence.
Will you, at least, join me in prayer for the return to health of this man? Will you at least do this decent thing?
YFC, I just said a prayer for this man and will continue to keep him in prayer. As you know I am a strong advocate that those who are brain injured should have the best of care. It should be encouraging to you that they did surgery on him to relieve the pressure on his brain. Hopefully they are cooling him as well. With the proper care, he has a better chance of making a complete recovery. It is my suspicion that he was found not to be a candidate for organ donation, or the scenario might have turned out much differently. That being said, if his recovery is prolonged, there may be pressure to remove him prematurely from the ventilator. His loved ones need to be aware of this.
YFC I also will keep this man you mention in my prayers tonight. I’m so sorry about that sad news.
Thank you Abeca
Your welcome YFC, how is doing now? I actually stayed up late, since you have mentioned him here, thinking about your prayer request and praying. My heart breaks. It brought me back when I use to reach out to homosexuals….
I really pray for his salvation and that God shows His mercy on him and help him apply the gifts that God would have him embrace. God is good and merciful and more so when others mercifully pray for all sinners. We are all sinners YFC….I am grateful for God’s mercy….that is why the world is still moving, so hopefully more and more would have real conversions and receive sanctifying grace before they leave this earth….
May all sinners correct or at least try to correct what errors they have spread against God and of His ways. May we understand what the desensitization of sin has produced even within us. We are all victims of this desensitizing.
God bless your friends, friend. I pray for him…..my heart goes out to all who are feeling sad about this, may Jesus present himself to them, and be their doctor…for the Lord Jesus is the great physician of all souls!
Michael, I’m appealing to your better natures. Will you please join me in praying for this man? Perhaps all of CCD would do the same?
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/26/randy-gener-journalist-hate-crime_n_4669477.html
Prayers for this young man, YFC. Always that!
THank you Ann.
I pray for you, too, YFC. It is a grace to be able to pray for souls as they are the choicest of gifts one can offer to God. But you’re very welcome all the same.
God bless.
I have already prayed for his spiritual and physical health and safety, and that if he must die, it be in the good graces of the Lord.
Ann – if you would care to digress on the subject pushed by the Anonymous Troll I might find some interest, and possibly a motivation to actually pray…
But following an Anonymous Anti-Catholic Troll down the rabbit hole of an unknown link is IMNPHO a foolish act of trust – in someone too craven to even identify themselves before making such a request.
Michael – thank you for your concern. It is most appreciated. That said, YFC and I have corresponded on CCD for some while and yet despite our obvious differences, I cannot reject the call to prayer for this wounded soul.
God bless!
Ann – I appreciate your compassion and the goodness of your heart, even if it is based on ‘faith’ that the Anonymous Troll you correspond with is even a single person (with a fixed political agenda)- as opposed to a committee assigned this Troll Patrol as part of the shared ‘duty’ to trash the Church.
I have been around the internet for a long time (Not before Horatio Algore invented it – but I could see their campfires on the electronic frontier) – and I have also bothered to read the Alinsky Manifesto ‘Rules for Radicals’ – and have watched it applied for decades now to Derail / Obfuscate / Hijack the ‘debate’ – so that there is No Actual Debate = just ‘kum-baa-yah’ sloganeering.
The Anonymous Troll you are ‘corresponding’ with (unless you actually know their name and are keeping it confidential) is using Standard Alinskyite ‘Shaming Tactics’ – providing a stalking horse we must all share pity for, without providing the Background on just who is tugging the heartstrings.
I do Pray – for many of the lost, and those in danger of being lost – but never as part of what looks like an Alinskyite Scam to disrupt the real purpose of the forum – hopefully bringing sinners (and we all are) Closer to the Truth of Jesus.
Tell your pal(sl – whoever they may be – that Hiding their Identity only weakens their case.
Ann – I appreciate your compassion and the goodness of your heart, even if it is based on ‘faith’ that the Anonymous Troll you correspond with is even a single person – as opposed to a committee assigned this Troll Patrol as part of the shared ‘duty’ to trash the Church.
I have been around the internet for a long time – and after reading the Alinsky Manifesto ‘Rules for Radicals’ – and sen it it applied for decades now to Derail / Obfuscate / Hijack the ‘debate’ – so that there is No Actual Debate.
The Anonymous Troll you are ‘corresponding’ with (unless you actually know their name and are keeping it confidential) is using Standard Alinskyite ‘Shaming Tactics’ – providing a stalking horse we must all share pity for, without providing the Background on just who is tugging the heartstrings.
Tell your pal(s) – whoever they may be – that Hiding their Identity only weakens their case, and like so many Trolls over the years I refuse to play the game Blindfolded.
BTW – I do Pray – for many of the lost, and those in danger of being lost – hopefully in bringing sinners (and we all are) Closer to the Truth of Jesus.
I include Victims of the Gaystapo – like Toddler Boys Raped by Larry Brinkin and his Pederast Possee ..
– and those infected with Aids by Meth Dealer Matthew Shepard, 0r caught up in the nightmare of Crank Abuse Shepard and his Homosex Boyfriend / Fellow Meth Dealer / Eventual Killer – visited upon others.
God bless you, Michael. You are very accurate in your assessment of Alinsky tactics being employed on CCD. As to your suggestion regarding my ‘pals’, you might want to check out how many times I’ve been attacked for suggesting posters use an identifiable moniker. It’s kind of a joke now, especially when Anonymous get all hot under the collar and then claim victimization (Capital sin) or lecture about ‘rights’ and being misunderstood.
The disruption tactics are very similar to those I used to use when as the youngest of eight I’d somehow manage to elicit the…. oh, the poor wee thing…. and then magically get my way even when what I wanted was in direct contrast to house rules. And right in the midst of siblings that were expected to tow the line. It’s called manipulation and its a lot older than Mr. Alinsky’s book. (That’s why I loathe and detest seeing such outright malarky used in God’s house and in His Church.)
Foot stomping, curl shaking, turning blue, lip quivering, shifting the topic, crying, whimpering ‘you’ hate me, and it’s all ‘your’ fault were standard. Using whatever was necessary, whenever necessary was the motto. That and pulling in help from unsuspecting siblings, neighbors, whoever. Alinsky just put it in a book and gave adults the permission to use those tactics they’d supposedly grown out of. (It’s amazing how people will fall after anything once it’s in print.)
to Michael cont:
No doubt the Anonymous will crawl out of the woodwork again to attack because I have admitted to knowing and employing Alinsky tactics in my past. They will rush to point out that the SSPX is not in full communion – while not seeming to understand that their own ‘full communion’ implies that they agree with current leadership that the Holy Ghost works in other sects. And that they have pieces of the truth and can sanctify souls. But confront someone with the reality that the Society is protecting/promoting/teaching that fullness of truth that preceded the ‘Smoke of Satan’ and then you’re asking for it.
Truth is called slander. And expressing one’s opinion is labeled pretending to ‘know it all.’ How sadly familiar.
Ann, excellent points! I hadn’t realized, until now that you’ve pointed it out, that Saul Alinsky simply put childish manipulation tactics into a book for adults. Ouch!
Sadly, it seems that while radicals were given encouragement to use these childish tactics, we church going, law abiding citizens were at the same time being groomed to be tolerant and accepting of all behaviors and viewpoints.
The situation in the Church seems to mirror the culture, Tracy.
Ann, you are correct. But as they say, “there is nothing new under the sun”. We only need to look at what happened to the Israelites whenever they decided to mix with the pagans in their midst. That being said, even when it looked as if all of Israel had abandoned the Lord, there were always a remnant of faithful individuals to be found among her people.
Very true, Tracy, but I wouldn’t discount those faithful hiding out either. The same who came down from the hills to fight in Macabees. And no, there is nothing new under the sun. And yet every generation thinks theirs is the first to invent everything….. how predictable we are.
We will pray for his soul, and if he is to be called before God, that he honestly and completely repent of not only the sin of sodomy, but of any other sins he may have on his soul!
May God have mercy on an amoral Amerika!
Viva Cristo Rey!
God bless, yours in Their Hearts,
Kenneth M. Fisher
Thank you mister Fisher.
Saint John Chrysostom denounces homosexual acts as being contrary to nature. Commenting on the Epistle to the Romans (1:26-27), he says that the pleasures of sodomy are an unpardonable offense to nature and are doubly destructive, since they threaten the species by deviating the sexual organs away from their primary procreative end and they sow disharmony between men and women, who no longer are inclined by physical desire to live together in peace.
Abeca,
But what does this male, priest, theologian, Canonized Saint, Doctor of the Church know about the real world?
May God have mercy on an amoral Amerika!
Viva Cristo Rey!
God bless, yours in Their Hearts,
Kenneth M. Fisher
Again we are speaking of the acts against the Natural law. We do need to be charitable towards those who suffer with this disorder but we are not to condone it or make excuses for it. For the sake of their human dignity and salvation, we need to help them lead a chaste lifestyle but those who promote, defend etc homosexual lifestyles are committing a grave sin!
Saint Thomas Aquinas, writing about sins against nature, explains: “However, they are called passions of ignominy because they are not worthy of being named, according to that passage in Ephesians (5:12): ‘For the things that are done by them in secret, it is a shame even to speak of.’ For if the sins of the flesh are commonly censurable because they lead man to that which is bestial in him, much more so is the sin against nature, by which man debases himself lower than even his animal nature.”
Saint Bonaventure, speaking in a sermon at the church of Saint Mary of Portiuncula about the miracles that took place simultaneously with the birth of Our Lord Jesus Christ, narrates this: “Seventh prodigy: All sodomites—men and women—died all over the earth, as Saint Jerome said in his commentary on the psalm ‘The light was born for the just.’ This made it clear that He was born to reform nature and promote chastity.”
Saint Bernardine of Siena, a preacher of the fifteenth century, makes an accurate psychological analysis of the consequences of the homosexual vice. The illustrious Franciscan writes: “No sin has greater power over the soul than the one of cursed sodomy, which was always detested by all those who lived according to God. . . . Such passion for undue forms borders on madness. This vice disturbs the intellect, breaks an elevated and generous state of soul, drags great thoughts to petty ones, makes [men] pusillanimous and irascible, obstinate and hardened, servilely soft and incapable of anything. Furthermore, the will, being agitated by the insatiable drive for pleasure, no longer follows reason, but furor. . . . Someone who lived practicing the vice of sodomy will suffer more pains in Hell than anyone else, because this is the worst sin that there is.”
So this article has you believing that that gays are taught self hate….no it is not true! Since they can not reason, they think that but the truth is that they are warned about the sins of sodomy, the sins against the Natural law and yet they still choose to go against God. It is their lack of humility and meekness.
There is an injustice committed daily and that is the excuses people give towards any given sin…any sin! There is no more shame. The word gay is an agenda word! So this article also displays the heretical point of view of their usage of that word…you can’t have that word “gay” and “Catholic” in the mix because the church is not to be cheapen and used for such agendas! If you are to share light to the truth, that word will not be used to describe the human person who chooses to abide in God’s truths and live a chaste lifestyle but those who wish to change the church and desensitize sin will bring that word in the mix of acceptance as a valid word, especially more to tone down the seriousness of sins against the natural law.
Abeca, What do you mean “Since they cannot reason”. These are human beings and they are free to believe and do what they want. What they do is between them and God. Does it ever occur to you that all these Church teachings could be misunderstood or wrong. You say one thing and then seem to take the other side of the subject at hand. If you respond to this comment please make it short and to the point and no insults please.
Ryan your in bad will…so don’t worry I won’t waste my time replying….if you really want to know….continue your study in those references I have posted here, they will go more in detail and definitely will answer your question directly! That is if you are really looking for the truth and don’t worry about any insults because even when the truth is right in front of many, many will reject and feel insulted.
Abeca, sorry you can’t waste your time are unable to reply to my comment. I found the truth many years ago in Catholic schools and that is we are one to one to God and responsible to ourselves as to what we do. Your posts are are too long and, frankly, not on subject most of the time. Show some understanding toward others and stop this ‘my way or the highway attitude. Go on a retreat as that will help…
Ryan it was Saint Thomas Aquinas who taught that certain sins didn’t allow a person to reason well. It would take a very contrite heart to convert them, especially I believe it was this saint and many others, doctors of the church, who especially said that homosexuals acts/sins truly spiritually blinds a soul.
I’m sorry that I offended you. It was not my intention…but when you first started off with your comments to me you and said this “You say one thing and then seem to take the other side of the subject at hand. If you respond to this comment please make it short and to the point and no insults please.” We have a lot of trolls here on this website, its hard to keep up and know who is really sincere.
That comment you made to me, came across to me in bad will because I felt that you really weren’t looking for answers but were trying to distract me. If you are really interested in the truth, then dialogue without the insults and presumptions that someone will reply in insults.
Abeca,
Thanks for the great references for my apologetics files!
May God have mercy on an amoral Amerika!
Viva Cristo Rey!
God bless, yours in Their Hearts,
Kenneth M. Fisher
Your welcome Kenneth
Sin is one thing, but sacrilege is another. A person can be weak and fall into sins of impurity, which are mortal, but somebody who encourages people to sin, telling them something which is a sin is not, is going against the Will and Commandments of God and is probably guilty of a greater sin.
Hate the sin; love the sinner!!
“Always Our Children” has absolutely no magisterial authority. And a disorder is never a ‘gift from God’.
And BTW, on this topic of material participation or being complicit in an abortion, it is not simply ‘up to the individual’ to announce his repentance, as the dying Sen. Ted Kennedy tried to do in a semi – apologetic non – apology to Pope Benedict a few years back, but in the act of confession, a priest must formally apply IN WRITING on behalf of the penitent, who assumes a pseudonym, known only to the confessor, to the Sacred Penitentiary in Rome (its offices are just to the left of the Piazza S. Pietro). So why the detail on this issue? It is likely someone reading this who has so participated may want to get the truth and get right with God.
For those who may have procured an abortion, etc., – sources you can read –
CCC: “2272 Formal cooperation in an abortion constitutes a grave offense. The Church attaches the canonical penalty of excommunication to this crime against human life. “A person who procures a completed abortion incurs excommunication latae sententiae,” “by the very commission of the offense,” and subject to the conditions provided by Canon Law.
The Church does not thereby intend to restrict the scope of mercy.
Rather, she makes clear the gravity of the crime committed, the irreparable harm done to the innocent who is put to death, as well as to the parents and the whole of society.”
And code of Canon Law – (Code of Canon Law, can. 1398), “by the very commission of the offense” (Code of Canon Law, can. 1314) and subject to the conditions provided by Canon Law (cf. Code of Canon Law, can. 1323-1324).
https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20090711_aborto-procurato_en.html
Code of Canon Law – https://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/_INDEX.HTM
(Source of the above: conversation with the late accomplished canonist, Fr. Richard Hill, SJ, of USF, a servant of the Church to the end.)
Remember everyone that there is a huge significance between TEMPTATION
VERSUS
giving in to Temptation – actually COMMITTING SIN.
Same sex attraction is a temptation, and does not become a sin unless acted upon in some way.
We all have various types of temptations.
We are all called to do God’s will, not our own will.
Jesus was also tempted by the devil – Mt 18:5-7; Mt 4:1-11.
The institutional Church has been dealing with the same sex issue for a long time; first with priestly gays and then with the sex abuse scandal with young people. The same sex issue does challenge all of us to love and respect each other even if we may disagree with their orientation. Remember the Church has provided forgiveness and repentance for priests involved in the sex abuse cases, only to have most of those priestly penitents commit more sex crimes against children, mostly boys. The Church can certainly tell the story that confession has its limitations and orientation can be a fixed issue in someone’s life, not something that is amenable to repeated confession. Acceptance of one’s orientation is an important part of their self image and worth, and hate is sintful. Let’s encourage them to reach out to each other, even if the Church holds that sacramental marriage is best for opposite sex couples.
good cause writes, “…even if the Church holds that sacramental marriage is best for opposite sex couples.” The Catholic Church doesn’t teach that sacramental marriage is ‘best’ for opposite sex couple. She teaches the reality that sacramental marriage can only be entered into by a heterosexual ‘couple.’
Same sex unions which attempt to ape true marriage can never be so approved – even if one advocates them to be the lesser of two evils.
good cause you said, “Acceptance of one’s orientation is an important part of their self image and worth, and hate is sinful”. Can you give me the rational and basis for making such a statement?
Are we not all “orientated” towards sin? Aren’t we told that we human beings have a sinful nature? Do you believe that our sinful nature is that which gives us worth? Are you saying that if we “hate” sin” we are committing a sin? Are you suggesting that we “accept” our sinful nature? If so, what does that mean to you? Would it mean that we should not fight against our sinful orientation?
Praise God Tracy reasons well and is helping good cause use his smarts on how to.
Praise God for Ann too and others who reason well….it helps me keep sane!
Abeca, thank you for your kind words. You call it reasoning well, I call it using critical thinking skills. This is a skill can be taught and improves with practice. In today’s culture we are rather taught to repeat sound bites like drones. It starts in kindergarten: “Just say no to drugs”, “A bully won’t stop until he is stopped.”, “No one will miss a bully”.”With books you can go places.”, “it’s cute to distribute.”, etc. (those are just a few found on thinkslogans.com
Tracy do you really think that everything is a thinkslogan? Not all thinkslogans are bad. When I was in sixth grade, it was that saying not to drugs slogan that helped me stay away from them, and believe you me, drugs are everywhere, even in good areas. I guess those examples you gave me, are just points that I don’t want to get into….some are good and for that I applaud but there are many that go against my faith and those are the ones I detest. : )
Abeca, if you do not think that the modern masses are not living their lives by “thinkslogan”s, I do not know how to convince you otherwise. Do I think that all slogans are bad in and of themselves? Of course not! The issue is this: what are the implications of thinkslogan? Thinkslogans are meant to create emotional reactions, not rational thought nor the desire to learn more. And they work! Why? Because an emotional reaction is like a reflexive reaction, whereas rational thought takes time and work. Defining the thinkslogan is not what is important, only the emotional reaction a particular thinkslogan emits.
“Republicans are racists”
“Republicans hate women”
“conservatives are religious fanatics”
“Democrats are for the poor”
“if it feels good do it”
“A woman’s right to choose is a moral imperative”
“people are not illegal”
“have it your way”
“safety net”
“homophobic”
Why do you think YFC reacts so predictably when I start defining words? He knows that it wakes up those who have largely been living their lives by reflex. (or rather by how they are told to react to any given event by the talking heads on the evening news)
It’s not so much the think slogans themselves that Tracy is against, Abeca, but rather the idea that our culture has been so systematically led away from critical thinking – the full banana – that it must employ thinkslogans to win the day.
While good at times, this method become dangerous when those creating the thinkslogans are more intent on implanting their own idea/agenda in kids instead of teaching them the critical thinking skills necessary to make good choices/decisions on their own.
But thinkslogans much like commercial jingles can get stuck in the brain – motivating us on deeper levels that we don’t even think about that much. That’s one reason why ejaculatory prayers like “Jesus, I trust in You,” are so helpful. They become part of us. This is what helps us in times of trial as we fall into the good habit of praying the prayer, relying on the prayer, relying on God and maintaining Faith.
Thank you Ann….the way you explained it is exactly how I feel and Tracy just uses another unique way of looking at it from another angle, God bless you both!
Even when a society lacks those traits, they still have sufficient graces to understand some things and they make due with what they have been accustomed to. Sufficient graces to understand that drugs are bad, so as a secular they try to help out with that in their schools. Its a beginning point. Many just never mature or articulate what it is to use their logic or reason to a deeper level.
Because the American language has been cheapened so much and virtues are not sought after, what can we expect….when we lack the fear of God within us?
That is why the Bible is no longer allowed in our classrooms, TV no longer censors bad language etc….
We need to plant seeds….spread the word on chastity, share with others our love for Jesus, carry our sacramentals, share scripture with others etc etc…we need to combat the lack of thinking with the truth…its a challenge and always a huge job too because it just seems like its a never ending thing. How do we get someone to reason better, introduce them to Jesus and His love, especially introduce them to His mum. But most important with charity through prayer….Jesus did command us to pray.
God gave us ten “thinkslogans” socialist want the masses to ignore and impugn. They are called the Ten Commandments. If the “masses” followed these ‘thinkslogans”, our do-gooder policy makers would not have much work to do and they certainly would not the hold the power they currently do over our lives! By the way, this is how our Founding Fathers of our country designed it to be! By abandoning the Ten Commandments, we have chosen slavery!
Tracy do I sound like I do not get it? Yes I agree also with your ten commandments example. Pretty good, ill be sure to use that one too. : )
Abeca, I do realize that you get it. Please accept my apology for not mentioning it. In fact I liked what you posted. It was after reading your post, that I was inspired to add the 10 Commandments to the “thinkslogan” list. I’m glad you liked it :)
This is what I like about posting on this forum so much. It sparks ideas and helps all of us who are seeking the truth to become better at the art of persuasion. —- All for the glory of God!
In recent years, I have become a great supporter of the Courage/EnCourage program, founded by the late, great Fr. John Harvey. In one of their most recent newsletters, their current director Fr. Paul Check stated that they have recently made some major advances in their media outreach. In fact, one of their recent projects is a DVD that they produced which contains a wonderful video illustrating the Catholic Church’s teachings on ministry to those with same-sex attractions. It is Fr. Check’s goal to send this DVD to each and every parish in the US. In order to do so, additional funds have to be raised. I encourage each of you to make a generous donation to Courage for this great venture, and to consider your regular financial support to them as well. Their website is couragerc dot net. Fr. Check writes: “Our documentary, DESIRE OF THE EVERLASTING HILLS, is complete. I am very pleased with the result and very proud of Rilene, Dan, and Paul for their courage and humility in agreeing to go on camera to share their stories, which will convey understanding, insight and hope to many. Please remember them in your prayers. I believe that our members are our best ambassadors, and the ones most likely to form relationships—even through media—that will become avenues of grace, mercy and peace in the hearts of others. We must now raise money to promote and distribute the film, free of charge.
Of course we must love all but not the sin. As there is a very strong effort to promote homosexuality through grooming young boys into the homosexual life style is fact that is very well covered up or not even talked about. I know from personal experience that my 2 boys were groomed into to it and that there is a homosexual effort to bring boys to homosexuality. While people like Fr. Curran call it a gift. We must be tolerant and very passive because society has caused them to hate themselves ect…..lets be real they are destroying our youth right under our noses. Love yes, license no ! Holy tolerance not secular tolerance.Always with kindness but with Our Blessed Lords conditions ….as He said to the adulteress….. but sin no more . God does love us but there are conditions just as there is mercy.
The Politics of Adversarial Terminology – ‘Happily’ At Work In The World
I post this link to an essay by Dr. Anthony Daniels (writing as Theodore Dalrymple) = author of one of the finest compilations of essays on the modern human condition I have ever read: “Anything Goes”.
His analysis should be useful to those trying to wade through the radical gender feminist / homosex troll propagandists here and elsewhere – whose attempts at obfuscation have but one common goal, trashing the Catholic Church & the Wise Moral Teachings of the Magisterium.
Dalrymple is not a Catholic, but his insights and the reasoning behind them are quite relevant to the current media paradigm worldwide, and the attempts to manipulate the discussion here with gaily sanitized euphemisms that carefully avoid Un-Good Facts:
Sense and Sentimentality > By Theodore Dalrymple
https://www.newenglishreview.org/custpage.cfm/frm/142285/sec_id/142285
“…Generosity at the expense of others, whether it be financial or moral, is not generosity, it is moral exhibitionism. Where sentimentality pervades, we cannot make the proper distinctions…”
The Pope got this one right too – and it is good advice for dealing with the Anonymous Trolls on this board – even if they pretend a first name relationship – that can never exist with an Anonymous Troll:
Pope Francis declares Internet ‘a gift from God’ – but to beware of trolls
https://www.catholic.org/hf/faith/story.php?id=54009
SO I take it Michael, that you won’t pray for the man who struggles for his life in New York? You are quoting Francis obscure comments about the internet to hide behind your own unwillingness to show compassion for a man who might well be dying?
Kenneth M. Fisher, according to Father John Harvey, founder of Courage, the original document was revised in 1998. The Sacred Congregation of the Faith was consulted and satisfied with the revision. Fr. Harvey was given permission by them to publish his reservations about it. The revised version still carries the 1997 copy write.
“Whichever-Anonymous..”, I have heard this claim that “the Sacred Cong. Faith was satisfied with the revision” of AOC, but I have never found any written documentation, certainly not an “imprimatur” (“Let it be printed”): the fact remains that this document is not “in force” even for the US Bishops’ Conference because it never was passed by a plenary session of the bishops, a requirement for it to have any “teaching authority”—-even apart from its misleading claims about orientation “being good and from God”. Perhaps, “Whichever-Anonymous” you can provide evidence of the documentation for this “approval” by SCF.
In his own 1998 letter to the SCF, Fr. Harvey related that he had been told by Bishop Thomas O’Brien of Phoenix that “the Sacred Congregation for the Faith was satisfied with the revisions”—but no one ever saw any document evidencing this claim of Bp. O’Brien’s
Come, Holy Spirit,
send forth the heavenly
radiance of your light.
Come, father of the poor,
come, giver of gifts,
come, light of the heart.
Greatest comforter,
sweet guest of the soul,
sweet consolation.
In labor, rest,
in heat, temperance,
in tears, solace.
O most blessed light,
fill the inmost heart
of your faithful.
Without your grace,
there is nothing in us,
nothing that is not harmful.
Cleanse that which is unclean,
water that which is dry,
heal that which is wounded.
Bend that which is inflexible,
fire that which is chilled,
correct what goes astray.
Give to your faithful,
those who trust in you,
the sevenfold gifts.
Grant the reward of virtue,
grant the deliverance of salvation,
grant eternal joy.
Amen.Alleluia.
By the way, “Whichever-Anonymous”, it is wrong to imply that Fr. Harvey actually “saw” an approval by the Sacred Cong. Faith of “Always Our Children”. In his own 1998 letter to the SCF, Fr. Harvey related that he had been told by Bishop Thomas O’Brien of Phoenix that “the Sacred Congregation for the Faith was satisfied with the revisions”—but no one ever saw any document evidencing this claim of Bp. O’Brien’s. With regard to this claim, and based on some experience with former, now quite-disgraced, Bp Thomas O’Brien, I would be very doubtful as to the veracity of this claim.
In Father Harvey’s letter about his concerns with Always Our Children, he states that he wrote to Rome and received permission to publish his reservations. He does not say that anyone denied having been “satisfied” with the document. I am sure that if he had discovered that the claim was distorted, he would have mentioned it. That is all we have to go on.
QED. There is no “Vatican” approval of Always Our Children.
I hope you aren’t suggesting that a Bishop’s teaching is only valid after the CDF signs off on it, because to suggest this is to be wrong. The Bishop does not derive his teaching authority from the CDF, but from the very office he holds.
Of course they derive their ‘teaching’ authority from their office, YFC, which is precisely why said authority is so often grievously misused and changes from diocese to diocese. Such unity of sacred purpose is staggering.
YFC, the Office gives a Bishop not only the authority but the RESPONSIBILITY to teach the Doctrine of the Faith.
All Catholics (not excluding Bishops) must adhere to the CCC in entirety. If they do not, something is rotten.
You know, YFC, the same logic you use regarding Bishops can be used for parents. Parents receive their authority to rear their children from the office they hold, that given them by God.
So why is it that you are seemingly legislating for teaching parents how to do their job the way your special interest group wants instead of how God wants?
Pederast Toddler Boy Rapist Larry Brinkin is set for Sentencing on March 5, and it looks like the ‘fix’ is being put in by the political heavyweights who are his enablers.
I submit that somebody ought to make sure the Judge quotes the Law (9th Circuit) and California Bar – saying that these Are Acts of Moral Turpitude – even if his victims were only toddler age Boys.
Kiddie Porn Does Not Count as ‘Moral Turpitude’ to S.F. Govt.
by ZOMBIE
https://pjmedia.com/tatler/2014/01/23/kiddie-porn-does-not-count-as-moral-turpitude-to-s-f-govt/
True Words – True Faith – Bless You Bishop Paprocki:
US bishop: We fight same-sex ‘marriage’ out of love for homosexuals (VIDEO)
BY PETER BAKLINSKI WASHINGTON, DC, January 27, 2014 (LifeSiteNews.com) –
The US Catholic bishop from Illinois who held a public exorcism on the same day the state governor signed into effect a controversial same-sex ‘marriage’ bill has defended his actions as the “loving” thing to do.
“You really have to understand what love is all about. Love is really to seek the best for people. By being opposed to the redefinition of marriage, and being opposed to things that are sinful, that’s actually a very loving thing,”
Bishop Thomas Paprocki of the Springfield Diocese told LifeSiteNews.com in a video interview during the March for Life in Washington, DC.
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/us-bishop-we-fight-same-sex-marriage-out-of-love-for-homosexuals-video
Again, with regard to the “Vatican approval” of Always Our Children, has anyone a copy or a link to an official copy of the so-called document “approving” AOC? In his own 1998 letter to the SCF, Fr. Harvey related that he “had been told by Bishop Thomas O’Brien” of Phoenix that “the Sacred Congregation for the Faith was satisfied with the revisions”—but no one ever saw any document evidencing this claim of Bp. O’Brien’s. Those who want to pronounce this non-USCCB approved “letter” as “official teaching”—please provide the evidence? I have never found it, neither when I requested it in Phoenix either and Bp. O’Brien was grand poo-bah.