From the infamous Relatio of last October's Synod:
‘Welcoming homosexual persons’ -- “Homosexuals have gifts and qualities to offer to the Christian community.” ... “Are our communities capable of providing [them a welcoming home], accepting and valuing their sexual orientation, without compromising Catholic doctrine on the family and matrimony?”
From Cardinal Baldisseri, the Cardinal in charge of the Synod:
“The documents were all seen and approved by the Pope, with the approval of his presence,” “Even the documents during the [Extraordinary] Synod, such as the Relatio ante disceptatationem [the preliminary report], the Relatio post disceptationem [interim report], and the Relatio synodi [final report] were seen by him before they were published.”
The Statement on Marriage by the Confraternity of Catholic Clergy (British Province) issued on January 19, 2015:
Marriage was instituted by God, not invented by man (cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, n.1603). The Creator has built it into human nature, even into the human body, in its two complementary forms, male and female. ‘Male and female He created them’ (Gen.1: 27): man for woman, and woman for man, united in marriage as ‘one flesh’ for the procreation of new life: ‘Be fruitful and multiply’ (Gen. 1: 28).God has given marriage its essential characteristics and proper laws: unity (one man married to one woman); indissolubility (nothing but death can end a marriage); and openness to procreation (in every act of physical love). No president or religious leader, no senate or synod, nor any government, has the authority to re-define marriage.Our Lord Jesus Christ, the Incarnate Son of God, raised marriage to the dignity of a Sacrament. The marriage of a Christian man and woman is a sacramental sign of His union with His Church (cf. Eph. 5: 32). Since the union of Christ with the Church, His Bride, cannot be dissolved, no power on earth, not even the Pope himself, can dissolve the valid sacramental marriage, once consummated, of a Christian man and woman. ‘Those whom God has joined together let no man put asunder’ (Mt. 19: 6).The Church’s discipline is built upon the doctrine of the faith, and gives practical expression to it. To introduce a discipline at odds with a doctrine thus implicitly undermines the doctrine. The discipline of not admitting to the Sacraments divorcees who have entered a subsequent civil ‘marriage’ follows directly from the doctrine of Marriage and the Eucharist as the Church has received it from Christ and His Apostles. Unless an annulment has recognized the invalidity of the original marriage, then the state of life of divorced and ‘remarried’ Catholics ‘objectively contradicts the union of love between Christ and the Church signified and effected by the Eucharist’ (Pope St John Paul II, Familiaris consortio, n. 180). However sorrowful for their sins they may be, the divorced and ‘remarried’ remain ‘one flesh’ (cf. Gen. 2: 24; Mt. 19:5) with their original and only spouses. Therefore, their second ‘marriages’ cannot participate in the one flesh union of Christ and His Church that is signified and effected by the Eucharist.In the absence of a clear appreciation of marriage and the true meaning of human sexuality, a number of associated moral challenges have arisen. Amongst these is the growth of widespread homosexual activity and the promotion of such behaviour. The Church teaches, as she has always taught, that homosexual activity is gravely sinful, as it distorts one of the most sacred and fundamental dimensions of human life. Even the inclination to homosexual activity is ‘objectively disordered’ (CDF, 1986) in the sense that such a sexual inclination, with its associated tendencies, feelings and expressions, is not properly directed to spousal union, marriage, and procreation. The Church, of course, welcomes all human beings created in God’s image, who by His grace have the power to renounce their sins, live a chaste life and become saints. But the Church cannot bless, or tolerate, sin in any form, nor structures and lifestyles that encourage or promote sin, disorder, and temptation.The Church in so many ways reaches out to those broken and hurt by the breakdown of marriage in our society and by the widespread confusion of what it means to be male and female. No-one is turned away. The first mercy and true compassion is offering to sinners the truth of Christ as the light by which to live. The greatest help for those who struggle is to point out with charity the way of Christ, the only way conducive to virtue and true joy.The Church has nothing, can do nothing, is nothing, without Christ, her Head and Bridegroom. She is the servant of the Word of God (cf. Dei verbum, n. 10). Her pastors therefore have no power whatever to change what He taught about the nature and goods of marriage and have the duty to promote and defend that truth for the good of every person and society.
Well, I guess we know where the line is in the sand.
While the pagan secularists and protestants with whatever little faith in Christ that they have left are out celebrating a couple of rodents be they in Punxsutawney, Pennsylvania or Wiarton, Ontario, we Catholics are blest to know that the groundhog is but a beautiful creature of God, it is not a god that can predict anything -- even in jest. It is a mockery of the One True God and His First Commandment - to even joke that an animal can predict the weather other than by its Creator growing it a longer coat. Today is Candlemas, the official end of the Christmas Season according to ancient tradition. The Christmas cycle ends with the last singing of the Alma Redemptoris Mater tonight and on a personal note, the Christmas tree will be lit one last time tonight and out tomorrow. This feast - solemnity recalls the day when our Blessed Mother - Mary being a Jewess and forty days after giving birth to her first-born Son, the Messiah; presented herself in the Temple as Orthodox Jewish women still do today for a mikvah, or Purification. The proof that "Groundhog Day" is Candlemas is in history. Look at this little English rhyme:
If Candlemas be fair and bright,
Come, Winter, have another flight;
If Candlemas brings clouds and rain,
Go Winter, and come not again.
In Germany, it went thus:
For as the sun shines on Candlemas Day,
So far will the snow swirl until May.
These were quaint little cultural occurrences in Europe. When the protestants came to America, mainly the Germans into Pennsylvania, they could not have anything to do with their heritage, the One, True Catholic faith. So they substituted a rodent. Canadians of course, followed suit with the worship of Willie rather than the Light to the Gentiles. For the rest of us Catholics in the Toronto area, there is this:
Now Thou dost dismiss Thy servant, O Lord,
according to Thy word in peace;
Because my eyes have seen Thy salvation,
Which Thou hast prepared before the face of all peoples:
Barona at Toronto Catholic Witness once again scours the Polish press for this gem. Thanks be to God for another Polish Bishop unafraid to speak the truth to power and corruption! Read all of it here.
Archbishop Henryk Hoser. Photo: Courtesy Artur Stelmasiak
Today's Niedziela, from Poland, carries an interview with Archbishop Henryk Hoser of Warsaw-Praga, about the recent acts of treachery against Our Lord, His Church and our recently sainted Pope, St. Pope John Paul II. These acts of treachery were committed by an assortment of innovators at last October's Synod of the Family.These innovators have not been idle, and neither have the defenders of the truth about the sanctity of holy matrimony. I predicted to a friend recently that the upcoming Synod will be an ugly confrontation, that (for example) the Polish Episcopate will never surrender to the innovators. We now have conclusive evidence that this is true. When an archbishop has to publicly proclaim that a canonized saint Pope has been betrayed, then we can see the depth of the rebellion, and the "filth" (c.f. Pope Benedict XVI) that has infiltrated the Mystical Body of Christ.
Key highlights from Archbishop Hoser, which I have translated, include:
A day in the life of the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate courtesy of Rorate Caeli Blog. The history is not yet written, it is still in progress. The men who did this to the FFI are not smart; no, not very, not a one; but they are crafty. They have never been parents and do not understand that when you tell a child they can't do something they want to know why. If you prevent them from doing something without explanation or justice, they will do it anyway, in spite of you! Truth cannot be suppressed.
Break them up and some or most will become priests anyway. They will shut-up and get ordained. Go ahead and persecute. Persecution is the seed.
Our Holy Father Pope Francis has called on priests to stay close to the marginalised, to go out to the "peripheries" and to be “shepherds living with the smell of the sheep.” At Our Lady of Grace Church in Aurora, on the periphery of Toronto, I'm afraid that it is more of stench; it's been going on for over 25 years as you will come to read shortly.
The Pastor, Father Joseph Gorman, has been removed for the time-being for "ecclesiastical irregularities." Last Sunday, Auxiliary Bishop Wayne Kirkpatrick attended the parish to explain the situation to the people. The next day Neil MacCarthy, Director of Communications for the Archdiocese of Toronto explained that there were two serious irregularities. Father Gorman presided over a wedding in the parish where one person had not received a "Decree of Nullity" and he allegedly wed two other Catholics -- a couple, according to the Toronto Star, in an Anglican chapel. It is also alleged that Father Gorman then altered the records to indicate that another minister had officiated. He is also alleged to have not followed accounting procedures for special collections and according to a report, gave parish funds directly to people "in need" in the parish. According to our sources Father Gorman was asked to take a leave of absence and to advise the parish and refused forcing the bishop to order the leave and make the announcement. Father Gorman is still listed as Pastor.
Please note that any comments about Father Gorman other than an expression of prayer for him, will not be published.
Now, let's get to the meat of the matter. One cannot marry in the Catholic Church if one is married previously. An investigation must be held by the Marriage Tribunal and a Decree of Nullity issued that the first marriage did not take place for whatever grounds or defects are determined within Canon Law. Father Gorman knows this. Not all annulment requests are granted. There are safeguards in place so that this does not happen. If this is true and Father Gorman did this it is extremely serious. It involves a desecration of the Sacrament of Matrimony, and the "second" marriage was invalid and the people are in a state of mortal sin (adultery) sanctioned by the parish priest. Secondly, marrying a Catholic "couple" at an Anglican church is a serious matter. What could be the reason for this? Were they not permitted to marry in a Catholic Church? Were they previously married? Were they a couple of the "same-sex?" Why would a Catholic priest preside over the marriage of a Catholic couple in an Anglican church and then falsify the documents? This is a very, very serious matter, it violates provincial government law as well as Church Law. Further, there were some alleged financial irregularities on special collections which are ordered by the Bishop for specific purposes. However this, if true, pales in comparison to the issues of the marriage ceremonies.
After Bishop Kirkpatrick read a statement, presumably at the homily, His Excellency was interrupted by various people who stood up in the church and shouted out at the Bishop demanding their pastor back. Interviewed by the well-known anti-Catholic Toronto Star (bet they couldn't wait for this one, eh?), Randall Gerrits, said that the people shouted that the "Catholic Church should be more open to change ... there was a standing ovation and then people started walking out ... nothings been explained; everyone is still in the dark"
In the dark? That's an understatement. You should be ashamed of yourselves. You are a disgrace.
Your shouting out at the Bishop in the church during Mass and then giving a standing ovation to the muckrakers and walking out - objectively speaking was a mortal sin - it was a sacrilege. You also missed Mass on Sunday. You did everything but, the keeping of "the Lord's Day holy!" It requires you to go to the Sacrament of Confession before receiving Holy Communion again, lest you commit another sin of sacrilege for receiving "unworthily and bringing condemnation upon yourself." Hey, don't blame me, take it up with Saint Paul (Corinthians 11:27).
How could you possibly think that doing this was the right thing to do at Mass?
Gerrits continues, "I'm not Catholic. My husband's not Catholic but we go to Our Lady of Grace because of Father Joe."
A question for Mrs Gerrits, has Father Joe asked your family to take instruction in the RCIA -- the Rite of Christian Initiation of Adults -- you know, to become, Catholic? Has anyone ever told you that you don't to to Mass for any priest but for God and to save your soul?
She continues, "During mass, he's funny. People laugh. He's great with kids and makes them part of mass, so they have fun and want to go." Oh how sweet. How warm and fuzzy. (JB this was from the Fox)
Mrs. Gerrits - The priest is not be "funny" at Mass, he should be sober. The Mass is not about the priest, it is about Jesus Christ. Mass is not about having fun and your children should go because you take them and teach them, not because it is fun.
We go to Mass for four reasons which you can remember with the acronym, ACTS, just like the book of the Bible:
A = Adoration of God - FATHER, SON and HOLY SPIRIT.
C = Contrition for our sins.
T = Thanksgiving for all the gifts that God has given to us.
S = Supplication - asking God for our needs and the needs of others.
Nowhere there does it say to have fun or to go because the priest is funny.
In all the time that you have attended at Our Lady of Grace were you ever told that the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is the Sacrifice of Jesus on Calvary brought forward in time and re-presented on the Altar of Sacrifice in our churches? That it is a propitiatory (appeasing) offering to God the FATHER by God the SON through God the HOLY SPIRIT of the once and final blood sacrifice of Christ re-presented in an unbloody manner for the expiation of our sins and those of the whole world? Were you told that the Eucharist is the body, blood, soul and divinity of Jesus, "tis God, the very God" made present under the species of bread and wine? I have a question for Gerrit, did she and her family, non-Catholics, receive Holy Communion?
Gerrit adds that she is "quite certain that if Father Joe doesn't come back, that church will lose lots of people." Perhaps she should read John 6:67.
A petition is being taken up for the return of Father to the parish. The comments there are pathetic. They are of the same type as Gerrit's and worse. What is clear is that a cult of personality seems to have existed at this parish. A cult of personality that has caused these people to lose all rationality and moral judgement of right and wrong. A cult of personality that endangers their faith and their souls. The comments in the newspapers and the petition which you can read by clicking on the links below is a judgement and a condemnation of the current state of catechesis in the Archdiocese of Toronto. The actions of Father Gorman, the standards of the liturgy, his dog in the sanctuary as commonly known are all examples of a failure of formation and education -- this is also a condemnation on his superiors and his professors and the people of Our Lady of Grace parish are paying for it. Something else about Our Lady of Grace Church in Aurora that will make you sick to your stomach. The cult of personality that seems to have developed with some parishioners for Father Gorman is quite strange considering previous episodes in this parish. Perhaps they're too young to know,perhaps they are new to the community. Perhaps the older ones that do know the history have forgotten or have have chosen to forget. Last Sunday was not the first time that all hell broke loose in this parish and people stormed out. It happened one Sunday in 1990 when they did it to Cardinal Ambrozic himself when he announced that the pastor, Paul McCarthy was removed from the parish. A sordid and sinful abomination of innocents - there, in the rectory and at summer camps. Not only him but another. Barry Glendinning was stationed there as an Associate. Who was Barry Glendinning? Look him up and the trail of defilement, sodomy and destruction he sowed in dioceses across Canada from Edmonton to London, to Ottawa and Toronto. The Diocese of London is still literally "paying" for the crimes of this man shuffled off from parish to parish and diocese to diocese by Emmett Cardinal Carter. Glendinning plead guilty in 1974 to six counts of gross indecency involving children in Windsor, Ontario and was given a suspended sentence and three years probation. Yet, he was later sent to the people of Aurora by Carter! A liturgist he was that Glendinning, just like his fellow sodomite and child pornography aficionado Raymond Lahey (former Bishop of Antigonish arrested and convicted for possession of child pornography and now defrocked under the orders of Pope Benedict XVI). It's funny eh, how these types always end up in liturgy. They seem to have a hatred for the Mass and what it truly means and all things Holy these sodomites; and a sordid saga of deception, seems to be a regular pattern for the poor people of Aurora. Perhaps the parishioners of Our Lady of Grace parish in Aurora need to ask some serious questions to the leadership in this Archdiocese about what is wrong with their parish and why they are afflicted with such pastors. Perhaps they need to ask how they an be so ignorant in catechetics that they would develop such patterns of cult worship rather than true worship of Our Blessed Lord. Hard questions to be sure, but someone above Father Gorman owes this parish an explanation for decades long patterns and failure in teaching the Catholic faith. It is a sad situation and a great divide has been created in the parish. It need not have happened, had the Pastor done what was asked and gone quietly for the time-being explaining the reasons to the people himself. Instead, he chose a different path and it will not be an easy task for the parishioners to move forward. From the comment boxes, it is quite apparent to witness first hand the ignorance of many of the parishioners, there lack of respect for norms and the rule of law and their hostility towards anyone that would try to explain it. Pride is a dreadful thing. Pray for Father Joseph Gorman and for the people of Our Lady of Grace parish in Aurora. http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2015/02/03/aurora-parishioners-want-their-suspended-priest-back.html http://www.yorkregion.com/news-story/5298720-aurora-s-our-lady-of-grace-parishioners-rally-in-support-of-priest-in-wake-of-temporary-removal/
"Unless we get on our high horse and think this is unique to some other place, remember that during the Crusades and the Inquisition, people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ," Obama said Wednesday. "And in our home country, slavery, and Jim Crow, all too often was justified in the name of Christ." Barack Hussein Obama.
Yes, he really did say that. Today. At the National Prayer Breakfast.
Do I have to shout it out Obama?
The Crusades were to free Christians from Muslim persecution. As for that old canard about the Inquisition, this Muslim Brotherhood sympathiser in the White House has proven by these two statements that he is manipulative, lying, deceitful and anti-Christian.
To have the absolute temerity to equate ISIS savagery with whatever excessed occurred centuries and millennia ago is evil and disgusting.
Is he justifying the beheadings of children and innocents and the burying alive of people, the murder, the burning alive of a trapped man in a cage? Tantumblogo provides a solid take on it at Dallas Area Catholics.
Meanwhile ... this is the man he wants "removed" and the people of this same land he wants slaughtered under a lie that Basser Al-Assad is persecuting his people and needs to be overthrown by America. Assad is shown here with his wife Asma during a visit to the Saint Takla Monastery in Maloula in 2014, before it was destroyed by Islamists funded by Barack Obama and urged on by John McCain.
This is the man, President Sisi of Egypt, who showed up at Christmas Mass in the Coptic Cathedral in Cairo - the first time in modern Egyptian history that a President of Egypt has not only wished his beautiful lands Christians a Blessed Christmas but actually went into a Coptic Church to cheers and tears of joy by the people. He has vowed to rebuild churches destroyed by the Islamists under the Obama supported Muslim Brotherhood takeover!
A priest, Father Polous Yacoub has been beheaded in Mosul. Where is the outrage from this Obama?
Has America gone insane?
Do you have any idea what is coming upon you and the rest of us because of this man, Obama?
Barack Hussein Obama has to be called out as an enemy of Catholics and Christians everywhere.
He is an enemy to America and a danger to the security of our lands.
IRAQ | Bestial ISIS jihadis behead another Aramean Christian, according to eye witnesses and local media. The priest Bulus Ya'qub, who was kidnapped 7 months ago and whose church was blown up, has been executed this week in the Ghazlani Camp south of Mosul. ISIS, which converted the Syriac Orthodox Cathedral in Mosul into a mosque, has already removed the crosses from at least 30 churches in Mosul.
Don't you agree that it is conspicuous, strange and unethical that the world media barely report about such atrocity crimes when it concerns defenseless Aramean Christians who lack the voice and the support of a country? It is time for the Aramean people to stand up and reclaim their dignity, human rights and freedom.
In the absence of a state, we ask you to support the WCA that will continue to raise the ignored voice and combat the human rights violations against the Aramean people in their occupied homelands. Click here for your support: http://www.wca-ngo.org/support
At a meeting of the Catholic Civil Rights League in December, we were warned that the writing seemed to be on the wall for this decision. It was not expected until May. Once again, Canada's Supreme Court judges have decided that which should be in Parliament's domain. These activist judges have forced upon this country abortion, threatened to do so with sodomite and lesbian "marriage", prostitution and now, euthanasia. The Constitution of Canada and the Charter of Rights and Freedoms of Pierre Elliot Trudeau has been interpreted by leftists and activists to undermine our nation. There is buried within it an out; a Notwithstanding Clause to overturn the decision. Any bets on whether the government will find the fortitude to stand up to these bastards? Happy now Michael? https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/breaking-canadas-top-court-rules-doctors-can-help-kill-patients BREAKING: Canada’s top court rules doctors can help kill patients
OTTAWA, February 6, 2015 (LifeSiteNews.com) — In a momentous ruling this morning, Canada’s highest court unanimously ruled to open the door to a doctor helping kill someone nearing the end-of-life stage, a ruling comparable to the sweeping Morgentaler ruling 27 years ago that allowed a doctor to kill someone at the earliest pre-born stage of life.
In Carter v. Canada, the Court overturned a previous law prohibiting assisted suicide, in effect reversing the previous 1993 Rodriguez decision in which it said the state’s obligation to “protect the vulnerable” outweighed the rights of the individual to self-determination. The ruling makes Canada join the ranks of Switzerland, the Netherlands, and Belgium, as well as Oregon and Washington, in allowing assisted suicide.
Section 33 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
(1) Parliament or the legislature of a province may expressly declare in an Act of Parliament or of the legislature, as the case may be, that the Act or a provision thereof shall operate notwithstanding a provision included in section 2 or sections 7 to 15.
(2) An Act or a provision of an Act in respect of which a declaration made under this section is in effect shall have such operation as it would have but for the provision of this Charter referred to in the declaration.
(3) A declaration made under subsection (1) shall cease to have effect five years after it comes into force or on such earlier date as may be specified in the declaration.
(4) Parliament or the legislature of a province may re-enact a declaration made under subsection (1).
(5) Subsection (3) applies in respect of a re-enactment made under subsection (4).
I urge you to stand up for vulnerable Canadians and oppose the Supreme Court's dreadful ruling overturning Canada's prohibition on physician-assisted suicide.
Canadians pride themselves on being a caring, welcoming nation, a country that defends the vulnerable, yet this ruling sends the message to the weak and infirm that their lives are not worth protecting.
This Supreme Court ruling is merely the first step down a slippery slope that leads to the heinous practices we've seen increasingly in places like Belgium and the Netherlands. In Belgium, euthanasia is now permissible even for children. Please don't let that happen to our country.
I urge you to use your parliamentary authority to invoke section 33 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (the "notwithstanding clause") and overrule the Supreme Court decision. Canada needs a law that will protect all Canadians.
Sincerely,
[The undersigned]
Tell Canada’s Parliament to block Supreme Court ruling legalizing assisted suicide by using 'notwithstanding clause’: petition
5 Supporters19 Minutes Ago
Canada’s Supreme Court has just overturned the country’s ban on assisted suicide, meaning that doctors will now be allowed to actively participate in bringing about the deaths of their patients.
If the colleges of physicians in places like Ontario and Saskatchewan have their way, doctors could very well be forced to end their patients' lives.
This shocking ruling goes against the clear will of Parliament, which overwhelmingly rejected a proposal to legalize euthanasia in 2010 by a vote of 226 to 59.
The Supreme Court has given Parliament a year to enact a new law. But Parliament has the power to act right now - by invoking the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms’ little-used “notwithstanding clause,” which allows Parliament to override a court ruling.
We need to urge Parliament to invoke the “notwithstanding clause” and craft a law that will protect vulnerable Canadians from this heinous ruling.
I really want to be charitable, but I'm finding it difficult. Perhaps you may wish to explain it to our poor friend.
Anonymous said...Guess what? This isn't the 1700's. We are in 2015 and the world changes and so will churches. If the church doesn't change the catholic population will continue to decline. Is it a bad thing that people and children enjoy church? A bunch of crazies on this site that need serious help. To sit there and pass judgement on situation it sounds like you have no personal experience with is a sin. Do you remember when black people were not allowed in churches. Is it ok that they changed those rules?
The Catholic Civil Rights League (CCRL) decries the Supreme Court's 9-0 decision in Carter striking down Criminal Code provisions against physician assisted suicide - Canada enters a new era of 'suicide relativism'.
TORONTO, ON February 6 2015 - The Catholic Civil Rights League (CCRL) warns of the dangers of a new era of 'suicide relativism' in Canada, following the Supreme Court's 9-0 decision in Carter to strike down the Criminal Code provisions against physician assisted suicide.
The Supreme Court's ruling now leaves legislatures and provincial health disciplinary mechanisms to sort out the messy business of competing conscience claims, let alone the parameters of 'medical aid in dying'.
By this decision, the Court has re-asserted its claim to the title 'Policy Maker of the Year', as recognized by the MacDonald-Laurier Institute in December, 2014. The Supreme Court has moved our country from a position where suicide was opposed outright, to a jurisdiction where suicide is to be made available on request, subject to future unknown conditions.
The Court overruled its previous decision from 1993 in Rodriguez, in which the same provisions of the Criminal Code were upheld, by a 5-4 majority, asserting in today's ruling that the law and factual matrix have changed in the past 22 years.
The Court failed to mention that nine different motions or legislative attempts have been raised in Parliament in that time frame, with six separate votes on the issue, all of which rejected efforts to change the law, recognizing the risks to the most highly vulnerable. In fact, in 2011 and in 2012 Parliament gave its near unanimous support for a national anti-suicide prevention policy. The Supreme Court has now undercut such legislative enactments.
Given that history, Parliament will need to give serious consideration to the Charter's notwithstanding clause, to allow further time for serious reflection on the merits of what has been introduced as a new regime in Canada. A one year suspension in an election year is unreasonable.
While the Court has suspended its decision for one year to allow legislatures and provincial health care professional Colleges time to consider legislative changes, that time frame may be insufficient to allow all of the various public institutions to address the challenging demands involved.
The CCRL sought that clear language be provided by the Court to assert the primacy of conscientious rights of healthcare professionals. The Supreme Court stepped back from making any such pronouncement, preferring to allow a future 'reconciliation' of competing rights claims.
Such concerns are not limited to healthcare professionals. Chaplains, lawyers, and other counselors will be confronted with how to deal with requests for assistance on suicide in the months ahead.
The Court has struck down these provisions of the Criminal Code with severe limitations on any new provisions to re-criminalize particular forms of assisted suicide. The court has asserted that any future law must accept situations based on irremediable medical conditions and where there may be intolerable suffering. In its reasons, the Court stated, 'We make no pronouncement on other situations where physician?assisted dying may be sought'. However, as has been seen in other jurisdictions, efforts to impose safeguards rarely limit the availability of assisted suicide. By its own language, the Supreme Court leaves open the likelihood of further challenges to any draft legislation.
For example, the Canadian Civil Liberties Association supported the decriminalization of these provisions primarily on the basis of personal autonomy - i.e. if a competent patient sought to be killed, the medical professional should assist, regardless of the underlying medical condition.
In the state of Washington, research has shown that the introduction of physician assisted suicide quickly is enlarged over time, such that individuals who may have years to live are encouraged to take their life prematurely. Assisted suicide regimes lead to abuse of the aged, especially from those who stand to inherit. Will the next push be to expand euthanasia to non-terminal individuals, or the allowance of individuals other than doctors to prescribe death drugs?
The Court also awarded the BC Civil Liberties Association full indemnity costs, such that taxpayers are obliged to pay what will likely exceed $1 million for this challenge at three court levels.
The focus of section 241 of the Criminal Code is on the person who assists in a suicide. The CCRL's intervention emphasized that most Canadian healthcare providers consider physician-assisted death immoral or unethical for reasons of science, conscience or religion. These healthcare providers may now be confronted by demands that they directly or indirectly participate in what they consider to be immoral actions.
Medical Colleges in Saskatchewan and Ontario are currently in the process of addressing such demands, including the contentious issue of mandatory referral by objecting physicians to another doctor, which the CCRL has asserted requires an objecting physician to participate in 'wrong'. Other provincial Colleges have already mandated such referrals, exposing doctors to professional disciplinary charges. Can migration from the profession in Canada be far behind?
At a minimum, the CCRL asserts the need for robust protection for the freedoms of everyone who declines or opposes physician-assisted death, or refuses to refer patients for such procedures, for reasons of conscience or religion.
About the CCRL
Catholic Civil Rights League (CCRL) (www.ccrl.ca) assists in creating conditions within which Catholic teachings can be better understood, cooperates with other organizations in defending civil rights in Canada, and opposes defamation and discrimination against Catholics on the basis of their beliefs. The CCRL was founded in 1985 as an independent lay organization with a large nationwide membership base. The CCRL is a Canadian non-profit organization entirely supported by the generosity of its members.
Source: 13h15 le dimanche, Sunday program of French public television network France 2, broadcast on Sunday, February 8, 2015 (title "N'oubliez pas de prier pour moi" - "Do not forget to pray for me"). Transcript begins at 8:17 and ends at 14:55. [Updated: see video below]
***
[Presenter:] Since then [the Christmas Address to the Curia dedicated to the "infirmities" of the Roman Curia], the Cardinals have receded into silence, but some remain with a heavy heart. One of the most influential of these has finally accepted to receive us. Cardinal Burke is an American, ultra-conservative, and close to former Pope Benedict XVI.
- [Interviewer:] We are very glad to meet you, that you could grant us a little bit of your time! You are a great admirer of Benedict XVI?
- [Burke, in French:] Oh, yes!
- [Interviewer:] You have his complete works?
- [Burke, in French:] Of all the qualities of Benedict XVI, I think that the greatest is the one of being a master of the faith. / [In Italian:] When there is confusion, protest, I always turn towards him, towards his writings on the liturgy, but also on other doctrinal matters. Now I must get used to a new pope and -
- [Interviewer:] Is it difficult? Sincerely.
[Presenter:] The Cardinal is not seen favorably [lit. "in odor of sanctity"] in the eyes of the new pope. He was in the room on the day Francis threw his darts against the Curia.
- [Burke, in Italian:] I have heard here and there some jokes among the cardinals: "how many infirmities do you have?" It will be remarked upon for some time.
[Presenter:] The opposition between both men goes back to the month of October, at the time of the Synod on the family. In the order of the day, some matters provoke turmoil among the bishops, such as communion to remarried divorcees or the recognition of homosexual couples.
[Recording of Francis in the Synod:] "A cardinal wrote to me saying, 'too bad that some cardinals have not had the courage to say certain things. This is not good. This is not synodality. Because it is necessary to say all those things that, in the Lord, it is felt that must be said."
[Presenter:] Several conservative cardinals take up a crusade in order to defend the traditional family - among them Müller, Brandmüller, and Caffarra. As for Cardinal Burke, he takes the helm of the rebels. The debates are very lively, heated.
-[Burke, in Italian:] I cannot accept that communion be given to a person who is living in an irregular union, because it is adultery. On the matter of persons of the same sex, this has nothing to do with matrimony. This is a suffering that some persons have, of being attracted - against nature, sexually - to persons of the same sex. Those people, we must help them to live chastely. But there is no relation to marriage and family, it is a separate issue.
[Presenter:] The response to the Supreme Pontiff is clear: it is a rejection of what Francis had said in July 2013.
[Recording of Francis in the Airplane interview of July 2013]: "If someone is gay, and he searches the Lord, and has good will, who am I to judge him?"
-[Interviewer:] How do you intend to place pope Francis on the good path?
-[Burke, in Italian] On this, also one must be very attentive regarding the power of the pope. The classic formulation is that, "the Pope has the plenitude, the fullness, of power." This is true. But it is not absolute power. His power is at the service of the doctrine of the faith. And thus the Pope does not have the power to change teaching, doctrine.
-[Interviewer:] In a somewhat provocative way, can we say that the true guardian of doctrine is you, and not pope Francis?
-[Burke, in Italian:] [Smiles, shakes his head] We must, let us leave aside the matter of the Pope. In our faith, it is the truth of doctrine that guides us.
-[Interviewer:] If Pope Francis insists on this path, what will you do?
-[Burke, in Italian:] I will resist. I cannot do anything else. There is no doubt that this is a difficult time, this is clear, this is clear.
-[Interviewer:] Is it painful?
-[Burke, in Italian:] Yes.
-[Interviewer:] Worrisome?
-[Burke, in Italian:] Yes.
-[Interviewer:] According to you, today, is the Catholic Church under threat as an institution?
-[Burke, in Italian:] The Lord assured us, as he assured Saint Peter in the Gospel, that the forces of evil will not prevail -- non praevalebunt, we say in Latin. That the forces of evil will not achieve, let us say, victory over the Church.
-[Interviewer, looking at a portrait of Francis in the Cardinal's study:] Well then, Francis is your friend?
-[Burke, in Italian:] [Laughter] I would not want to make of the pope an enemy, certainly!
***
[Update (Feb. 9): thanks to the reader who included our words above as subtitles in the video below:]
Some posts reveal just how far our people have fallen due to the failure of priests and bishops in catechetical, scriptural and ecclesiastical teaching. The Sad State of Affairs in Aurora extends far beyond the ecclesiastical-sacramental and collection plate irregularities. The seriousness of these issues are appropriate for the Church to deal with and not petitions of the people or letters to the editor or online. Failure of years of homiletics, liturgy and catechesis has corrupted and failed to correct the thinking and understanding of many members of this parish and others on what it means to be a Catholic and to think, like a Catholic.
A pastor has two responsibilities in life -- to get his soul to heaven and the souls of his flock. If a pastor has formed one to think and believe in a manner as you will read below, then he may have much to answer for. Deformed thinking comes from malformed faith. It is deadly to the person, their families and the broader culture. Those responsible for teaching heresy, mistruths and erroneous opinion and engaging in liturgical abuses could well end up in Hell. Notwithstanding certain heresies and opinions of some fairly prominent theologians and clerics, we do not have a "reasonable hope" that Hell is empty and that most or all are saved, they are not. There is a Hell and those who don't believe it will find out when they get there. I am being harsh to WAKE YOU UP. Time is short, the world is burning and it is going to get worse. Your time is short, so is mine.
I've written previously and will do so again that it is not me with whom you should be angry. You should be directing it to those who taught you wrongly and failed to teach you how to think and discern truth from lies, good from evil, wrong from right. You write of "love," whatever you mean by love, but do not write of faith or truth. You whine about "feelings" but you cannot articulate fact. Faith is not about feelings. It is about Truth and His name is Jesus Christ! So, let our catechesis begin.
Anonymous said...
Where does your condemnation end? You could go back much further in the history of the Church to find offences much greater than that of which you speak. The Catholic Church has a very dark history that I'm sure you are very aware of. I am worried/sad for you because of the hate that you cause others to feel. Whether it be directed at people who you feel have sinned, or directed at you for your sensationalist views. You can quote the bible all you want, and that is your right. However, I challenge you to find anything in there about Jesus saying that homosexuality is a sin. Here I mean a very clearly stated quote, and not a piece that can be construed in any number of ways. Also, as far as the practice of marriage goes, I assume you are a aware that the Catholic Church (not God, Jesus or otherwise) decided that this should become a sacrament in the medieval times. Who are you, or I or anyone else to say what constitutes a holy, sanctified marriage? If you were truly a Godly person as you claim to be (and for the record I am not saying that you aren't) I cannot understand how love is not the focus of your writing. People make mistakes, people sin, people are not perfect, but who are we if we cannot accept them and help them to the best of our ability? Who are we to condemn? Saturday, 7 February 2015 at 21:38:00 GMT-5
And. Anonymous said...
Hi Brian (it's me again)
you do raise a good point that because Jesus didn't condemn something by name, then anything goes. Clearly that is not reasonable to assume. However, who then makes these decisions to condemn others who are different? I am not homosexual myself, but I have the privilege of knowing a couple of people who are. Homosexuality is NOT a choice, who, in their right minds would make the decision to be gay in a world that is still so ignorant and hateful towards those who are? It is not the work of the Devil. These are loving, intelligent people who have every right to have the love and happiness that we have. As far as my reference to marriage not originally being a part of the Church, it is true that I have not looked into this fact in many years. Once upon a time I studied medieval history in University, this is where I learned this fact (through my own research). This comment was more to the idea of the Church being a changing entity to which Vox was arguing against. Let me be perfectly clear with what is my belief, a belief which has grown through the Catholic Church. Love is where faith should begin. One of the biggest problems that I have seen with religion in general is people hiding behind their faith to make 'holier than thou' statements. These people attend Church regularly and therefore believe that they are superior to those who do not. You want to be 'Holy', or 'Good'? Get involved in your communities and make a positive difference. Don't judge others because they are different, love them for it. Have meaningful discussion about your differences. Condemnation ends any and every conversation and hate takes its place. Every single time.
1.0: My condemnation of evil and those who undermine truth and liturgical prayer will end, God-willing, with my last breath and the words, "Jesus have mercy upon me a sinner," may I have that grace! I hope to be welcomed with "Well done, good and faithful servant you have been faithful with few things" but I expect I will have a millenium or two or more in purgatory. There, I go quoting scripture again and Catholic dogma which seems to be an issue for you. 1.1: You seem to be a member of this parish. Perhaps you should show your anger over what happened 25 years ago, since you mention a "dark history" in the Church proper. Please tell us what other examples of this so-called "dark history" you accuse the Church of committing, real dark history, not the revisionist history of the Muslim Brotherhood lackey Obama's view of the Crusades and the Inquisition. Please, be specific about the greatest force of good in human history, rather than some canard which simply did not exist. 2.0: I hate no person, though admittedly, it comes close with Obama (and don't even think that I am a racist, the better-half of the Vox, the Fox; is South African!) I do hate the Islamo-fascist movement that is wiping out Christians and setting the world aflame - I hate the false religion founded by a murderous peodophile and denier of Christ; I hate the sodomite-fascist movement that is undermining the culture, the family and going after our youth by convincing them that it is "cool to be gay" and the Church is wrong (been to a school lately?) I hate the pervert movement epitomised by the child porn aficionado and former bishop Raymond Lahey masturbating to the images of naked boys on his laptop computer. I hate the pathetic and perverted actions of child pornographer Bernard Levin whose work still influences lesbian Kathleen Wynne and her intent to corrupt children with unacceptably blatant sex education in our schools. I hate abortion which kills babies and hurts women and proclaims choice without ever describing the choice - murder of the innocent. I hate the movement to kill our elderly and infirm (yes, it will go that far) through the Supreme Court of Canada, I hate all of these and you should too. On all of these, it is the fault of Catholics, bishops, priests and laity. We are 40% of Canada's population. If we lived our faith we would change our country overnight. As for me, "Truly, I know my sins, they are always before me."
3.0: Are you judging and "condemning" me for "quoting the Bible?" If so, then you are playing right into the hands of Protestants, now and in history, with their "Catholics don't read the Bible" mantra.
4.o: You challenged me to "to find anything there (in the Bible) by Jesus saying that homosexuality is a sin ... a clearly stated quote ... not construed" 4.1: I imagine the question of sodomy is raised because I mentioned it in the original post. I proffered that the filthy, degrading history of a pastor and associate pastor decades ago has left a darkened spirit in the parish. That abomination released a devil in the parish yet to be exorcised. Demons occupy space and geography, not just people. 4.2: Your comments reflect a nihilistic, relativist, modernist and politically-correct view of marriage, divorce and the condition of homosexuality. The men that did this in your parish were sodomites. Not all men - those homosexuals suffering with same-sex attraction (SSA) - are pederasts [men having sex with post-pubescent boys verses paedophiles which have sex with prepubescent boys or girls] but all pederasts are homosexuals! You've heard of NAMBLA, right? The sex abuse crimes committed by priests, except in rare cases, were crimes committed by sodomite priests upon boys that had reached puberty. Homosexual sex with post-pubescent, virginal teen-age boys has historical fact dating back to ancient Greece and Rome. It is not new. Even one thousand years ago in his monumental work Liber Gomorrhianus"St. Peter Damian, a Doctor of the Church said, “For God’s sake, why do you damnable sodomites pursue the heights of ecclesiastical dignity with such fiery ambition?” You ask, for authority, I give it to you. Where is yours?
Caution - use of certain terminologies that some may find disturbing
4.3: The homoheresy movement has succeeded in making one think that it's all about love and curtains and nice kitchen appliances and the colours of paint on the walls and "his and his towels"[JB this is from Fox] and that anyone taking an opposing view is a hater. They have made people think that it is about tolerance and acceptance. It is not. It is about destroying marriage and the family and forcing the acceptance of sexual perversion on the rest of us. It is about promoting a pattern of life filled with guilt and self-loathing and normalising it. It is evil and those who are manifestly trapped within it have been given over to Satan. Fisting, rimming, anal and oral copulation, urination, fecal play, slurp-ramping, glory holes, public bath-houses for sex and other deviant behaviours and public nudity is not acceptable. The body is a "temple of the Holy Spirit" - it is a sin against God and a crime against nature. Why should I care? I care for people's souls. Every sin affects the world, mine and yours. It destroys grace and dulls the senses. Sexual sins of fornication, adultery, sodomy, pornography, masturbation and so on create a need to go further and further for satisfaction Pornography of homosexual and heterosexual nature is one of the biggest crises facing children and youth, it is rampant. Men and yes, women -- Catholic men and women watch pornography regularly spending trillions of dollars on it and blind to the damage that it causes to their souls and psyche. Pure evil. Is this hate? No! It is in fact love to speak the truth. Men wear diapers because they have lost control of the anal sphincter! They die younger than men not engaging in sodomy. They have greater degrees of depression. Their suicide rates are higher. The rates of syphilis and gonorrhea and other sexually transmitted diseases are higher and more virulent to say nothing of AIDS. The abuse between same-sex couples is manifestly higher than heterosexual. Monogamy is rare. 4.4: When you say that sodomy is not a choice, you are wrong. We all have a choice whether to sin or not. We do not have to have sexual relations with anyone. The condition and causes of SSA is not fully understood but, nobody is born with a "gay-gene." A loving God who creates us and condemns this behaviour would not create us in this manner. It is a learnt behaviour - psychological, emotional and environmental. People have freed themselves from the behaviour and I know men that have. They may still have some form of SSA they do not act out on it. Some marry and become fathers. Some dedicate a life to God offering up their suffering for the sake of their souls. The Church, as outlined in the Catechism of the Catholic Church does not label people as "Gay" notwithstanding certain imprudent remarks by the current Bishop of Rome. We are not defined by our sexual action. There are only two genders, the rest are straight from the pit of Hell. The desire to have sexual relations with someone of the same sex is "intrinsically disordered" not the person, the desire as the Church teaches magisterially and definitively in the Catechism, is disordered, the act is mortally sinful. It is one of the four sins"crying out to God for justice." The acts of sodomy, fisting, rimming, oral-copulation, sado-masochism, mutilation of the gentiles through surgery along with adultery, fornication, masturbation and bestiality are sins against God and nature and the unrepentant will end up in Hell, period. 4.5: The word homosexual is just over one hundred years old -- 1892. It is an English translation from Richard von Krafft-Ebing's Psychopathia Sexualis. Of course, Jesus did not use the word, the word did not exist! Sodomy is used throughout Holy Scripture and it is the sin to describe unnatural sexual acts, usually between men, but can be broader. Jesus did not need to use the term; everyone knew in first century Judaism that it was a sin and an "abomination to the LORD." The first century apostles and the early church fathers knew it.
4.6 Jesus is God. He was "from the beginning." Jesus is the WORD MADE FLESH. He was active in the Old Testament, He was the WORD of God Who came forth in the Blessed Mother's womb. Do you believe this? If you are a Catholic you must believe this. Jesus said plenty about sodomy.
4.7 These verses are taken from the New Revised Standard Version -- Catholic Edition used in the lectionary in Canada.
Leviticus. 18:22. "You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination."
Leviticus. 20:13 If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall be put to death; their blood is upon them.
1 Corinthians 6:9-10. Do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived! Fornicators, idolaters, adulterers, male prostitutes, sodomites, thieves, the greedy, drunkards, revilers, robbers—none of these will inherit the kingdom of God.
Romans 1:24-27. Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the degrading of their bodies among themselves, because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever! Amen. For this reason God gave them up to degrading passions. Their women exchanged natural intercourse for unnatural, and in the same way also the men, giving up natural intercourse with women, were consumed with passion for one another. Men committed shameless acts with men and received in their own persons the due penalty for their error.
Jude 1:7. Just as Sodom and Gomor'rah and the surrounding cities, which likewise acted immorally and indulged in unnatural lust, (NOTE: NOT INHOSPITALITY - St. Jude would know, he spoke to Jesus and was his cousin) serve as an example by undergoing punishment of eternal fire.
4.8: Jesus did say these things. Jesus is God the Son who is, was and always will be. He is the WORD as stated above. It was the WORD through the HOLY SPIRIT that inspired Holy Moses and Saints Paul and Jude to write that which you read above, or do you not believe this? Are you questioning the clear and unambiguous teaching of Holy Scripture? 5.0: You further wrote that, "as far as the practice of marriage goes, I assume you are a aware that the Catholic Church (not God, Jesus or otherwise) decided that this should become a sacrament in the medieval times. Who are you, or I or anyone else to say what constitutes a holy, sanctified marriage?" You also indicate that "once upon a time you "studied medieval history at university." So, your professors, many biased against the Catholic Church are to be believed but the Church is not? Did university teach you at least to think and research? The bible tells us to "prove all things and hold fast to that which is good" as can be found in 1 Thessalonians 5:21. Why would the St. Paul tell us to "prove" it if he was not certain that the truth could be proven? I'll take St. Paul over your professor.
5.1: With all charity and respect I must ask this question, "Are you really a Catholic?" I must also ask a more important question; "Who put in your mind the doubts of the truth that would cause you to make such statements?" You have proven my point, that you and the people of your parish (I assume that Our Lady of Grace is your parish) have every right to be angry. The problem is, you are angry with me for shining a light and writing the truth when you should be angry with those who were responsible for forming you as a Catholic and who failed. They will be held responsible for this on their judgement day "for to whom much is given, much is expected" and "it is better that a millstone be tied around their necks and they be thrown into the bottom of the sea rather than to scandalise one of my little ones." We were once and in many ways still remain, "little ones." However, you will also be held responsible notwithstanding your false teachers. You are not a child, you are presumably Confirmed by the Holy Spirit. You went to university. There is the Internet for you to do research. You have no excuse - none of us does. Have you ever read the Catechism of the Catholic Church? Do you believe what the Church teaches? If not, why are you here? If your conscience cannot abide the truth, why do you stay? How can you hold false beliefs and receive Holy Communion?
5.2: Do you believe that the Catholic Church -- One, Holy, Universal and Apostolic -- was established on earth by Jesus Christ as His Bride and from which grace will flow to the whole earth to gather mankind within Her to bring all who will come to Heaven? Do you believe that to do this, Our Blessed Lord established it under Peter to whom he gave the "keys of the kingdom" and that what Peter -- the Church "binds on earth shall be bound in heaven and what is loosed on earth shall be loosed in heaven?" Do you believe that the Pope is in the line of Peter and that the bishops are the Apostles of our time to carry out the work of salvation for you and I through Holy Mother Church? Do you believe that "outside the Church there is no salvation?" If you do not believe these truths as revealed by Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition and Magisterial Authority, then you have not been properly formed as a Catholic and it is not surprising that you would hold the views that you do.
5.3: Last Sunday was Marriage Sunday in the Archdiocese of Toronto. The Deacon at the Mass where I chanted Saturday evening referred to the Book of Genesis where God gave Eve to Adam and this was the marriage from which the earth would be filled. Let us look at some verses from Scripture, again from the NRSV-CE.
Matthew 19: 1-11 When Jesus had finished saying these things, he left Galilee and went to the region of Judea beyond the Jordan. Large crowds followed him, and he cured them there. Some Pharisees came to him, and to test him they asked, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any cause?” He answered, “Have you not read that the one who made them at the beginning ‘made them male and female,’ and said, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’? So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate.” They said to him, “Why then did Moses command us to give a certificate of dismissal and to divorce her?” He said to them, “It was because you were so hard-hearted that Moses allowed you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so. And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for unchastity, and marries another commits adultery. His disciples said to him, “If such is the case of a man with his wife, it is better not to marry.” But he said to them, “Not everyone can accept this teaching, but only those to whom it is given.”
5.4: Note that twice Jesus says "at the beginning" (some translations use 'in'). What is He referring to? He is referring to the first three words of the Holy Bible in Genesis - "In/at the beginning." In other words, God always intended that marriage was something ordained from Him to be "holy and sanctified" quoting yourself.
5.5: To say that the Church made marriage a "sacrament in medieval times" is simply untrue What are you referring to and where do you get such fallacy? Who told you this? Show me the proof? Protestants were similarly vexed with the believe that "transubstantiation" was also a medieval construct. Wrong. The transformation of the bread and wine to the body and blood of Christ - body, blood, soul and divinity, was always believed from the very beginning. It was defined with a word "transubstantiation" by St. Thomas Aquinas. It was always believed. The Church - East and West - always believed in the Dormition and Assumption of Our Blessed Mother but it was not defined as dogma until 1954! 5.6: Marriage between a man and a woman was ordained by God from "the beginning." The Church ordered it as a Sacrament from the early days -- a Sacrament not imposed by the priest or deacon but exchanged by the man and woman. It has also long been recognised that our protestant brethren generally maintain two of the Seven Sacraments, the first being Baptism the second being Holy Matrimony, between two Protestants, not with a Catholic. Before syphilis rotted his mind, King Henry VIII was given the title by the Pope of "Defender of the Faith," a title still held by Elizabeth II, Regina and granted, ironically, because of his defense of the Seven Sacraments against the heretic, Martin Luther. The Church of Rome, and the other autocephalous Churches have always from the beginning that matrimony was a sacrament. It has been a ritual in every culture, even pagan, from the beginning of time. The abomination of which two men or two women marrying is a pathetic and disgusting attempt to normalise a perversion and undermine our culture. You cannot re-write 6000 years of human history and culture by an Act of Parliament! You cannot undo what is within the natural law by political correctness.
5.6: You and I have every right to say what is a "holy and sanctified" marriage. I have every right because of my faith and grace of Baptism and duty of Confirmation. I have the authority to do so under "referential authority." I'm surprised that they did not teach this to you in university. I refer to the authority of Holy Scripture, the authority of the Catechism of the Catholic Church, the authority of the writings of the Popes such as Familiaris Consortio by a declared Saint - John Paul II and so on. As a rational man given knowledge and natural law, I can refer to 6000 years of recorded human history of every culture. Our native people in Canada the Aztecs and others - they all had marriage between a man and a woman and they did not have the Holy Bible! It is therefore as much culture and history as it is faith and sacrament!Human society has always held marriage as a sacred act, even when it did not know God.
6.0: Pope Benedict XVI wrote an Encyclical called Caritas in Veritate, Charity (Love) in Truth, you may wish to read it. Love is found in speaking and writing the truth. If I told you what you wanted to hear even though I knew it was wrong and would deceive you, would I be showing love? If I saw you attempting to put your finger in a light socket and did nothing, even though I knew that it could harm or even kill you, would I be showing you love?
5.8: Must there not be order in the Church? Must bishops not act appropriately to protect the integrity of the truth, the sacraments and the law of the Church and the Province for which they are responsible? You keep excusing what happened with stories about "feelings." Yes, love, love, love. Absolutely. Saint Paul tells us that "love covers a multitude of sins." But you cannot have love without truth. Jesus did not come to "destroy the law but to fulfil it." When he cautioned the people about the Pharisees he warned the people to follow them in "the law" but not to act "as they do."
Make no mistake, you have been manipulated. You've been manipulated by priests, by teachers, by media and by those who would misconstrue the truth.
You should be angry but not with Vox. If you wish to write me privately to explain any of this further, for reasoned explanation or catechesis or to find a priest that can help you, please write me at voxcantoris@rogers.com.
Act. "We must, at this dangerous time, be courageous in illuminating the truly Gnostic and revolutionary character of the “Kasper agenda,” demonstrating the continuity of the Divine doctrine on marriage and its practice throughout the two thousand years of the history of our Church."
Editor’s Note: Following his strongly-worded interview with Polonia Christiana in the wake of the first part of the Extraordinary Synod on Marriage and Family, we reached out to Bishop Athanasius Schneider to seek his guidance on concrete actions Catholics can take during this time of turmoil within the Church. We specifically requested his advice on what the faithful could do to resist heterodoxy and address the errors (or at least obfuscations) that seem to be issuing forth from some of the highest prelates in the Church. Though his counsel is brief, it is deeply thoughtful, and offers us a great deal of work to do. With the next meeting of the Synod less than eight months away, there is no time to waste.
Giulio Meotti, an Italian journalist with Il Foglio, wrote an interesting Op-Ed which I share here because it portends what is coming to America. It's only a matter of time. This because, like Belgium, America is committing spiritual and intellectual suicide.
I was dressing that morning, it was just after 06:00 EST. I screamed to my wife and picked up the phone to call a priest friend. He had just received a text and was distressed and going to pray before the Blessed Sacrament. I regret that day. I will regret it for years to come. A monsignor sobbed, then silence fell:
"It seemed that, in slow motion before me, an assistant television cameraman put his hand to his mouth in a cartoonlike gesture of astonishment, the monsignor sitting next to me started to sob quietly, Archbishop Gänswein’s shoulders seemed to drop. The cardinals leaned forward to make sure they understood precisely what was being said and I found myself checking that my jaw wasn’t dropping open. Then there was silence."
Reflections on some current problems of the crisis of the Catholic Church
I had the experience of living with priests who were in Stalinist prisons and camps and who nevertheless remained faithful to the Church. During the time of persecution they fulfilled with love their priestly duty in preaching Catholic doctrine thereby leading a dignified life in the imitation of Christ, their heavenly Master.
I completed my priestly studies in an underground Seminary in the Soviet Union. I was ordained a priest secretly during the night by a pious bishop who himself suffered for the sake of the faith. In the first year of my priesthood I had the experience of being expelled from Tadzhikistan by the KGB.
Subsequently, during my thirty-year stay in Kazakhstan, I served 10 years as priest, caring for faithful people in 81 localities. Then I served 20 years as bishop, initially as bishop of five states in Central Asia with a total area of around four million square kilometers.
In my ministry as a bishop I had contact with Pope Saint John Paul II, with many bishops, priests and faithful in different countries and under different circumstances. I was member of some assemblies of the Synod of Bishops in the Vatican which covered themes such as “Asia” and “The Eucharist”.
This experience as well as others give me the basis to express my opinion on the current crisis of the Catholic Church. These are my convictions and they are dictated by my love of the Church and by the desire for her authentic renewal in Christ. I am forced to resort to this public means of expression because I fear that any other method would be greeted by a brick wall of silence and disregard.
I am aware of possible reactions to my open letter. But at the same time the voice of my conscience will not allow me to remain silent, while the work of God is being slandered. Jesus Christ founded the Catholic Church and showed us in word and deed how one should fulfill the will of God. The apostles to whom He bestowed authority in the Church, fulfilled with zeal the duty entrusted to them, suffering for the sake of the truth which had to be preached, since they “obeyed God rather than men”.
Unfortunately in our days it is increasingly evident that the Vatican through the Secretariat of State has taken the course of political correctness. Some Nuncios have become propagators of liberalism and modernism. They have acquired expertise in the principle “sub secreto Pontificio”, by which one manipulates and silences the mouths of the bishops. And that what the Nuncio tells them appears as it would be almost certainly the wish of the Pope. With such methods one separates the bishops from one another to the effect that the bishops of a country can no longer speak with one voice in the spirit of Christ and His Church in defending faith and morals. This means that, in order not to fall into disfavour with the Nuncio some bishops accept their recommendations, which are sometimes based on nothing other than on their own words. Instead of zealously spreading the faith, courageously preaching the doctrine of Christ, standing firm in the defense of truth and of morals, the meetings of the Bishops’ Conferences often deal with issues which are foreign to the nature of the duties of the successors of the apostles.
One can observe at all levels of the Church an obvious decrease of the “sacrum”. The “spirit of the world” feeds the shepherds. The sinners give the Church the instructions for how she has to serve them. In their embarrassment the Pastors are silent on the current problems and abandon the sheep while they are feeding themselves. The world is tempted by the devil and opposes the doctrine of Christ. Nevertheless the Pastors are obliged to teach the whole truth about God and men “in season and out”.
However, during the reign of the last holy Popes one could observe in the Church the greatest disorder concerning the purity of the doctrine and the sacredness of the liturgy, in which Jesus Christ is not paid the visible honour which he is due. In not a few Bishop’s Conferences the best bishops are “persona non grata”. Where are apologists of our days, who would announce to men in a clear and comprehensible manner the threat of the risk of loss of faith and salvation?
In our days the voice of the majority of the bishops rather resembles the silence of the lambs in the face of furious wolves, the faithful are left like defenseless sheep. Christ was recognized by men as one who spoke and worked, as one, who had power and this power He bestowed upon His apostles. In today’s world the bishops must liberate themselves from all worldly bonds and – after they have done penance – convert to Christ so that strengthened by the Holy Spirit they may announce Christ as the one and only Saviour. Ultimately one must give account to God for all that was done and for all what wasn't done.
In my opinion the weak voice of many bishops is a consequence of the fact, that in the process of the appointment of new bishops the candidates are insufficiently examined with regard to their doubtless steadfastness and fearlessness in the defense of the faith, with regard to their fidelity to the centuries-old traditions of the Church and their personal piety. In the issue of the appointment of new bishops and even cardinals it is becoming increasingly apparent that sometimes preference is given to those who share a particular ideology or to some groupings which are alien to the Church and which have commissioned the appointment of a particular candidate. Furthermore it appears that sometimes consideration is given also to the favour of the mass media which usually makes a mockery of holy candidates painting a negative picture of them, whereas the candidates who in a lesser degree own the spirit of Christ are praised as open and modern. On the other side the candidates who excel in apostolic zeal, have courage in proclaiming the doctrine of Christ and show love for all that is holy and sacred, are deliberately eliminated.
A Nuncio once told me: “It’s a pity that the Pope [John Paul II] does not participate personally in the appointment of the bishops. The Pope tried to change something in the Roman Curia, however he has not succeeded. He becomes older and things resume their usual former course”.
At the beginning of the pontificate of Pope Benedict XVI, I wrote a letter to him in which I begged him to appoint holy bishops. I reported to him the story of a German layman who in the face of the degradation of the Church in his country after the Second Vatican Council, remained faithful to Christ and gathered young people for adoration and prayer. This man had been close to death and when he learned about the election of the new Pope he said: “When Pope Benedict will use his pontificate solely for the purpose to appoint worthy, good and faithful bishops, he will have fulfilled his task”.
Unfortunately, it is obvious that, Pope Benedict XVI has often not succeeded in this issue. It is difficult to believe that Pope Benedict XVI freely renounced his ministry as successor of Peter. Pope Benedict XVI was the head of the Church, his entourage however has barely translated his teachings into life, bypassed them often in silence or has rather obstructed his initiatives for an authentic reform of the Church, of the liturgy, of the manner to administer Holy Communion. In view of a great secrecy in the Vatican for many bishops it was realistically impossible to help the Pope in his duty as head and governor of the whole Church.
It will not be superfluous to remind my brothers in the episcopacy of an affirmation made by an Italian masonic lodge from the year 1820: “Our work is a work of a hundred years. Let us leave the elder people and let us go to the youth. The seminarians will become priests with our liberal ideas. We shall not flatter ourselves with false hopes. We will not make the Pope a Freemason. However liberal bishops, who will work in the entourage of the Pope, will propose to him in the task of governing the Church such thoughts and ideas which are advantageous for us and the Pope will implement them into life”. This intention of the Freemasons is being implemented more and more openly, not only thanks to the declared enemies of the Church but with the connivance of false witnesses who occupy some high hierarchical office in the Church. It is not without reason that Blessed Paul VI said: “The spirit of Satan penetrated through a crack inside the Church”. I think that this crack has become in our days quite wide and the devil uses all forces in order to subvert the Church of Christ. To avoid this, it is necessary to return to the precise and clear proclamation of the Gospel on all levels of ecclesiastical ministry, for the Church possesses all power and grace which Christ gave to her: “All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. Go therefore, and teach all nations. Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and I am with you always unto the end of the world” (Mt 28, 18-20), “the truth will set you free” (John 8, 32) and “let your word be Yes, yes; No, no: for whatsoever is more than these comes of evil” (Mt 5, 37). The Church cannot adapt herself to the spirit of this world, but must transform the world to the spirit of Christ.
It is obvious that in the Vatican there is a tendency to give in more and more to the noise of the mass media. It is not infrequent that in the name of an incomprehensible quiet and calm the best sons and servants are sacrificed in order to appease the mass media. The enemies of the Church however don’t hand over their faithful servants even when their actions are evidently bad.
When we wish to remain faithful to Christ in word and deed, He Himself will find the means to transform the hearts and souls of men and the world as well will be changed at the appropriate time.
In times of the crisis of the Church God has often used for her true renewal the sacrifices, the tears and the prayers of those children and servants of the Church who in the eyes of the world and of the ecclesiastical bureaucracy were considered insignificant or were persecuted and marginalized because of their fidelity to Christ. I believe that in our difficult time this law of Christ is being realized and that the Church will renew herself thanks to the faithful inner renewal of each of us.
January 1st 2015, Solemnity of the Blessed Virgin Mary, Mother of God
My wife, the Fox, hails from your Newmarket and Aurora community. She is as gobsmocked as I am with what you brave Anonymous folks from Aurora write in the combox. She also grew up in a parish where Father Scanlon was Pastor and he had dogs then, golden retrievers, but they were never, ever brought into the sanctuary. Frankly, Cardinal Ambrozic would have gone ballistic on him. She was as poorly cathechised as you, until one day she found out about it and took it upon herself to find out what the priests and teachers failed to tell her. St. Paul wrote "faith comes from what is heard, and what is heard comes through the word of Christ." Romans 10:17. At the end of the argument, if what you "heard" was wrong or heard incorrectly, it is now your duty as an adult to rectify it. I've tried. I've really tried to inform you, to help you understand -- that is the whole purpose of this blog. Yet, you have not read the posts for the purpose of learning, you only see what you don't like and give an opinion. Well, you know what opinions are like, everyone has one and everyone but yours, stinks! Let me repeat once again. 1. The Holy Mass is the Sacrifice of Jesus on Calvary re-presented forward in time by the priest on the altar. It is not the Last Supper and the Eucharist is not just a meal. In Lauda Sion, the Sequence for Corpus Christi, -- of course, you've never heard of the Sequence because most priests ignore it and option it out of the Novus Ordo Mass, though it is intended, and you should be mad about that too -- there is a phrase written by St. Thomas Aquinas; "vere panis filiorum, non mittendus canibus" which translates as "the true bread of the children, not intended for the dogs." It is to be interpreted literally and as a metaphor. Dogs are beautiful creatures. I have a dog. I love dogs. Dogs do not belong in the sanctuary during Mass, period. The Mass is the Holy of Holies as in the Temple of Jerusalem and the Jews would never have taken an animal inside. It is sacred. It s not for dogs. It distracts the "children" from the Mass. Stop justifying the dog because it is cute. 2. Collections are taken up for various causes ordered by the bishop. We do not take from the collection plate for our own purposes or charities, even if we mean well. There must be accountability. We refer the poor to the St. Vincent de Paul Society or it to them. The Society is very, very active in York Region. Special collections are for what the bishop determines, the north and our native peoples, ShareLife, Shepherd's Trust, the maintenance of holy sites in Israel and Palestine, and so on. It is not for a priest or a parishioner to decide otherwise. If the priest or the individual wishes to take money from their pocket to directly help the poor, that is their business. We refer to our Catholic agencies supported from the collection. We do not give directly from the plate because it is not accountable! What don't you get about that? 3. Pope Francis is not an issue to be compared to in this regard and he would uphold the law as set by the Bishop, so leave the Holy Father out of this and stop misinterpreting him. He wants the homeless in Rome to be clean and have hair cuts, so he ordered a facility built just off St. Peter's Square. He did not sell a fresco and give the money to the poor which could be used as an enabler for alcohol, drugs, gambling, porn, prostitution or other purposes which would be harmful to the individual or his or her family. To suggest that the Pope would support what you think in this case is beyond absurd. You really are impoverished -- and I'm being charitable. If you want to learn and have valid questions, leave them in this combox and I will answer you with facts and references. In the interest of your salvation, my friends who doubt what I am saying, sit down for 16 minutes and listen to this homily: Our time is short. A storm is coming, indeed; it is already here.
