Blog to discuss the book "The Apocalypse - Letter by Letter: A Literary Analysis of the Book of Revelation" and current events that point to the events described therein.
Note: Contraception is the greatest evil of our time. It's acceptance by Catholics against Church teaching drives a wedge between the faithful and the clergy and causes the clergy to be in grave danger of apostasy. It naturally leads to all other evils of the flesh - abortion, adultery, pre- and extra- marital sex. And once the sex act is divorced from procreation, homosexuality and all other perversions quickly increase. This is nothing new. But it is on the rise and is insidious.
The Challenges Faced by Humanae Vitae Priests and the Resultant 'Clergy Problem'
5/18/2008 8:27:00 AM By John Mallon -Human Life International e-Newsletter When priests lose the nerve to preach over concern for money, are they following after Peter, or Judas?First of all, I want to thank all of you priests, deacons and seminarians who signed on to this mailing list. It is very encouraging to see the humility and willingness to gain knowledge that will help you in your service to God's people. If this seems a strange statement, let me tell you that in the first 48 hours that this site was up we received emails from about 130 priests demanding to be removed from the mailing list. Some were quite nasty. Some took offense that someone sent in their email as though it were a personal affront.
It is no secret that orthodox priests who think with the Church often receive cold shoulders and outright hostility from their brother priests. Those who don't go along with the "CYA club" or the clerical mafia and preach Christ instead of the status quo, thus rocking the boat, soon know they are persona non grata. All too often a faithful priest who makes a mistake is much more likely to be called on the carpet and chewed out much more severely by the bishop than a dissident cleric whose errors are deliberate and treated with kid gloves.
A priest friend of mine, ordained within the last 12 years or so, told me that during his first parish assignment he dutifully preached on contraception, but immediately afterwards was "spoken to" by the pastor. The pastor ordered him "not to do that again," and muttered, "just watch the collection receipts go down."
Huh?
If this is what we are about, then we are no better than a governmental bureaucracy that self-perpetuates after having lost its purpose for existing. I should add that the pastor was not a wild-eyed radical or dissenter, but one of the stalwarts of the diocese, the type to whom bishops like to send the newly ordained to learn the ropes. He was the type that another priest friend of mine referred to as "a company man." In frustration he cried out to me, "John, they're company men!" By the company, he was not referring to the Magisterium, but the local diocesan system. They knew how to play the game, advance their careers, manipulate or get around the bishop when necessary, and keep their own backsides covered.
The Gospel? What Gospel?
If they only knew the true danger their backsides were in.
Christ didn't land on the Cross by playing it safe with the high priests of His day. In view of the corrupt system outlined above, when people ask about the sex abuse crisis, "How could this have happened?" the only answer is, "How could it not have happened?" when whistle-blowers were punished and abusers honored or at least coddled. The only response is "Thank God it happened!" Not thank God children were abused, but thank God the corrupt system that allowed it to continue was blown sky high. It is only the beginning, but it may well be the deliverance so many of us have been praying for. Recalling the famous vision of Pope Leo XIII where he saw God grant Satan's request of 100 years to destroy the Church, and chose the 20th century, was it an accident that this particular stronghold collapsed two years into the 21st century? Judgment begins with the House of God (1 Peter 4:17). Thank God.
What does this all have to do with contraception? Contraception was the epicenter of the "sexual revolution." Contraception was also the epicenter of the movement for dissent against Church teaching, Humanae Vitae in particular, and the center of most of the fiercest battles in the Church today.
Contraception, abortion and homosexuality are the three legs of the stool upon which the Culture of Death sits. (We will have more on the contraception/homosexuality link in a future column.) Thank God for you priests in our midst who know the Gospel has always been preached at personal risk and that Humanae Vitae is part of that Gospel and an expression of God's love and protection for His people.
Note: What a powerful and direct public repudiation of a public official. The archbishop is right , of course, and we should all pray that the governor amends her life and begins to understand how her actions scandalize the entire body of Christ. In the meantime, this statement serves as a wonderful model for other bishops facing the scandal of politicians in their jurisdictions who openly defy Church teaching and scandalize the faithful.
Governor's Veto Prompts Pastoral Action
On the day of my return (Monday, April 21) from the exhilarating experience of participating in Pope Benedict's pastoral visit to the United States, I learned that Governor Kathleen Sebelius had vetoed the Comprehensive Abortion Reform Act (HS SB 389), which had been passed by significant majorities in both chambers of the Kansas Legislature. Last week, an attempt to override the governor's veto failed in the Senate by two votes.Governor Sebelius in her veto message claimed: "For years, the people of Kansas have asked their elected officials to move beyond legislative debates on issues like abortion." From her veto message, I received the impression the governor considered it a waste of the Legislature’s time to pass a statute that attempts to protect some women by making certain they have the opportunity to be well-informed: 1) about the development of their unborn child; and 2) about abortion alternatives available to them. Evidently, the governor does not approve of legislators devoting energy to protecting children and women by making it possible to enforce existing Kansas laws regulating late-term abortions.
The governor's veto message demonstrated a lack of respect to the members of the Kansas General Assembly who had carefully crafted and resoundingly passed the Comprehensive Abortion Reform Act, as well as to the many Kansans who find it more than an embarrassment, in no small part due to several previous vetoes by Governor Sebelius of earlier legislative efforts to regulate abortion clinics, that Kansas has become infamous for being the late-term abortion center for the Midwest.
What makes the governor's rhetoric and actions even more troubling has been her acceptance of campaign contributions from Wichita's Dr. George Tiller, perhaps the most notorious late-term abortionist in the nation. In addition to Dr. Tiller's direct donations to her campaign, the governor has benefited from the Political Action Committees funded by Dr. Tiller to support pro-abortion candidates in Kansas.
In her veto message, the governor took credit for lower abortion rates in Kansas, citing her support for "adoption incentives, extended health services for pregnant women, providing sex education and offering a variety of support services for families." Indeed, the governor and her administration should be commended for supporting adoption incentives and health services for pregnant women.
However, the governor overreaches by assuming credit for declining abortion rates in Kansas. Actually, lower abortion rates are part of a national trend. Our neighboring state of Missouri has actually had a steeper and longer decline in its abortion rate.
Governor Sebelius' inclusion of public school sex education programs as a factor in the abortion rate decline is absurd. Actually, valueless sex education programs in public schools have been around for years, coinciding with increased sexual activity among adolescents, as well as increases in teen pregnancy and abortion. On the other hand, the governor does not acknowledge the significant impact of mass media education programs, such as those sponsored by the Vitae Caring Foundation, or the remarkable practical assistance provided by Crisis Pregnancy Centers which are funded through the generosity of pro-life Kansans.
What makes the governor's actions and advocacy for legalized abortion, throughout her public career, even more painful for me is that she is Catholic. Sadly, Governor Sebelius is not unique in being a Catholic politician supporting legalized abortion.
Since becoming archbishop, I have met with Governor Sebelius several times over many months to discuss with her the grave spiritual and moral consequences of her public actions by which she has cooperated in the procurement of abortions performed in Kansas. My concern has been, as a pastor, both for the spiritual well-being of the governor but also for those who have been misled (scandalized) by her very public support for legalized abortion.
It has been my hope that through this dialogue the governor would come to understand her obligation: 1) to take the difficult political step, but necessary moral step, of repudiating her past actions in support of legalized abortion; and 2) in the future would use her exceptional leadership abilities to develop public policies extending the maximum legal protection possible to the unborn children of Kansas. Having made every effort to inform and to persuade Governor Sebelius and after consultation with Bishop Ron Gilmore (Dodge City), Bishop Paul Coakley (Salina) and Bishop Michael Jackels (Wichita), I wrote the governor last August requesting that she refrain from presenting herself for reception of the Eucharist until she had acknowledged the error of her past positions, made a worthy sacramental confession and taken the necessary steps for amendment of her life which would include a public repudiation of her previous efforts and actions in support of laws and policies sanctioning abortion.
Recently, it came to my attention that the governor had received holy Communion at one of our parishes. I have written to her again, asking her to respect my previous request and not require from me any additional pastoral actions.
The governor has spoken to me on more than one occasion about her obligation to uphold state and federal laws and court decisions. I have asked her to show a similar sense of obligation to honor divine law and the laws, teaching and legitimate authority within the church.
I have not made lightly this request of Governor Sebelius, but only after much prayer and reflection. The spiritually lethal message, communicated by our governor, as well as many other high profile Catholics in public life, has been in effect: "The church's teaching on abortion is optional!" I reissue my request of the faithful of the archdiocese to pray for Governor Sebelius. I hope that my request of the governor, not to present herself for holy Communion, will provoke her to reconsider the serious spiritual and moral consequences of her past and present actions. At the same time, I pray this pastoral action on my part will help alert other Catholics to the moral gravity of participating in and/or cooperating with the performance of abortions.
My note: I kept reading this article to find the explanation, the rationale for the Bishops taking a stand against a constitutional amendment that would enshrine the Catholic teaching that life (personhood in the law) begins at conception. It never came. Instead I found Judy Brown's condemnation of the Bishops' position. Have we reached the time that we can now trust the voice of an activist over that of the supposed shepherds of the Church? I have read and re-read the Bible and not once did I find anything from the mouth of Christ or his servants the prophets to indicate that political pragmatism was a value. These Bishops, the same ones who shuttled child abusers around and then exempted themselves from the corrective measures, will be easy prey for The False Prophet when he comes. They await him with anticipation no doubt. Montana Catholic Bishops Will Not Support Constitutional Amendment Defining Personhood
By Thaddeus M. Baklinski
BILLINGS, March 4, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) - In a statement issued last week, Montana bishops Michael W. Warfel and George Leo Thomas said the Montana Catholic Conference will not endorse Constitutional Initiative 100 (the Montana Personhood Amendment) that would establish conception as the beginning of life by placing a personhood amendment on the state's 2008 ballot.
Moe Wosepka, executive director of the Montana Catholic Conference said that although "the bishops agonized over this decision for several months, and did not take this decision lightly," they determined that even if voters approved it, the ballot initiative would be ineffectual. The bishops' official statement said they were "disallowing support for CI-100 in our parishes and church sponsored organizations, be it through endorsement, financial support, signature gathering, or distribution of promotional materials," though individuals were free to give their support to the initiative.
Note: Sounds like the Bishops are "personally opposed but pro-choice" on the issue.
The statement went on to explain that while the bishops praised the intention of CI-100 for eliminating abortion, the initiative was not "the most beneficial venue to pursue necessary change."
Note: OK, fair enough.. THEN WHAT'S YOUR IDEA? Let's hear it.
"We are currently working to develop a broad-based coalition to examine alternatives that offer a more realistic approach to the protection of human life," the statement said. "We, the Roman Catholic Bishops of Montana, remain dedicated to the protection of life from conception to natural death."
Note; The letter from Jesus to the Bishop of Laodicea comes to mind here, something about vomiting the lukewarm out of His body, the Church.
The amendment is sponsored by Rep. Rick Jore, a Constitution Party member for Ronan, MT, who explained that "while CI-100 merely defines 'person' as used in the Montana Constitution, it gets right to the heart of the abortion debate. The fact that human life begins at conception is the only sure foundation of the pro-life argument. We cannot, we must not, buy into the notion that human life begins at some arbitrary time that seems convenient to us."
A report in the Great Falls Tribune said Jonathan Martin, chairman of the Constitution Party of Montana and one of the main proponents of CI-100, was "saddened" by the bishops' unwillingness to support the CI-100 campaign. "I think far too often today that we make decisions based on pragmatism rather than right and wrong," he said.
Martin continued, "This initiative creates no laws, it legislates nothing, it outlaws nothing. It establishes a constitutional principle, and that is recognizing the personhood of the unborn child. If it gets the necessary signatures (to qualify for the ballot) and is approved by the voters of Montana, it will then be up to the Legislature to sit down and reason out legislation to implement."
According to an article in the Bozeman Chronicle, Montana Right to Life Coalition Director Greg Trude said his group is not supporting nor endorsing the measure. Mr. Trude was not available to comment on the statement.
The Montana bishops' statement follows on the heals of similar statements from Bishops' Conferences in Colorado and Georgia, where requests for support for personhood amendment proposals were rejected.
Atlanta Archbishop Wilton D. Gregory and Bishop J. Kevin Boland of Savannah said in a Jan. 8 statement that the proposed amendment to the state Constitution that would establish the rights of personhood for embryos from the moment of conception "does not provide a realistic opportunity for ending or reducing abortion in Georgia," although the bishops said they have "admiration and respect for those who have crafted this legislation."
In Colorado, Catholic Conference Executive Director Jennifer Kraska said that the bishops "commend the goal of this effort to end abortion, and individual Catholics may choose to work for its passage. At the same time, we recognize that other people committed to the sanctity of life have raised serious questions about this specific amendment's timing and content."
"It's a political, gutless position," said Judie Brown, president of the American Life League, in a report by the Denver Post. "As a Catholic, it's the most scandalous thing I've ever heard. I can't believe that any bishop wouldn't want to be out in the front lines helping the petitioners. The sanctity of life is a fundamental teaching of the Catholic Church."
You may contact Montana Catholic Conference Executive Director, Moe Wosepka at: director@montanacc.org.
