I somehow missed the latest skullduggery at the National Catholic Register.
They got together with the bastions of faithful Catholic thought - National Catholic Reporter, America Magazine, Our Sunday Visitor - and published a joint statement hoping the teachings of the Church in the Catechism will be subordinated by the Supreme Court.
Whooh boy. Here we have a shining example of why the problems at EWTN are waaaaayy above Mark Shea, Lizzy and Simcha Fisher.
Catholics have been warning that the Pope's subordination of the Deposit of Faith in one matter will result in others taking it upon themselves to subordinate it in other matters.
If, as Kasper's suggests, the Pope will create a policy around their evolving understanding that a state of sanctifying Grace is restored to a soul the more you sleep around with one person, and you are therefore eligible to return to Holy Communion, the Deposit of Faith is pretty much moot.
I digress here a bit, but have you ever wondered what the Pope's new policy would look like?
Will they call it a Canonical common law sacrament of monogamous sex?
Will it be based upon the number of years you've slept with the same person?
Will an accelerated program be allowed for couples who have frequent sex in a shorter duration?
Will they explain how many times you have to have sex with the same person before you restore your soul to a State of Sanctifying Grace?
What will you have to submit to the Church to return to the Sacraments?
Will people have to keep a log?
Will the sacrament of monogamous sex be restricted for people living together or will it be applicable if you sleep with some eye candy at the gym?
Anyway, I think somebody is going to have to start a real Catholic newspaper.
We had a good run with the Register. It's dead Jim!
The Register is implying Pope John Paul II and Pope Francis did not abolish Church teaching approving the use of the death penalty through the Catechism. Rather, they left the Catholic Church's disordered approval in the Catechism and told practicing Catholics to abolish it.
These two Popes have left the abolition of a heresy in the Catechism up to Mark Shea, Joan Chittister, America Magazine and our Sunday Visitor.
Shea calls this phenomenon, at the National Catholic Register mind you, 'non dogmatic guidance'. I refuse to link to it.
The CROOKS is calling it the Pope Francis miracle of mercy, where heresy is the faithful 'flexible' applicability of Truth.
Quite a cacophony of intellectual and spiritual bedlham.
These are the teachings of the Church on the Death Penalty.
2265 Legitimate defense can be not only a right but a grave duty for one who is responsible for the lives of others. The defense of the common good requires that an unjust aggressor be rendered unable to cause harm. For this reason, those who legitimately hold authority also have the right to use arms to repel aggressors against the civil community entrusted to their responsibility.
2266 The efforts of the state to curb the spread of behavior harmful to people's rights and to the basic rules of civil society correspond to the requirement of safeguarding the common good. Legitimate public authority has the right and duty to inflict punishment proportionate to the gravity of the offense. Punishment has the primary aim of redressing the disorder introduced by the offense. When it is willingly accepted by the guilty party, it assumes the value of expiation. Punishment then, in addition to defending public order and protecting people's safety, has a medicinal purpose: as far as possible, it must contribute to the correction of the guilty party.67
2267 Assuming that the guilty party's identity and responsibility have been fully determined, the traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude recourse to the death penalty, if this is the only possible way of effectively defending human lives against the unjust aggressor. If, however, non-lethal means are sufficient to defend and protect people's safety from the aggressor, authority will limit itself to such means, as these are more in keeping with the concrete conditions of the common good and more in conformity to the dignity of the human person.
Today, in fact, as a consequence of the possibilities which the state has for effectively preventing crime, by rendering one who has committed an offense incapable of doing harm - without definitely taking away from him the possibility of redeeming himself - the cases in which the execution of the offender is an absolute necessity "are very rare, if not practically nonexistent."
They are rare and practically non-existent but they do exist and for reasons the Church enumerates.
In no way, shape or form was it ever the intention of Pope John Paul II to imply the Church has retained a heresy in the Catechism and it is the duty of the faithful to see it is abolished.
Pat Archibold responds that they are actually asking the Supreme Court to override the authority of the states. As I mention above, I think the problem is much bigger. They are putting the Supreme Court above the Catechism.