Showing posts with label James Martin. Show all posts
Showing posts with label James Martin. Show all posts

Sunday, December 26, 2010

The Grinches at Catholics United

Hope your Christmas day was filled with joy, laughter, love and the presence of our newborn King.    We had a great day here at Camp McKinley.      I don't know about you, but I'm not psyched up for this 'blizzard'.   I don't know how to operate my snowblower.  :O)    Guess today's the day I'm going to learn!

Meanwhile, here's something to warm the cockles of your heart...

I somehow missed this, but apparently Chris Korzen and James Salt of Katholycs United responded to Bishop Olmsted's stripping of Catholic status and excommunication over the abortion at St. Joseph's Hospital by asking him to reverse his decision and saying he's too much of a hardliner and out of touch with many Catholics.

In a nutshell, they do a convoluted jig around the 'moral analysis' relied upon to perform the abortion.   The teaching of the Church is that it is never permissible to perform an abortion no matter what the circumstances, even when the abortion would improve the health of the mother.   If a pregnant woman is in a health crisis, medications, operations, procedures that will improve her health are permissible, even if those procedures risk the life of her unborn child, but never an abortion.

It's a tough teaching in the circumstances these individuals were in, but it is the teaching.     The administrator of the Catholic Hospital was there to uphold the teaching.  You tell her we'll do what we can to stabilize the situation until the baby can survive outside of the womb, give her the best medical care available, get the prayers and novena's going.  If the pregnant mother of four made the choice to pursue an abortion, we don't chain people to their hospital beds and she has the option of arranging a transfer to a non-Catholic hospital.

This is why you see a dance around calling the procedure an abortion in their 'moral analysis', as in this Condomweal piece here.

 “ “The procedure performed at St. Joseph’s Hospital and Medical Center on November 5, 2009, cannot properly be described as an abortion. The act, per its moral object, must accurately be described as saving the life of the mother. The death of the fetus was, at maximum, nondirect and praeter intentionem. More likely, the fetus was already dying due to the pathological situation prior to the intervention; as such, it is inaccurate to understand the death of the fetus as an accessory consequence to the intervention.”
There are numerous flaws in this analysis.  The procedure was an abortion with the direct intention of killing the child.   The child in utero was not dying and saying 'more likely' that it was is 100% conjecture.  But the most compelling observance of their moral poverty was their description of the 'death of the fetus as an accessory consequence to the intervention".

When dilating the woman's cervix, inserting the vacuum to the living child within her womb and tearing the child into small enough pieces to go through the tubes and into the jar, they approached the procedure with the intention of permitting the child to live.  In the course of this medical intervention, the dead child was an unintended accessory consequence and therefore, it is 'bogus' (as Korzen calls it) to describe the procedure as an abortion.

The hospital has the support of the Catholic Health Association, the U.S. Catholic community foremost healthcare authority, Catholics United says. Gotta love that.    (They also have the support of the reliable contradictors of Catholic teaching .  The crew at the National Catholic Reporter.   James Martin conveniently gathers the links of the people adrift from One Holy Catholic Apostolic Church at Condomweal here.  Vox Nova here.)


Taking a quick glimpse at other press releases at "Catholics United", it's quite a peculiar focus for a Catholic group.  In fact, I couldn't find anything that actually defended Catholic teaching.  When they "unite", they "unite" behind people people who procure and legislate abortion or pour ants over the Catholic Crucifix to blame Catholic teaching for the HIV caused by irresponsible sex.

I doubt they were edified with Bishop Olmsted's response --


The Phoenix Diocese issued the following statement: "Unfortunately, St. Joseph's hospital and 'Catholic's United are not in union with Bishop Olmsted and have no claim to being considered authentically Catholic, nor do they speak for the church in any way."

Why don't they just use the take away the right of "Catholics United", the "National Catholic Reporter" and the "Catholic Health Association" to use the name "Catholic" to set up an alternate 'magisterium'?  

Take the ax to the root.

Wednesday, December 22, 2010

Here's something you won't see at Condomweal Magazine, Vox Nova and America Magazine

The Vatican has issued a clarification on the mess made out of the Pope's statements on condom use.

It is comprehensive in addressing every inanity by theorists proposing this was the green light for people having irresponsible sex. The focus of Christendom, society and the State is liberating people chained to immoral and sinful practices.


The response of the entire Christian tradition – and indeed not only of the Christian tradition – to the practice of prostitution can be summed up in the words of St. Paul: "Flee from fornication" (1 Cor 6:18).

The statement also affirmed that the Pope was not separating the unitive and procreative meaning of human sexuality.

So much for irresponsible priests like Fr. James Martin who claimed the Pope's statements are a "game changer".

My favorite part was addressed to the luminaries who were frantically asserting the teaching of abstinence was now trumped with the 'pastoral approach' of the "the lesser of two evils":


S
ome commentators have interpreted the words of Benedict XVI according to the so-called theory of the "lesser evil". This theory is, however, susceptible to proportionalistic misinterpretation (cf. John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Veritatis splendor, n. 75-77).

An action which is objectively evil, even if a lesser evil, can never be licitly willed...


In conclusion, in the battle against AIDS, the Catholic faithful and the agencies of the Catholic Church should be close to those affected, should care for the sick and should encourage all people to live abstinence before and fidelity within marriage.

I'm very relieved the Holy See responded to the pandemonium so thoroughly.

Friday, October 29, 2010

I Desire Mercy - UPDATED

The ongoing discussions about Rachel Zoll's article have flushed out publicly the thrust of the theological problems we have been facing inside of our parishes, schools and community.

Discussion with Elizabeth Scalia sheds decent light on the counterfeit church being erected.  The theology she is using to warehouse her gig is "I desire Mercy", from St Faustina.   I wanted to dissect it so we can be armed for future discussion.

So you'd have to believe that Scalia, who desires mercy, picked up the article written by Zoll and draws the conclusion she needs to tell the world that Zoll is a bigot.

For the record, Zoll is not a bigot.  She in fact expressed to me that as a religion reporter, she is reading with interest and has has gained more perspective on orthodox Catholics and this has been an insightful and pleasant experience.

Scalia, completely out of tune with the spirit of the article, decides she's going to give her readers her judgment call about Zoll and the new breed of nasty, hateful Catholics who want their religion taught to them.

While trying to explain to Elizabeth Scalia that her clouded judgment is inciting the malice against Christ's Church that is intimidating people into proclaiming the teachings, she said that wasn't her intention but she was standing by her words.


Yes, there are a handful of extreme Catholic bloggers to whom Jesus might say, “But go and learn what this means: ‘I desire mercy. . .’.”


And, because they are extreme types, they will each assume that that line is meant for the “others”—
the ones against whom they burnish the swords of righteousness; the ones they lampoon, often, unto snotty incoherence"

That one line from St. Faustina can get played over and over in some heads.  But lampooning innocent people and their intentions to make Christ's Church and Her teachings look like hateful things said by nasty people  isn't exactly what St. Faustina was talking about.    It is taking away the teachings that inspire us to seek the Sacrament of Confession and the Divine Mercy St Faustina was talking about.   This is why the Sacrament of Confession is an essential part of the feast day of Divine Mercy when we granted indulgences and Divine Mercy.     You won't be seeing people Elizabeth Scalia is spiritually forming lined up on Divine Mercy Sunday because they are instead going to her to get kindness.  

Elizabeth wants to emulate kindness, humility and gentleness and we need this spirituality in the Church.   Each of us is animated with gifts we are perfected and sponsored and prayed for by great Saints who had these gifts when they were alive and served Christ's Church with them.

None of us are perfect with these gifts, she admits, but she wants everybody to have the same gifts she is perfecting and mocks others

There are also many great Saints who carried swords.  The next time you run into a Bush basher, remind them that St. Joan of Arc not only carried a sword, she led an army of people who lampooned people with them in a thing called just war.   People who use mercy as the symbol of their spirituality ought not to be mocking other Catholics whose gifts and symbols of those gifts are not the same as her own.

What St. Faustina meant by "I desire Mercy", was Christ's reminder that in our personal lives, when people malign, insult and hurt us,  we apply the virtue of "charity" to nurture mercy in our heart.

If you read the thread, you will see a comment by "Bender" that really demonstrates how backwards the unsound theology is.

In the scenario they are proposing, "wrong lessons" are taught to our children and "right lessons" are withheld from the person espousing the "wrong lessons". This leaves both people in these circumstances ignorant of the truth.   What is astounding to me is that they see this as the sign that they are doing God's work. This is impossible.

Maybe a little parable will help put things into better perspective.

There was once was a father who taught his children and his servants the moral theology of the Catholic Church. He brought his children to Our Lady of the Puppets because it said "Catholic Church" and it was animated with lively music and entertainment for teenagers.  He sent them to CCD where they learned the teachings of the Church are antiquated.  Everyone has sex as teenagers and if they need condoms or an abortion their god desires mercy so call 1-800-Caritas Christi or Partner's Health Care and the Cardinal and Jack Connors will fix you right up.  They helped many people at Our Lady of the Puppets to understand that they can vote for people who legislate abortions.   They desire mercy.  His eldest son, let's call him Prodigal, started visiting the local brothel, being licentious, drinking, partying, etc.   The other children in the house started to wonder if this was okay and thinking it looked like fun.  After repeating moral laws of God, the son was getting madder and madder at his father.

There was another 'family' who lived next door who was always out in the public square saying this man was mean old snooty curmudgeon.  Other people in town started being mean to the father.   Prodigal loved the woman next door.  She was so kind, he thought.  Prodigal kept comparing this woman to her own father.  Prodigal grew angrier and angrier at his own father until finally one day he did not want to hear what he was doing was wrong and left his father's house.

The woman next store was wild.  She went to the local church and gossiped about how the father purged Prodigal from his own house.   She tarred and feathered the father until he was no longer welcome in his community.  There is no joy and love in people like this, she told everyone in cyberspace.   Other parents who also teach their children the morals of the Catholic Church were afraid to say anything because the woman had influence and they did not want to be tarred and feathered like the father at Our Lady of the Puppets.  

One day the priest at Our Lady of the Puppets was transferred and the new priest was all fired up for leading souls to the Sacrament of Confession and Divine Mercy St. Faustina was talking about.  He dusted off the Catechism started teaching the people moral theology in it and about Humanae Vitae and about God's Mercy in the Sacrament of Confession helps us to amend our lives and be better prepared to understand the truth when it is spoken to us because it awakens our consciences.    Father noticed more and more people asking him for the Sacrament of Confession.  He was pleased.  But the woman was very upset with Father and told everyone in the parish that father was cold-hearted snotty extremist and he has to learn the meaning of  "I desire mercy".   The more and more the woman complained about Father, the mobs in the pews started swearing at him and telling him they were not going to give him any more money.   The mobs called the local Bishop, lets call him Cardinal Spineless, and telling him they were not going to give any more money to the Cardinal's Appeal.  Cardinal Spineless and his chancery bureaucrats told Father that he couldn't teach that kind of stuff anymore but to teach people how to rely on the woman for kindness.

People stopped coming to church because they can be kind in the grocery clerk and they can be kind to trees and plants.     They hung quarts around their necks for energy and power and they drew circles in their yard and walked around in circles thinking about the peace they are creating on the planet and how Jesus must be so pleased with them.


They link to the faith of Stephen Colbert and John Lennon.  

Imagine there's no heaven, it's easy if you try.  Nothing to kill or die for and no religion too.  No need for greed or hunger.  A brotherhood of man.   You may say they're dreamers.  But they're not the only ones.  They hope some day you'll join them and the world will live as one. 

They didn't intend to whip up malice to shut people up and they don't know how that all happened.  They're just trying to be nice and the father of Prodigal and the priest who teaches the Catechism who is making people hate the teachings of Christ's Church and keeping them away from the mercy of the women at church. 


See anything familiar with Elizabeth's Scalia idea of "I desire mercy"?

The prodigals are being keeping from conversion by whipping up a frenzy against our priests and prophets.    They have replaced God in the hearts of His people.

Elizabeth and others seem to think we are trying to get them to go back on their 'words'.  They think we are upset and angry and have hurt feelings about the names they are calling us.   That used to work so well.

But they better pull out the Book of Revelation to see where it's going.   We no longer have attachment to whether they accept or reject what we are saying or ridicule or mock or slander.  We're doing it because our eyes on on Our Beloved.

n.b.  Before anyone reads the parable and sucks on their charity crack pipes starts to throw around slanderous assertions about my children - for the record - all of them have done none of the things described in the story of the prodigal.  I was referencing the story in the Bible.       Your poor judgment has caused enough people anguish, especially Our Lord.

Good day to you, ma'am.

Tuesday, March 9, 2010

James Martin, S.J. Daily Straw Man

Martin posted a whopper yesterday.

A preschool in Archbishop Chaput's See has asked a lesbian couple to find another school.

I'm confused.

Why would a lesbian couple want their child to be taught the tenets of the Catholic Church?


Did they want the child to learn that any sexual relationship outside of the Sacrament of Marriage needs the Sacrament of Confession?

Or, were they expecting the school to stop teaching the tenets of the Catholic Church when they enrolled their child there?

The whole thing seems staged and specious.

Clearly, this would cause a child a spiritual and intellectual crisis they are too young to process. Why would you put your preschooler into that kind of intellectual turmoil?

Seems like the pastoral thing to do to release the child and the family from the divisive emotional conflict.

From the school:

Parents living in open discord with Catholic teaching in areas of faith and morals unfortunately choose by their actions to disqualify their children from enrollment. To allow children in these circumstances to continue in our school would be a cause of confusion for the student in that what they are being taught in school conflicts with what they experience in the home.

Martin poses several rather disturbing questions. Is he really this ignorant about the Church? I've taken a quick crack at answering him:

So do the same rules apply to a child of parents who in similar discord?

-That is, the child of a single, divorced parent?
Divorced Catholics do not lose their state of grace because of divorce.

-To a child of divorced and remarried parents?
If the parents were sacramentally married without annuling their first marriage, if they developed a flag to espouse the virtues of multiple marriages and were known for railing in the community against the teachings of the Church - then of course they are denied admittance all the time.
If the parents were married outside of the Church, of course they are free to sacramentally marry - because their civil marriage that ended in divorce doesn't exist in the eyes of the Church.

To a child of a single, unmarried mother?
Again, if a single unmarried mother has announced they did not and will not seek the sacrament of confession for their adultery, if they develop a flag and have a pride parade to espouse the virtues of promiscuity - then of course.

All the rest of these, are straw men:
To a child of a parent who commits adultery? To a child of a parent who uses birth control? To a child of a parent who steals from his company? To a child of a parent who fails to forgive his neighbor? To a child of a parent who fails to care for the poor? To a child of any parent who sins?

Sinning isn't the problem. It's the effort to persuade people to disobey doctrine.

Give me a break.

The 9 Ways We Participate in Others' Sins
By counsel
By command
By consent
By provocation
By praise or flattery
By concealment
By partaking
By silence
By defense of the ill done