The whole area of contraception troubles me deeply. Back in the early 1990s I read a piece by the founder of Human Life International, he states that abortion was already in Ireland through the use of the standard pill. If a woman is on the pill for a year and is sexually active, more then likely she has conceived once each 6 months, but because the pill changes the womb the new life cannot attach its self and is flushed out.
Baldisseri reproves Chaput, says abuse crisis won’t stop synod success Chaput was one of 15 members of the council that drafted the instrumentum laboris and because of that role, will participate in the synod as an “ex officio” member. “If he had some objections, he could have demonstrated them; we would have inserted them, calmly,” Baldisseri said of Chaput. I would think that that is a bit disingenuous since he admits that what Chaput may have seen or partially witnessed was some kind of "draft" but not the final paper to which he objected. You can give all kinds of nuances and implications in a final imposition of such original elements. This seems rather sneaky and exposes a clearer revelation of the moral division in thinking by the responsible parties. We will always have the Church/Body of Christ in Truth.....even when it's forced underground.....and within the remnant faithful. But this rotten "institution" is going down in flames. That heretical formation attempting to "ape" the true body is not worth defending or getting too upset about in its demise.
That is the truth within this "science"/chemistry that is forbidden to be revealed, generally, to the public. Instead it's the diabolically deliberate ignorance and "spin" that is fed universally. Everything now is based solely on the material world, cutting off any connection to the Creator God and His universal laws. There is always suffering within the soul whenever this connection to Truth is severed until it's lost completely.
The hormones in the pill change the womb, you are correct. You put this in a very clear and understandable way.
How likely is the epidemic of breast cancer in young women a result of the prolonged use of these very powerful growth-inducing chemicals?
Yet, it is our clergy who have helped form the lack of conscience of the faithful with their dumbed down social justice sermons, week after week after week for many decades. Our laity are a product, not only of a progressive society, but of a progressive clergy who have embraced social justice and often times Marxist forms of government. There is no guilt taught in most Catholic homilies, there is no hell spoken of as a consequence of sin. So the laity become complacent in their faith, which then eventually dies out. God bless the few good and faithful clergy who are in the battle with us against the powers of hell.
I agree and think this is deliberate. That there are those who intentionally wish to cause grave harm to those ignorant of the underlying laws they are sinning against. They relish and delight in this. It is due to our own selfish desires of course which leads one to take part in such things but there is more to this than simply cause and effect of this sort especially for those who believe in God. For if we believe in God then we know too the diabolic is at work. We see this at work in those who promote new teachings in the Church. They try to tie these teachings loosely to tradition. If the masses can not be misled through their own desires due to the sound teachings and tradition of the Church then the Sheppard's will be used to poison them and lead them astray. Many in the Church today are buying into the poison coming from the Bishops Synods because they have children or loved ones who have left the Truth and are living and promoting lives of sin and perversion to others. They think that the truth can be changed, that it can evolve to include their wayward loved ones and their own sinful desires which they love more than God. "Do not think that I have come to bring peace upon the earth. I have come to bring not peace but the sword. 35 For I have come to set a man 'against his father, a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; 36 and one's enemies will be those of his household.' 37 "Whoever loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me, and whoever loves son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me; 38 and whoever does not take up his cross and follow after me is not worthy of me. 39 Whoever finds his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life for my sake will find it.
The Whole World Groans by Michael Hanby 10 . 2 . 18 https://www.firstthings.com/web-exclusives/2018/10/the-whole-world-groans St. Jerome, angry over the protracted Arian crisis and the apparent victory of the “semi-Arians” at the Council of Rimini, expressed his exasperation and amazement in words that have endured across the centuries: “The whole world groaned and marveled to see itself Arian.” Over the past decade, the West has seen a massive push for so-called LGBT rights and the codification of radical new human archetypes, with ramifications for law, politics, family, technology, and social structure that we have barely begun to contemplate. Meanwhile, the Church has witnessed the McCarrick revelations, the exposure of widespread, predominantly homosexual abuse, and the allegations by Archbishop Viganò of a homosexual cabal operating at the highest levels of the Roman Curia. We have endured the machinations connected with two controversial Synods on the Family, the promulgation of Amoris Laetitia, two World Meetings of Families and, now, the Synod on Youth. And we have seen the rise of a public-relations juggernaut, buttressed by progressive bishops and a fawning media, aimed at “building bridges” to the LGBT community. Dissenters are intimidated by the toxic charges of “hate” and “homophobia,” coming from inside the Church. One could hardly be blamed for wondering whether future historians and theologians will look back on this period in ecclesial history and say, with an amazement similar to St. Jerome’s: “The whole world groaned and marveled to see itself gay.” Of course, our moment will merit comparison with the great heresies of ages past only if the question of sexuality pertains to fundamental truths and puts the integrity of the faith into question. It is a serious and urgent question how to think rigorously and without moralism about the phenomenon of same-sex attraction, while treating with “respect, compassion, and sensitivity” people whose lives are so deeply characterized by this desire. Serious and urgent, too, is the question of how to accompany them in the Christian life, not qua homosexuals but qua beloved children of God, many of whom doubtless live lives of great personal holiness. Unfortunately, the current “bridge-building” pastoral approach is not a serious answer to these questions. Using “the pastoral” as a weapon against the intrusion of both doctrine and thought, this approach pretends to do justice to people’s “concrete circumstances,” but in fact it is wonderfully abstract. It brackets the order of creation—which is the real world, after all—and separates the subjective experience of “LGBT identity” from all the actual circumstances that make “sexual and gender identity” a dominant preoccupation in our time: from its meaning as the centerpiece of a new authoritarian politics; from the consequences of reimagining the basic human realities of mother, father, and child, and inscribing the new human archetypes into law; and from its necessary relation to the biotech revolution and the flourishing ART and surrogacy industries, all of which promise to reshape family, law, and society. The bridge-building approach thus obscures what is most fundamentally at stake for the human future in the question of sexual “identity”: the truth of the humanum and the human archetypes by which we order our lives. We seem to have lost our capacity to think and speak about “LGBT identity” without capitulating to it. One needn’t even mention the campaign of Fr. James Martin to adopt LGBT nomenclature and amend the Catechism. The mere idea of heterosexual “orientation,” as one of two species of the genus sexuality, is already “gay,” since both “species” presuppose that sexual desire and identity are only arbitrarily related to a meaningless biological substrate. This same dualistic understanding is the premise of the revolution in assisted reproductive technologies and the normalization of surrogacy. Transgenderism follows quite logically from this premise, just as surely as the push for transgender rights followed the Obergefell decision in time. Yet if “gender,” like “orientation,” is merely a function of a self-appropriated identity distinct from one’s sexually differentiated body (now relegated to the realm of “mere biology”), then in fact there is no longer any such thing as man or woman as heretofore understood. We are all transgender now, even if gender and sexual identity accidentally coincide in the great majority of instances. It is whistling past the graveyard to pretend that these ideas will have no social, legal, political, or eugenical ramifications beyond the subjective experience of individuals; indeed, they have already had such consequences. Yet one searches in vain to discover any acknowledgment of these consequences in the bridge-building pastoral approach, in the two Synods on the Family, or in any of the recent teaching regarding what Church leaders are now calling “affectivity.” continued...
continued from above... This fact is all the stranger in view of the centrality of the “anthropological question” in the last two pontificates and their interpretation of Vatican II. Long before LGBT rights and “transgenderism” appeared on the horizon, John Paul II saw firsthand the great threat to the human future posed by the reductive political, economic, and technological ideologies of late-twentieth-century modernity. This is why he thought it so important to rescue Humanae Vitae from a reductive moralism and to deepen what he called its anthropological meaning. Rejected by progressives as a romantic form of biologism, dismissed by many conservatives as inspirational poetry rather than theology, and mistaken for a Catholic sex manual by many well-intentioned souls, John Paul’s Theology of the Body attempted to do just this—by restoring a symbolic order of nature in the face of these dangerous reductionisms, and by reasserting the human person as an indivisible unity of body and soul, and the male and female bodies as bearers of intrinsic meaning. Years later, with the full meaning of the sexual revolution much clearer, Benedict XVI ended his pontificate with a prophetic warning, mostly unnoticed it seems, about the impending loss of the “essential elements of being human”—father, mother, child—in the brave new world now upon us. It is tragic to think how many of the pointless controversies and bitter divisions in the years since his resignation might have been avoided if the Synod Fathers had heeded these “last words” and kept them at the center of their deliberations: The Chief Rabbi of France, Gilles Bernheim, has shown in a very detailed and profoundly moving study that the attack we are currently experiencing on the true structure of the family, made up of father, mother, and child, goes much deeper. While up to now we regarded a false understanding of the nature of human freedom as one cause of the crisis of the family, it is now becoming clear that the very notion of being—of what being human really means—is being called into question. He quotes the famous saying of Simone de Beauvoir: “one is not born a woman, one becomes so” (on ne naît pas femme, on le devient). These words lay the foundation for what is put forward today under the term “gender” as a new philosophy of sexuality. According to this philosophy, sex is no longer a given element of nature, that man has to accept and personally make sense of; it is a social role that we choose for ourselves, while in the past it was chosen for us by society. The profound falsehood of this theory and of the anthropological revolution contained within it is obvious. People dispute the idea that they have a nature, given by their bodily identity, that serves as a defining element of the human being. They deny their nature and decide that it is not something previously given to them, but that they make it for themselves. According to the biblical creation account, being created by God as male and female pertains to the essence of the human creature. This duality is an essential aspect of what being human is all about, as ordained by God. This very duality as something previously given is what is now disputed. The words of the creation account, “male and female he created them” (Gen 1:27), no longer apply. No, what applies now is this: It was not God who created them male and female—hitherto society did this, now we decide for ourselves. Man and woman as created realities, as the nature of the human being, no longer exist. Man calls his nature into question. From now on he is merely spirit and will. The manipulation of nature, which we deplore today where our environment is concerned, now becomes man’s fundamental choice where he himself is concerned. From now on there is only the abstract human being, who chooses for himself what his nature is to be. Man and woman in their created state as complementary versions of what it means to be human are disputed. But if there is no pre-ordained duality of man and woman in creation, then neither is the family any longer a reality established by creation. Likewise, the child has lost the place he had occupied hitherto and the dignity pertaining to him. Bernheim shows that now, perforce, from being a subject of rights, the child has become an object to which people have a right and which they have a right to obtain. When the freedom to be creative becomes the freedom to create oneself, then necessarily the Maker himself is denied and ultimately man too is stripped of his dignity as a creature of God, as the image of God at the core of his being. The defense of the family is about man himself. And it becomes clear that when God is denied, human dignity also disappears. Whoever defends God is defending man. How is it that we can no longer see this? How could we have forgotten it so quickly, even as daily reminders of this “anthropological revolution” press upon us from every side? These are the questions that amazed historians and theologians, writing about these years from our posthuman future, will have to answer. Michael Hanby is associate professor of religion and philosophy of science at the Pontifical John Paul II Institute for Studies on Marriage and Family at the Catholic University of America. Photo by Turkish Flame via Creative Commons. Image cropped.
This is what is used to explain the now almost universal use of low estrogen dose birth control pill.....and that low dose is what allows for the conception to take place but also the thinning of the lining of the uterus to prevent the implantation of the conceived life.
There are some pharmacists who are pro-life and make a stand for truth but they are a persecuted minority. http://www.positivepharmacy.org/ind...rmacists-speak/33-patrick-mccrystal-testimony
I think there might be ONE in the greater DC area. I'm like Diogenes, carrying my lamp, looking for one.
I will run by my pastor this week, a homily upholding the truth of Humanae Vitae, in hopes of presenting it to my brothers and sister in both a simple, yet challenging way. Please pray for me and his decision! Safe in the Barque of Peter!
Mario, Absolutely, I'm praying for both you and his decision! Here is a wonderful article from LifeSiteNews which is also very inspiring, Over 100 young Catholics to Synod-bound archbishop: We love Catholic doctrine By Dorothy Cummings McLean | https://www.lifesitenews.com/all/to...nod-bound-archbishop-we-love-catholic-doctrin catholic, leo cushley, scotland, youth synod EDINBURGH, Scotland, October 2, 2018 (LifeSiteNews) – Over 100 young Catholics have a message for the Scottish archbishop chosen to attend the Youth Synod: we love the doctrines of the Church. The Catholics aged 18 to 35 signed a letter to Archbishop Leo Cushley of the Archdiocese of St. Andrews and Edinburgh sharing their thoughts on their faith. While expressing their gratitude for the ministry they have experienced in Scotland, the writers worry that some Synod members are suggesting that “difficult aspects” of Catholic doctrine should be “downplayed and even put aside.” “Some even imply that priests who hold to orthodox teaching are out of touch with the lives of lay people, and of young people especially. However, it is in fact this line of thought that is utterly in contradiction to our lived experience,” they wrote. (The full letter is published below.) The young people said that it was the “uniquely Catholic” aspects of the faith that keep them in the Church, not concerns it shares with social clubs, political parties, or NGOs (non-governmental organizations). “What matters is precisely the Church’s claim to truth; Her liturgy and Sacraments; Her transcendent doctrine, communicated in teaching but also through beauty and goodness; Her understanding of the human person, laid out so powerfully for the modern world by St. John Paul II; and Her moral teaching, that while so very challenging, also offers the only path to true joy and human flourishing as we see in the lives of the saints,” they wrote. Only these things, they said, were worth the sacrifice to become and/or remain Catholic despite “increasing cultural pressure.” The young people also support orthodox priests. They wrote that priests who teach the “fullness” of Catholic doctrine bring “the light of Christ” into their lives. “Far from being ‘out of touch,’ it is those priests who proclaim orthodox teaching in its fullness with joy and courage who have brought the light of Christ into our lives,” they wrote. Such priests have offered them Christ’s mercy “which does not pretend human brokenness is irremediable, but truly heals and gives the grace we need to live new lives of virtue,” they said. “To those priests, we are unendingly grateful.” The young writers suggested that the majority of their generation hasn’t rejected authentic Catholicism but only a “poorly-misunderstood shadow” of it. Instead of innovations, they asked the archbishop for more beautiful liturgies and devotions; joyful examples of all the vocations; priests who are fathers instead of administrators, presiders, or pals; and a “proactive” response to the breakdown in family life. “The Church must be proactive and not merely reactive in facing the crisis affecting marriage and the family,” they wrote. ‘I hope to express in their name their great desire for a life of holiness’ Archbishop Cushley told LifeSiteNews via his press officer that he will be communicating the views of Scotland’s young people at the Synod. “I am looking forward to the Synod on young people and to the opportunity to put not only my own views but also those of the young people who have approached me and spoke with me as I prepared to come here,” he wrote. “I have also met with many young people since coming to Edinburgh, including many young adults who wish to know and love Jesus Christ and to deepen their Catholic faith, and I have them in mind too as we get ready,” he continued. “I hope to be able to express in their name their great desire for a life of holiness, led by good and wise pastors who will bring them to Christ by their words, witness and actions. Please pray for us bishops and other delegates, including the young people at the Synod, and for those we endeavour to serve in these days!” Ricardo German, a Brazilian student in Edinburgh, told LifeSiteNews that he signed the letter so that the archbishop would understand how important orthodox priests are to the young. “In my three years in Scotland, Sunday Mass has been the place where I felt welcomed the most,” he said. “That is because our priest constantly reassures us of God’s readiness to forgive us if we seek His forgiveness through Reconciliation and through amending our actions.” “I believe that is where rests the utmost importance of young Catholics reaching out to our Archbishop: so that His Grace can be made even more aware of our dire need for priests who, instead of telling us that we are ‘perfect the way we are,’ will encourage us to correct our failings and our imperfection through the Sacraments and the study of the Church’s perennial Doctrine,” he continued. Margaret Akers, an American who married a Scottish convert to Catholicism, told LifeSiteNews that she felt warmly welcomed by the Church in Scotland and signing the letter was their way to say thank you. “The formation we have received through communities for young Catholics has been so important to us over the last six years,” she told LifeSiteNews. “Therefore, this letter was an opportunity for us to say thank you to those who have helped in our proper catechesis, and to celebrate the beauty in Catholic teaching. It is our hope to see all young people receive the love, support, and Truth we have received.” “Thankfully, so many young Catholics in Scotland share this desire and we hope to communicate that to His Grace [Archbishop Cushley] ahead of this most important Synod.” Ref. More than 100 young Scottish Catholics champion a ‘uniquely Catholic’ Faith in letter ahead of youth synod BY Daniel Harkins | September 28 | http://www.sconews.co.uk/news/56527...atholic-faith-in-letter-ahead-of-youth-synod/ Related: 5 bishops who could move the youth synod The debate over the final wording of the document could prove even more contentious than the synod in 2015 by Ed Condon/CNA posted Tuesday, 2 Oct 2018 | http://www.catholicherald.co.uk/commentandblogs/2018/10/02/5-bishops-who-could-move-the-youth-synod/ I remember Pope Francis stating that he wants to hear from the youth, I am praying that he listens to the youth who wrote the above letter. I am also praying that there will be many youth in attendance at the synod who have similar opinions to those who wrote this letter. I also believe that the youth in attendance should speak up about the current sexual abuse crisis in the Church while in attendance at the synod. In addition, they are in a position to ask the Pope to answer Archbishop Vigano's charges and I think that they should do so.
Canada’s Cardinal Ouellet holds key to answers in McCarrick saga ........ Viganò addressed Ouellet directly in his letter, saying, “Before I left for Washington, you were the one who told me of Pope Benedict’s sanctions on McCarrick. You have at your complete disposal key documents incriminating McCarrick and many in the curia for their cover-ups. Your Eminence, I urge you to bear witness to the truth.” In the meantime, Ouellet reportedly has turned over his department’s archives to the Vatican’s Secretary of State, Italian Cardinal Pietro Parolin, who, sources tell Crux, is collecting documentation on McCarrick. To date, Ouellet has only responded publicly to Viganò’s charges once, during a meeting of European bishops in Poland. On that occasion, Ouellet called the charges against the pope “a very bad example” and “a very serious offense,” not to mention a “not positive” answer to the abuse crisis and “an unfair attack.” “To express solidarity with the Holy Father… is a conditio sine qua non of solidarity between ourselves as bishops to bring forward the mission of the Church,” Ouellet said, using a Latin phrase that means roughly “a condition without which not.” https://cruxnow.com/global-church/2...ellet-holds-key-to-answers-in-mccarrick-saga/
Wonderful for these young people! But it is so sad that it has come to this. People have to plead with their bishops to uphold Catholic Teaching
