Not sure where to post this, but this missive from Cardinal O'Malley just came into my inbox (I'm in the Boston Archdiocese). Really, really sick of the leftist apologetics coming from the pulpit while ignoring (actually extolling) the sins of the other side: Good Morning, The following statement has been released to the media from Cardinal Sean O'Malley. Nations live and flourish because of their ideas and ideals, not simply because of their material wealth or power. Our ideas and ideals express our identity and set the standards for our behavior as citizens. For the United States a core statement of our identity is expressed in the phrase “E Pluribus Unum”, from many peoples we shape one nation. This treasured civic truth reflects and is rooted in the biblical heritage of belief in the dignity of all people, and a shared humanity. We have not always as a nation reflected the best of our ideas and ideals, but they stand as a goal toward which we strive. Our country is once again in a moment when the civic and biblical heritage is being attacked and tested. We need to reassert and reaffirm the belief that one nation is meant to include all: the multiple races, cultures, ethnicities and religions which make up our country. The angry and violent mob which gathered in Virginia this past weekend, by word and deed, contradicted our national creed and code of civil conduct. As a nation in the past century we led the struggle against the pagan ideas of Nazism. Those who seek to resurrect a new form of Nazism and extreme nationalism – those who denigrate African Americans, who preach and practice anti-Semitism, who disparage Muslims, those who threaten and seek to banish immigrants in our land – all these voices dishonor the basic convictions of the American political and constitutional traditions. They must be opposed in word and deed. As a Catholic bishop I welcome the opportunity to stand with other religious leaders of the land in opposition to the voices of fragmentation and hatred. As the Archbishop of Boston, it is my responsibility to call the Catholic community which I serve to remember the basic truths of faith and reason which are so central at this moment. The truth that our rights and our duties to each other derive from God. The truth that we can successfully oppose hatred and bigotry by civility and charity. These truths can bind us together across racial, religious and ethnic communities. They can help us celebrate our pluralism as a rich treasure which strengthens this land. Today when our unity is tested, when our basic truths of faith and reason are violated, as people of faith and as citizens we must uphold our ideas and ideals. My prayer is that we can rise to this challenge. My belief is that we are surely capable of doing so. I was able to comment on my parish website accordingly: This would be more meaningful, Your Eminence, if you also spoke out on the diabolical disorientation of the crowd on the left who promote unfettered abortion, gay "marriage", homosexuality and transgenderism as just alternative notches on the sexuality spectrum. By the way, there were two violent mobs in Virginia this past weekend. Both brought weapons and both contributed to the mayhem. Only one of these groups had a permit to protest.
What I miss in O'Malley's comment is a call to conversion to those neo nazis, and a call to everyone to live a Christian life in the face of so much division. Fragmentation and hatred has not been introduced in our society by this pitiful neo nazis groups - it has been introduced by relativism, gender theory, trans humanism and other ideologies that in the last years are rising like never before. We are failing to see that the hatred and division currently in our society does not come from these reactionary nazi groups that can barely be found in daily life, it comes from the mainstream of our society, a ultra individualist self indulgent proud society that has removed God and his moral law from everything, and so the only way to change hatred and division into union and true charity is by choosing to follow the rules of the Kingdom of God. I think this excerpt from Rene Girard's interview with David Cayley speaks volumes about Charlottesville and the current situation: 'Human societies create order by channeling violence towards scapegoats. Resentment, envy are directed away from one another towards a common enemy [e.g. the neo nazis]. Ritual sacrifices institutionalize this way of expelling violence [e.g. the taking down of confederate statues]. Jesus denounces the lie on which this system rests, and allows himself to be crucified in order to reveal for all time the innocence of all sacrificial victims. But this revelation, by depriving people of the means to disown their violence projected onto others inevitably brings that violence home to roost, so to speak, setting "father against son" and so forth. Jesus flashes the hidden violence of cultures into the open imposing a choice on people and it is this choice, Girard says, that constitutes the 'unveiling' or 'uncovering' that Christians call the Apocalypse. "The Apocalypse is not some invention, it means if we are without sacrifices either we are going to love each other or we are going to die [kill each other], we have no more protection against our own violence, therefore we are confronted with it. Either we are going to follow the rules of the Kingdom of God or the situation is going to get infinitely worse.' [...] 'Today I think we have two totalitarian groups – one which may have exhausted its possibilities, which is anti-Christian – Nazism. I think the violence of Nazism is: how are we going to get rid of Christianity? Nietzsche talked about doing it through philosophy, genealogy, showing that the Christians are for victims only for the most vulgar and sinister reasons...because they are part of the lower class. The Nazis say, we are more powerful than a poor philosopher that was half mad, and we’re going to drown the Christian desire to vindicate victims [with] such injustice, such destruction that we will prove that the destiny of the world that has been Christian is _______ . You have to regard the open explicit nature of Nazi violence. They didn’t talk about concentration camps during the war because it would have been very bad from a strategic viewpoint, but if they had won the war they would have publicized it and said – our world has nothing to do with Christianity, we have proved that Christianity cannot do anything in this world. This was an explicit anti-Christian view. I think there is another totalitarianism which is opposite [that says]: don’t believe that Christianity is defending victims, it just pretends to; it’s nothing but inquisition, terrorism, etc. We’re going to show you how to defend victims...which is what we see today. An imitation of Christ which is at the same time a total betrayal of Christianity...we have to read much of contemporary history in this light. It’s so controversial and potentially explosive it’s very difficult to articulate, but I think the signs are converging in that direction. I would say today what we call political correctness and so forth is a superchristianity." This superchristinaity which Girard associates with political correctness reduces the world to nothing but victimization, oppression and the machinations of power [Foucault, etc]. It takes up the Christian concern with victims but abandons Christianity, and in particular Christian morality. "Today ideology consists in presenting the 10 commandments as the worst form of tyranny and oppression. The enlightenment would never have done that. Voltaire was making fan of the Church and all the aspects of the corruption of the Church, but today the 10 commandments, for example, though shall not commit adultery, is regarded as the worst oppression. Then everything is oppression, everything is victimization, and this I think is the totalitarianism of the future. Marxism was only its most primitive form." This new totalitarianism, as Girard sees it, promises to deliver all that is good in Christianity while dispensing with everything 'repressive' [christian morality]. It is currently engage in a gigantic intellectual expulsion of the whole judeochristian tradition. The fact that the defense of victims can now be carried on against Christianity is characteristic of our time, Girard says. Our preoccupation with victimization comes from Christianity but it has by now work its way so deeply into our society that it has become a valuable form of political currency. "Think that today some american politicians are thinking about indemnities for slavery…can you imagine one single society which will behave like we do? Not one in all of history. The sensitivity we have to victims is a concrete form of Christianity. Christianity doesn't need to be preached anyway today because the defense of the victim is something everyone is going to do...but against everybody else. If I am French I talk about American slavery. If I am American I talk about the terror…we are always obsessed more with the victims of other people than with our own." In the world of today an accusation of victimization can be an attempt to get one up on a rival just as a claim of victimization can be a source of advantage. This produces a general competition for victim status where it is sometimes hard to tell the scapegoats from the scapegoaters. Our world, as Girard said earlier, moves towards the best and the worst at once. We are more concern with victims and at the same time more concern with ourselves than ever before.'
Jarg, You said it all with this statement, "What I miss in O'Malley's comment is a call to conversion to those neo nazis, and a call to everyone to live a Christian life in the face of so much division." For the past few days I have been immersing myself in the visions of Tre Fontane, I wonder if this is what Our Lady meant by "Do not get undress of the priestly robe: the priest cassock calls to attention, it is a heavenly sign". Possibly a reminder to the clergy that they are first and foremost members of the clergy and that they should be speaking the word of Our Lord on all occasions. It appears that too many people are afraid to speak the truth.
Perfect response, CathyG. This just reminds me of yet another lost opportunity to evangelize, not propagandize. This was a perfect time to re-introduce the Sacred Heart of Jesus and The Immaculate Heart of Mary. This also reminds me of learning how to swim. It feels like we are under water and struggling to get to the surface to gulp a breath of air before we are thrust back down into the deep again. We need to keep kicking and stretch our hands up toward the light but it is mighty discouraging when the hand holding us under water belongs to a Cardinal.
Not simply a call to the Nationalist element which is what they really are but a call to the so called ANTIFA tribe as well. How many Catholics I wonder took part in this event? My guess would be near zero. Both sides of this equation drape themselves in a cause which they hold up to the world to see like a shining banner but hide that which they truly represent and fight to propagate. It is much like Masonry in this respect or the beginnings of National Socialism was. If this is what they want the world to see imagine what it is which they wish to hide.
Lots of new age ,atheist, self seeking Individuals in the antifa Yoga and tai chi and "peace seekers" But peace in whose name? Surely not Jesus
http://www.ncregister.com/blog/edwa...es-formal-correction-of-pope-francis-teaching Cardinal Burke Outlines Formal Correction of Pope Francis’ Teaching The former prefect of the Apostolic Signatura explains in a new interview how a correction of parts of the Holy Father’s magisterium would be enacted, pays tribute to the recently deceased Cardinal Meisner, and stresses the importance of true mercy. Edward Pentin In a new interview, Cardinal Raymond Burke has said it is “now necessary” that a declaration be issued on key areas of Church doctrine that are “not clear” in Pope Francis’ teachings. The Holy Father will then be “obliged to respond” in order to bring clarification to those teachings, he said. The cardinal told The Wanderer newspaper Aug. 14 that such a formal act of correction has not been invoked “for several centuries” and until now it has never been used “in a doctrinal way.” But he said it would be “quite simple” and involve presenting on the one hand the “clear teaching of the Church” and on the other “what is actually being taught by the Roman Pontiff.” The teaching in question in particular relates to doctrinal matters published in the Pope's 2016 apostolic exhortation, Amoris laetitia. “If there is a contradiction, the Roman Pontiff is called to conform his own teaching in obedience to Christ and the Magisterium of the Church,” the cardinal explained, adding that a “formal declaration” would be submitted to the Holy Father to which he would be “obliged to respond.” The cardinal stressed that the dubia, five questions which he and three other cardinals (Cardinals Carlo Caffarra, Walter Brandmüller and Joachim Meisner) issued nearly a year ago, aimed to give the Holy Father the occasion to clarify these aspects of Church teaching. They were issued in a “very respectful way and not in any way aggressive,” he said, but as the Pope has “chosen not to respond” to them, “so it is now necessary simply to state what the Church teaches about marriage, the family, acts that are intrinsically evil, and so forth.” “These are the points that are not clear in the current teachings of the Roman Pontiff; therefore, this situation must be corrected. The correction would then direct itself principally to those doctrinal points,” he said. The cardinal, a former prefect of the Apostolic Signatura, the Church’s highest court, did not give a timeframe for the correction, but hinted at its urgency by stressing that the Church is “being torn asunder right now by confusion and division” and that unity is at stake. “The Holy Father must be called on to exercise his office to put an end to this,” he said. Cardinal Burke first suggested a possible formal correction of the Pope in an interview with the Register last November, saying it is “clearly quite rare” but if there was no response, then it would be a “question of taking a formal act of correction of a serious error.” He spoke then of “tremendous division” that is “not the way of the Church.” In his latest interview, he said he finds the situation “has only worsened” and pointed to groups of lay faithful, priests and bishops he has met who are “practically in desperation” over what is happening. Any fraternal correction is expected to be undertaken in the first place in camera caritatis, in other words, not in public, according to Cardinal Brandmüller. In his interview with The Wanderer, the cardinal warned of the danger of schism if universal doctrinal discipline is not restored, but reiterated his firm opposition to that ever happening. “A schism can never be correct,” he said, adding that what is happening is a situation of apostasy that the Blessed Mother warned about in her Message of Fatima. “There can be apostasy within the Church and this, in fact, is what is going on,” he said. “In connection with the apostasy, Our Lady also referred to the failure of pastors to bring the Church to unity.” In a speech last month, Cardinal Burke observed that disorientation and error had entered into the Church “in a diabolical way,” but encouraged the faithful to remain steadfast in the faith as well as courageous and serene, knowing Christ’s victory is “already written.” Cardinal Meisner and true mercy In his latest interview, the cardinal also praised Cardinal Joachim Meisner, the archbishop emeritus of Cologne and one of the four cardinals to sign the dubia, saying he had a “profound sense of the Catholic Faith” and always “supported and encouraged” those who defended the Church’s “constant teaching and practice.” “He was a wonderful pastor,” Cardinal Burke said, who never criticized those who supported the Church’s teaching as “legalists” who “do not care about people” and were “throwing stones” at others. “He was a very loving pastor who understood that a good shepherd of the flock must teach the truth to the faithful in its entirety.” The cardinal also confirmed the existence of a commission to examine Bl. Paul VI’s encyclical Humanae vitae and warned that if the Church's infallible teaching on contraception (that it “is intrinsically disordered, that to separate the unitive and procreative aspects of the marital act is always and everywhere wrong”) is not upheld, it would “be an opening to all kinds of immoral activity involving our sexual faculties while people would justify sinful genital acts.” He also stressed the importance of “discriminating mercy” which “distinguishes the sin from the sinner.” “An expression of love toward the sinner makes it very clear that the sin he or she is committing is absolutely repulsive and must be stopped. Yet, the tendency is to respond with a false sense of mercy,” the cardinal said. “If we are not conscious of our sin and repenting of it, what does it mean to ask for God’s mercy? Why are we asking for God’s mercy if we have not sinned? So it is as simple as that. Otherwise, mercy is a meaningless term. We must admit the sin we have committed is wrong, that we are deeply sorry for it, and that we are asking for God’s mercy.”
One blogger has translated this paragraph for those unable to read between the lines. “He was a wonderful pastor,” Cardinal Burke said, who never criticized those who supported the Church’s teaching as “legalists” who “do not care about people” and were “throwing stones” at others. “He was a very loving pastor who understood that a good shepherd of the flock must teach the truth to the faithful in its entirety.” Actually means... ''Francis is not a wonderful pastor. He says that those who support the Church’s teaching are legalists and do not care about people, that they are throwing stones at them. Nor is Francis a loving pastor who understands that a good shepherd of the flock must teach the truth to the faithful in its entirety''.
Leading theologian: change canon law to correct papal errors by Dan Hitchens posted Friday, 18 Aug 2017 Fr Aidan Nichols Fr Aidan Nichols said that Pope Francis's teaching had led to an 'extremely grave' situation A prominent theologian has proposed reforming canon law to allow a pope’s doctrinal errors to be established. Fr Aidan Nichols, a prolific author who has lectured at Oxford and Cambridge as well as the Angelicum in Rome, said that Pope Francis’s exhortation Amoris Laetitia had led to an “extremely grave” situation. Fr Nichols proposed that, given the Pope’s statements on issues including marriage and the moral law, the Church may need “a procedure for calling to order a pope who teaches error”. The Dominican theologian said that this procedure might be less “conflictual” if it took place during a future pontificate, rather as Pope Honorius was only condemned for error after he had ceased to occupy the chair of Peter. Fr Nichols was speaking at the annual conference in Cuddesdon of an ecumenical society, the Fellowship of St Alban and St Sergius, to a largely non-Catholic audience. He said the judicial process would “dissuade popes from any tendency to doctrinal waywardness or simple negligence”, and would answer some “ecumenical anxieties” of Anglicans, Orthodox and others who fear that the pope has carte blanche to impose any teaching. “Indeed, it may be that the present crisis of the Roman magisterium is providentially intended to call attention to the limits of primacy in this regard.” Fr Nichols has written over 40 books of philosophy, theology, apologetics and criticism. In 2006 he was appointed to Oxford University’s first lectureship since the Reformation in Catholic theology. He has not publicly commented on Amoris Laetitia until now, but was a signatory to a leaked letter from 45 priests and theologians to the College of Cardinals. The letter asked the cardinals to request a clarification from the Pope to rule out heretical and erroneous interpretations of the exhortation. In his paper Fr Nichols mentioned some of the same concerns as the letter: he noted, for instance, that Amoris Laetitia could seem to imply that the monastic life was not a higher state than marriage – a view condemned as heretical by the Council of Trent. The exhortation has also been interpreted as arguing that the divorced and remarried can receive Communion without endeavouring to live “as brother and sister”. This contradicts the perennial teaching of the Church, reaffirmed by Popes St John Paul II and Benedict XVI. Fr Nichols said that this interpretation, which Pope Francis has reportedly approved, would introduce into the Church “a previously unheard-of state of life. Put bluntly, this state of life is one of tolerated concubinage.” But Fr Nichols said the way in which Amoris Laetitia argued for “tolerated concubinage” (without using the phrase) was potentially even more harmful. He quoted the exhortation’s description of a conscience which “recognizes that a given situation does not correspond objectively to the demands of the Gospel” but sees “with a certain moral security…what for now is the most generous response.” Fr Nichols said this seemed to say “that actions condemned by the law of Christ can sometimes be morally right or even, indeed, requested by God.” This would contradict the Church’s teaching that some acts are always morally wrong, Fr Nichols said. Continues here http://www.catholicherald.co.uk/new...ian-change-canon-law-to-correct-papal-errors/
Is there something wrong, or possibly missing with this picture?? POPE: RIGHTS OF MIGRANTS TRUMP NATIONAL SECURITY CONCERNS VATICAN CITY (AP) -- Pope Francis on Monday urged countries to greatly improve their welcome to migrants and stop collective expulsions, saying migrants' dignity and right to protection trumps national security concerns. .... In the message, Francis demanded governments welcome, protect, promote and integrate migrants, saying Jesus' message of love is rooted in welcoming the "rejected strangers of every age." He demanded a simplified process of granting humanitarian and temporary visas and rejected arbitrary and collective expulsions as "unsuitable." He said the principle of ensuring each person's dignity "obliges us to always prioritize personal safety over national security." ......... Ignoring critics who say his calls are unrealistic and naive, Francis insisted in the new message that border guards must be trained to protect migrants and that each new arrival, regardless of legal status, must be guaranteed access to basic services beyond health care. That extends to guaranteeing access to consulates, the justice system and the ability to open a bank account and survive financially, he said. Unaccompanied minors, he said, require even greater protection, including guaranteeing them citizenship and access to schooling, as well as foster programs rather than detention centers. He called for policies that support family reunification, employment opportunities and accelerated citizenship procedures to improve migrants' abilities to integrate. His call was immediately rejected by the leader of Italy's anti-immigrant Northern League party, which has opposed government proposals to change Italy's law to accelerate citizenship for children born in Italy to non-Italians. "If you want to do it in the Vatican, go ahead," Matteo Salvini wrote on Facebook. "But as a Catholic, I don't think Italy can welcome and support the whole world." http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/storie...ME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2017-08-21-06-26-22
Only a fool, or someone completely obsessed by a sinister political agenda, could possibly utter this nonsense in the face of the slaughter of thousands of Christians at the hands of the jihadist migrants.
On a similar note... "Love the environment as yourself" !!??? Whatever happened to: "YOU SHALL LOVE THE LORD YOUR GOD WITH ALL YOUR HEART, AND WITH ALL YOUR SOUL, AND WITH ALL YOUR STRENGTH, AND WITH ALL YOUR MIND; AND YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF." LED lights and recycle projects. The Assisi friars go green The Convent answers the ecological call of the Pontiff St. Francis Upper Basilica illuminated at night (Photo: Photographic Archives of the Assisi Sacred Convent) 42 Pubblicato il 20/08/2017 Ultima modifica il 21/08/2017 alle ore 15:29 DOMENICO AGASSO JR ASSISI By illuminating with LED lights the basilicas and tombs of St. Francis, using photovoltaic panels, thermal insulation, but also issuing brochures and kits for pilgrims as well as touring around schools, the friars started a green revolution in Assisi. From the land of the saint of "Brother sun and Sister moon", which welcomes about 6 million visitors every year, a strong "Here we are" comes to the ecological call of the first pope named after St Francis. Encouraged by the indications of the Argentine Pontiff, who chose as the title of his encyclical a quote of St. Francis Canticle of the Creatures, "Laudato si", the Sacred Convent of Assisi has made a series of pro-environmental agreements with the Italian Ministry of the Environment and Land and Sea Protection, led by Gian Luca Galletti, and the Arpa (Regional Environmental Protection Agency), led by Walter Ganapini. Published in June 2015, a few months before the Paris Cop21 climate change conference, Laudato si' is the first encyclical devoted to the protection of Creation and marks the Church's "green revolution". Now this ecclesiastical campaign for the care of our “common Home” has as one of its symbols Assisi, and as active protagonists the Franciscan friars, a community of about 70 religious from 21 countries, from Korea to the United States, from Africa to India, from China to Spain. Here are some of the Friars’ envisaged and already implemented measures. First of all, they will tour around schools to bear witness to the example of the holy “poor man” from Assisi. They have also issued a brochure, "Mother Earth" (which will be included in the magazine San Francesco Patrono d'Italia), with the slogan "Love the environment as yourself". Their goal is to show students of all ages virtuous patterns for making concrete choices in favour of the environment on a daily basis. For the younger ones, the friars will issue a comic strips version of the “Canticle of creatures". More below: http://www.lastampa.it/2017/08/20/v...s-go-green-v6VbWgj9B9ULaU7ZxHFeZM/pagina.html
This and the current obsession with tearing down borders and welcome, not just migrants, but entire towns from cultures that are meant to clash is suicidal, it is absolute madness and in my opinion it is part of an agenda of 'goodness' going way beyond common sense and prudence - it is the 'goodness' of the modern world that unleashes the escalation to extremes we see in ISIS, new forms of european nationalisms and populisms. It is an agenda that, maybe with the best intentions, it imposes a multiculturalist political social structure that far from accepting cultural differences and cultural incompatibilities with respect , it dissolves and levels down all cultures and religions. It seems really a prototypical case of virtues going wild associated with Protestantism! The modern world is not evil; in some ways the modern world is far too good. It is full of wild and wasted virtues. When a religious scheme is shattered (as Christianity was shattered at the Reformation), it is not merely the vices that are let loose. The vices are, indeed, let loose, and they wander and do damage. But the virtues are let loose also; and the virtues wander more wildly, and the virtues do more terrible damage. The modern world is full of the old Christian virtues gone mad. The virtues have gone mad because they have been isolated from each other and are wandering alone. Thus some scientists care for truth; and their truth is pitiless. Thus some humanitarians only care for pity; and their pity (I am sorry to say) is often untruthful. For example, Mr. Blatchford attacks Christianity because he is mad on one Christian virtue: the merely mystical and almost irrational virtue of charity. He has a strange idea that he will make it easier to forgive sins by saying that there are no sins to forgive. Mr. Blatchford is not only an early Christian, he is the only early Christian who ought really to have been eaten by lions. For in his case the pagan accusation is really true: his mercy would mean mere anarchy. He really is the enemy of the human race-- because he is so human. As the other extreme, we may take the acrid realist, who has deliberately killed in himself all human pleasure in happy tales or in the healing of the heart. (G.K. Chesterton, The Suicide of Thought)
When I read this it made me snicker. I apologize for saying that and for having that reaction but....I don't turn to the pope for border control/immigration issues. The US STILL takes in many migrants even with the travel restrictions, we are taking in quite a lot of people into our country. This is madness. The pope relays the importance of taking in strangers and welcoming the refugee. Yes. But at what point do I fulfill my duty to protect my family? Did God not also charge me as a parent to protect my minor children? Are they not in my care, both physical and spiritual? And the "terrorists" are blowing people up and killing people, children. I don't get it. Truly I don't. I am angry also about this. I am so angry it makes me laugh because of the absurdity of it.
I don't really understand why he even broaches this subject. Is not the world swallowing up these men from foreign lands who have left their homes? We see a few exceptions such as Poland refusing to allow more migrants. Big deal. Either my head is in the sand or this whole thing is a non issue. I really hate to say this but it really seems to me that Pope Francis is struggling to be relevant.
August 22, 2017 13 Times Pope Francis Promoted Liberation Theology Pope Francis enjoys widespread popularity among Americans generally, especially American Catholics. In fact, his favorability ratings are better than any American president when they left office, ever since Gallup began keeping data under Harry Truman! What makes this somewhat surprising is Pope Francis has regularly alluded to liberation theology, which places him at least as far left as any U.S. president and much further left than most Americans. Liberation theology takes many forms. It tends to emphasize the importance of overcoming economic oppression of the poor and understanding Christian teachings from their perspective. Christian social scientist Rodney Stark explains the rise of liberation theology thus in his book, The Triumph of Faith, as a response by Catholic theologians to Protestant evangelism efforts, particularly in Latin America: Known as liberation theology, it was a mixture of Marxism and Catholicism that aimed at “mobilizing the poor for their own liberation.” The proposed tactic to achieve this liberation was to unite small groups of lower-class Latin Americans into a form of utopian socialist commune, wherein they would have their political and moral awareness raised and serve as models of progress for people in the surrounding area. The Institute on Religion and Democracy, founded in 1982, came about at the height of liberation theology. But it was major Protestant denominations, not just the Catholic Church, which lent moral credibility to Marxist revolution. “During the 1980’s, United Methodist Church missionaries toiled in Nicaragua, not planting churches or winning souls, but flaking for the Sandinista experiment with Central American Marxism,” IRD President Mark Tooley reflected in 2009. Yet most churches have since “lost interest in touting Marxist liberation around the world,” Tooley later noted. Although certainly not all proponents of liberation theology are Marxists, the worldview still holds sway among high-profile Christian leaders. As Stark noted, “Probably the primary proponent of liberation theology today is Francis, the first Latin American pope.” (However, one must question how the dire economic straights facing his home country of Argentina and the political turmoil in nearby Venezuela failed to convince Pope Francis of the flaws of this progressive worldview.) Indeed, Pope Francis has frequently employed the language of liberation theology, although his particular policy proposals (if any) remain ambiguous. Considering this, perhaps most Americans would realize just how far apart the pope’s views are from their own. Here are 13 quotes from Pope Francis about Christianity and liberation: (1) “Each individual Christian and every community is called to be an instrument of God for the liberation and promotion of the poor, and for enabling them to be fully a part of society. This demands that we be docile and attentive to the cry of the poor and to come to their aid.” (Letter from Pope Francis to Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott on November 15-16, 2014) (2) “Responsibility for the poor and the marginalized must therefore be an essential element of any political decision, whether on the national or the international level.” (Message for the Lenten Brotherhood Campaign 2015 in Brazil on February 2, 2015) (3) “So many poor people — also poor in faith — are waiting for the Gospel that liberates! How many men and women, on the existential peripheries created by a consumerist, atheistic society, wait for our closeness and our solidarity!” (Address at the Pontifical Council for Promoting New Evangelism on May 29, 2015) (4) “So many poor people, victims of old and new forms of poverty. There are new forms of poverty! Structural and endemic poverty are excluding generations of families. Economic, social, moral and spiritual poverty.” (Address at the International Pastoral Congress on the World’s Big Cities on November 27, 2014) (5) “The growth of inequality and poverty undermines inclusive and participatory democracy at risk which always presupposes an economy and an equitable and nonexclusive market. It is a question, therefore, of overcoming the structural causes of inequality and poverty. In the Apostolic Exhortation Evangelii Gaudium, I wished to point out three fundamental instruments for the social inclusion of the most needy: education, access to health care and employment for all.” (Address at the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace on October 2, 2014) (6) “There are economic systems that must make war in order to survive… An economic system centered on the god of money also needs to plunder nature, plunder nature, in order to maintain the frenetic pace of consumption inherent in it.” (Address at the World Meeting of Popular Movements on October 28, 2014) (7) “Today, added to the phenomenon of exploitation and oppression, is a new dimension, a graphic and hard hue of social injustice; those that cannot be integrated, the excluded are discarded, the ‘leftovers.’ This is the disposable culture…” (Address at the World Meeting of Popular Movements on October 28, 2014) (8) “Solidarity, this word that frightens the developed world. People try to avoid saying it. Solidarity to them is almost a bad word. But it is our word! Serving means recognizing and accepting requests for justice and hope, and seeking roads together, real paths that lead to liberation.” (Address at ‘Astalli Centre’ Jesuit refugee service in Rome on September 10, 2013) (9) “An unfettered pursuit of money rules. This is the ‘dung of the devil’. The service of the common good is left behind. Once capital becomes an idol and guides people’s decisions, once greed for money presides over the entire socioeconomic system, it ruins society, it condemns and enslaves men and women, it destroys human fraternity, it sets people against one another and, as we clearly see, it even puts at risk our common home, sister and mother earth.” (Address at the Second World Meeting of Popular Movements on July 9, 2015) More....
Continued... (10) “We must recover the whole sense of gift, of gratuitousness, of solidarity. Rampant capitalism has taught the logic of profit at all costs, of giving to get, of exploitation without looking at the person… and we see the results in the crisis we are experiencing!” (Address while visiting homeless shelter ‘Dono di Maria’ on May 21, 2013) (11) “The Church has realized that the need to heed this plea is itself born of the liberating action of grace within each of us, and thus it is not a question of a mission reserved only to a few: ‘The Church, guided by the Gospel of mercy and by love for mankind, hears the cry for justice and intends to respond to it with all her might’ … it means working to eliminate the structural causes of poverty and to promote the integral development of the poor, as well as small daily acts of solidarity in meeting the real needs which we encounter.” (The Joy of the Gospel: Evangelii Gaudium, 2014) (12) “Let us ask ourselves: what does it mean to evangelize the poor? It means first of all drawing close to them, it means having the joy of serving them, of freeing them from their oppression, and all of this in the name of and with the Spirit of Christ, because he is the Gospel of God, he is the Mercy of God, he is the liberation of God, he is the One who became poor so as to enrich us with his poverty.” (Angelus in Saint Peter’s Square on January 24, 2016) (13) “The Gospel passage we have heard presents us with a figure who stands out because of her faith and courage. This is the woman whom Jesus healed of a hemorrhage (cf. Mt 9:20-22). … This example causes one to reflect on how the woman is often perceived and represented. We, even Christian communities, are all alert to views of femininity invalidated by prejudice and harmful suspicions about her intangible dignity. The Gospels themselves restore the truth and bring a liberating perspective in this regard.” (General Audience at Saint Peter’s Square on August 31, 2016)
Fr. James Martin at Boston College, 2014. Youtube. Pete Baklinski Tue Aug 22, 2017 - 2:17 pm EST Vatican adviser scraps Catholic teaching, says God made gays ‘who they are’ catholic , homosexuality , james martin , pflag PORTLAND, Oregon, August 22, 2017 (LifeSiteNews) — A high profile Vatican consultant has publicly departed from Catholic teaching on homosexuality, saying God made “LGBTQ people … who they are.” Father James Martin, a Jesuit priest who is the editor at large of America Magazine as well as an adviser to the Vatican's Secretariat for Communications, made the comment to the pro-homosexual organization PFLAG (Parents, Families, and Friends of Lesbians and Gays) on August 18. Martin spoke on the occasion of PFLAG honoring him with its 2017 Flag Bearer Award for making what it called “lasting contributions to the safety and/or equality of people who are LGBTQ, their families, and allies.” The award will be given at PFLAG’s National Convention in Portland, Oregon, two months from now. “I'm grateful to PFLAG for this recognition, and I hope that the award serves as another reminder that all LGBTQ people are beloved children of God, that God made them who they are, and that they have as much place in our churches as anyone else,” said Martin. The Catholic Church teaches, however, that sexual attraction to someone of the same sex is “objectively disordered” since God created sexual attraction to be between a male and female for the sake of procreation. Because of this, the Church holds that there is no such reality as a “homosexual person,” but only a person who struggles with what the Church calls the “disorder” of being attracted to someone of the same sex. “Although the particular inclination of the homosexual person is not a sin, it is a more or less strong tendency ordered toward an intrinsic moral evil; and thus the inclination itself must be seen as an objective disorder, states a 1986 letter on the topic of homosexuality from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith to the worlds’ bishops. “pecial concern and pastoral attention should be directed toward those who have this condition, lest they be led to believe that the living out of this orientation in homosexual activity is a morally acceptable option. It is not,” the letter adds. The Church teaches that everybody, including those with a disordered sexuality — often expressing itself in lust, masturbation, fornication, pornography, homosexuality — are called to chastity, that is to the moral virtue of a rightly ordered sexuality integrated within the person. The Church furthermore teaches that persons who struggle with same-sex attraction must be “accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity.” While Fr. Martin has accepted various awards from pro-homosexual organizations that sell themselves as “Christian,” this may be the first time he has accepted an award from a secular pro-homosexual organization that is bluntly at odds with Catholic sexual teaching. PFLAG exists to advance what it calls “equality and full societal affirmation of LGBT people through its threefold mission of support, education, and advocacy.” It has been a leading proponent of same-sex “marriage” and homosexual adoption in its four-decade existence.
August 22, 2017 Fornicating in Self-Defense Deacon Jim Russell When is fornication not really fornication? Well, if reports are accurate, according to Archbishop Victor Manuel Fernandez, dubbed by some as Pope Francis’ “closest theological adviser,” if a sexually active, unmarried couple lives together, he says it is “licit to ask” whether such sexual activity “should always fall, in its integral meaning, within the negative precept of ‘fornication.’” I’ll go out on a moral-theological limb at this point—yes, Your Excellency. Yes, such sexual activity should indeed always fall within the negative precept of “fornication.” Ah, but I haven’t been patient enough to hear him out more fully. He has more to say. He bases his remarkable claim on another remarkable claim. He says that “one cannot maintain [that] those acts in each and every case are gravely dishonest in a subjective sense.” Remember the good old days, when Catholic moral theology was actually quite concretely based upon objective moral norms? Surprise! Nowadays, if something is not “gravely dishonest in a subjective sense,” why then I guess the merely observable fact that the same something remains gravely dishonest in an objective sense is no longer that important. But wait—aren’t there really objective moral norms? Sure. But, according to Fernandez (again, if accurately reported), there’s a big problem—not with the norms, but with their formulation: “It is the formulation of the norm that cannot cover everything, not the norm in itself,” the archbishop says. He says that a formulated norm is “incapable of addressing each and every situation.” Got it? So, fornication is always wrong as a general norm. But, when you fornicate with the same person under the same roof, that’s a situation that falls outside the norm’s “formulation” and might really be “subjectively honest” and therefore shouldn’t really always count as violating the negative precept against fornication. I haven’t gotten around to telling you the best part of all this—this is part of Archbishop Fernandez’s “systematic defense” of the problem passages of Amoris Laetitia, which he is credited by many as having helped draft. He even claims that the infamous Amoris Laetitia footnote 351 was intentionally crafted to have the Church move pastorally closer toward letting some divorced-but-not-annulled Catholics who invalidly attempt another marriage to receive Communion without having to cease sexual relations. Okay, maybe that’s not the best part, either. Maybe the best part is the archbishop’s insistence that Pope Francis gave the Church an “authoritative interpretation” of the vexing Communion issue via his papal letter of thanks to the bishops of Buenos Aires for their guidelines on this question (which allowed for discerning cases in which such couples would be permitted to receive Communion). In that letter, Pope Francis himself states there is “no other interpretation” besides theirs. But I’ll beg to differ and offer a quite non-authoritative counter-interpretation of what Fernandez himself seems to be saying: I find his claims to be, at face value, a false and inelegant sophistry of the highest order. If there is any truth whatever to his claim that a footnote in a pope’s post-synodal apostolic exhortation is deliberately intended to “discreetly” undermine existing and clear Church teaching, then that footnote should be ignored, excised, or otherwise eliminated from the conscious recollection of faithful Catholics. Test everything—retain what is good. I already know there is no truth whatever to the convoluted claim he makes about fornication. But let’s hammer a few nails in that particular coffin anyway. If the archbishop’s take on fornication is correct, then I should be able to fornicate in self-defense. Indeed, he himself compares killing in self-defense and stealing to feed the starving as examples of “exceptions” to otherwise absolute norms. But here’ s the problem with the “self-defense” comparison—any time we are compelled by circumstances to do something that results in an evil effect, that evil effect is excused by the fact that we had no choice, such as with killing in self-defense, or stealing food to keep the family from starving. The fornication example is entirely different. The preservation of one’s life and the right to food are both matters of justice. They involve values that arise from the inviolable dignity of the human person. Fornication, on the contrary, involves in itself one of those inviolable values attached to human dignity—the reality that marital relations are reserved only for real marriage. Not false marriage sanctioned by the state. Not cohabitation. This is an absolute norm that cannot be altered, regardless of the “formulation” it may receive. There is no “right” to sexual activity that must be safeguarded or protected as a matter of justice. And this is particularly obvious for those who are not even married! Rather, there is a responsibility that a non-married person has to completely avoid fornication. Not only can there be no such thing as the ridiculous notion of “fornicating in self-defense,” but there can also be no such thing as any claim to fornicate to avoid starvation (as in the stealing comparison). Imagine if it were permissible. The so-called “world’s oldest profession”—prostitution—would be morally permissible, as long as it was a subjectively “honest” attempt to make a living wage from it. There is an unbelievably acute madness at work in the so-called “logic” of these claims. While the Church has clearly taught through her existence that only that which is true is authentically pastoral, now we are facing a twisted perspective in which we’re being told that the only truly pastoral path requires that we set aside that which is true because, if we don’t (once more according to Archbishop Fernandez), we’re just stuck in a “death trap” that is a “betrayal of the heart of the Gospel.” Serial fornication by cohabiting couples does not deserve a label of “subjective” honesty. Such claims—even from clergy—must be repudiated as contrary to the Catholic faith. Truly pastoral accompaniment does not, cannot, mean forfeiting the objective reality of sin just because those committing the sin are subjectively not seeing their act as gravely dishonest. Similarly, as faithful Catholics we must studiously and steadfastly reject any claim that sometimes the “best” a person can do in concrete, lived situations is to freely and deliberately commit sin. Coming to that conclusion means robbing the human person of his or her most precious interior freedom to make moral choices. The human person ought not be diminished and objectified by such tormented reasoning. We’ve all heard it: well, a person whose spouse leaves him or her just has to find a new partner and certainly can’t be expected to make the right moral choice of remaining faithful to promises made to a now-long-gone spouse unless and until that marriage is declared null. The divorced-remarried can’t be expected to untangle the mess of “remarriage” (so-called) now that this “irregular” union has borne children! Just like the illogic of fornication in self-defense, there is simply no way to make “adultery in self-defense”—that is, attempting marriage again, without annulment, after separation from one’s legitimate spouse—justifiable or logical. Yet, that is what is now happening before our very eyes. Highly placed churchmen are moving away from months of ambiguity regarding Amoris Laetitia and now making unambiguous claims about its intentions. Tragically for the universal Church, these profoundly bankrupt claims are being hailed by some as genuine “progress.” Yet, I can think of nothing quite so regressive, nothing quite so reckless and damaging to souls. Just like the nonsensical concept of fornicating in self-defense, assertions that fornication isn’t fornication and adultery isn’t adultery are indeed not the least bit pastoral. Furthermore, such “accompaniment” of wounded souls will only lead them further away from God’s kingdom, not closer to it. With due respect to the as-reported views of Archbishop Fernandez, the “death trap” here is pretending that things aren’t what they really are. The path to life, and the preservation of the Gospel, is to be found solely in the truths that we owe to ourselves and to everyone else. The truth is ultimately inescapable. We can’t change it with artful sophistry posing as pastoral accompaniment. We can either learn the truth now, or learn it later. And learning it now is far easier.
