The vendor’s book used reputable sources for its information, including the U.S. Centers for Disease Control.
Anyone with half a brain can easily understand that homosexual behaviors naturally lead to disease. Why would the LGBT groups want to harm their own through behaviors that spread HIV/AID and promote abusive? Because those in the dark want to stay in the dark. John 3:20.
Source: Liberals mad Trump spoke at event where guests learned truth about gay STD epidemic
Pope Francis recently declared that the death penalty is “per se contrary to the Gospel”—but this statement is flatly untraditional according to Church history.
By his own admission the Pope is not a theologian and definitely not a canonist since he would consider that to be rigid and Pharisaical. Now we see him again promoting a personal opinion as if it’s magisterial but we know the topic of the death penalty has a long magisterial and theological history that includes support by Thomas Aquinas whom the Pope incorrectly suggests is the authoritative voice behind his ambiguous Communion approach from Amoris Laetitia. Sorry, AL is not Thomistic, Canonical, Doctrinal, or Scriptural. Only his advisors tell him that.
Now the Pope speaks of changing the Catechism on the death penalty based on an inaccurate understanding of the development of doctrine. The article points out how the Pope is not in agreement with Newman on this point of development. We should remember Newmans understanding was often noted by the Vatican II documents and nothing like the Pope’s was used.
Its sad that because of ignorance many will be emotionally swayed by the Pope’s aguements because they don’t know what Newman wrote. Many reforms are gathering ground because of the ignorance of the laity.
Source: Pope Francis on the Development of Doctrine | P. J. Smith
Cardinal Gerhard Müller, the former Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF), keeps surprising us.
Instead of Amoris Laetitia being a clear and direct teaching document based on two years of Bishop meetings it’s become a disaster for the Church, a black eye for the authority of the Magisterium and Pope, and a source of scandal for all bishops involved.
One might even call it a whitewashed tomb and the smell is growing.
Source: Cardinal Müller Suggests He Had Not Voted for the Unanimous German Report at 2015 Family Synod – OnePeterFive
Cardinal Sarah says the motu proprio does not substantially alter the authority of the Holy See on liturgical translations
As we can see another ambiguous document promoted by the Pope on liturgical translation will yet again seed our Church with strife. As usual the liberal Germans want to define their own path while the voice of Cardinal Sarah, who is in charge of this office, has to correct misunderstandings from a document he didn’t sign. What a mess again and again.
How many prelates does it take to screw in a light bulb? All of them because because they can’t agree to what the instruction book says after they’ve ripped pages out.
Source: Cardinals Marx and Sarah disagree on Magnum Principium | CatholicHerald.co.uk
In a new article, the prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship discusses the effects of the Pope’s recent revisions to canon law governing liturgical translations.
Why would the Pope propose that local conferences can go and write their own liturgical translations? Hmm. The obvious issue would be the eventual destruction of the mark of the Church of unity in faith and worship. One could no longer go from country to country and be comfortable attending mass. We would no longer be universal. It would put us on par with the Protestants with a type of sola liturgica.
It appears to be another ambiguous document intended to support and promote future shadow reforms. Think about it. We’ve seen leadership changes, school curriculum changes, priest formation changes, research institute changes with the new JPII Institute, a raising of a priest army by asking the Jesuits to help push Amoris Laetitia, and now promoting change in Liturgy and worship. The last piece will likely be a change of Canon law which is even now being proposed. So it seems the Pope is by an “executive order” process implementing all the liberal changes that Vatican II set the ground work for but never magisterially promulgated in its documents. I wonder then why Pope’s Paul VI, St John Paul II, and Benedict XVI corrected and fought against these reforms?
I’m glad we have knowledgeable and orthodox Cardinals still around that point out the authority and responsibility still stops at the Vatican. More than ever we need to be a voice for truth and orthodoxy at our parishes. Join your worship committees. If not us than who?
Source: Cardinal Sarah Confirms Vatican Retains Last Word on Translations
The Washington Post’s fact-check proved the president was correct on late-term abortions
198 countries say late term abortion is inhuman but the US is listed among the 7 that supports it. That shows you how Christian and honestly how moral the US isn’t any longer. Abortion at any point is a willful killing of a human. Why is killing a baby legal but killing an adult not? A person loved by God dies in both situations.
Now that we have the tools and science to truly know what a baby goes through during an abortion how can we look ourselves in the mirror and call our selves human when we argue for and support the tearing apart and burning with chemicals of an innocent child. What true animals we have become. How can we believe the unborn don’t feel pain? This is a willful ignorance of science.
Source: Media forced to admit Trump is right about horrific U.S. abortion laws
Catholic Initiative in Germany invites Protestants to Communion; lay witnesses call it “heresy” Ecumenism has gone wrong one more time in Germany and has escalated into denial of the truth about the Eucharist: in the German Diocese, Stuttgart-Rottenburg.
It’s intetesting that you constantly have Jesus used as the poster child for false ecumenism but you never hear about how Jesus was a faithful Jew who only ministered to Jews. He wasn’t really very ecumenical was he?
Lets not loss sight that the German Church is just about dead and without the injection of Protestants wont survive as a visible and viable institution for many more decades. Along with the fear of lost income for the government paid prelates the continuous drip drip of Luther’s anthropocentric theology has worn the Catholic details away from the foundation of the Germany Church. Today it’s just intellectually easier for German priests to be Protestant like it was for Luther.
Source: “Together Around the Table”: German Catholic Initiative Invites Protestants to Communion – OnePeterFive
At Mass on Tuesday, Pope Francis took off on yet another flight of rigidity fancy. Preaching on Jonah’s grumbling efforts to prophesy to the Ninevites, the Pope identified Jonah as the epitome of rigidity—the antihero of all those who fail to appreciate God’s mercy.
For anyone who has read any of the Pope’s homilies the evidence demonstrates that he has difficulties. He admits himself that he isn’t a theologian so should we really expect much more than what we hear from him on airplane interviews? I think we should expect more.
For him to beat this dead horse of “rigidity” over and over demonstrates it a personal issue he is fight rather than what he is responsible for – faith and morals.
The miraculous point of the reading isn’t Jonah but that once the Ninevites sins were revealed they repented. Praise God! But it required someone to point out their sins. Why wouldn’t his homily be about God’s mercy through the recognition of our sins which leads to repentance and forgiveness? Oh yeah. There is no sin if you feel at peace with God about your actions. So let’s not be rigid because it highlights people’s sins and then they don’t feel at peace.
Would the Pope say God was rigid by saying if the Ninevites didn’t repent that they would be destroyed? I guess God always knew they would repent and this was really just a test of Jonah using a whole city to do it and a ship full of people. Hmm. Kind of makes God out to be mean wouldn’t it?
Source: Francis takes aim at Jonah for rigidity—and misses again.
Image: Coppo di Marcovaldo, The Hell (c. 1301)
Why would the Pope say there is no Hell but only the annihilation of the soul for those that don’t go to heaven? That’s not what Christ said.
I guess if there’s no Hell there’s really no sin. Only a choice for Christ or against Christ at the final judgement. This sounds more like Eastern religious thought than Catholic. How much university religious studies rather than Catholic theology has Jesuit training taken on?
Source: Do Pope Francis and Archbishop Paglia Believe Hell Does Not Exist? – OnePeterFive
Pope Francis’ recent comments on the 100th anniversary of codified canon law
Outside of the oddness of a wishlist about what canon law should or shouldn’t do it appears what our 1983 Code of Canon law covers touches all the bases. Hmm. Why suggest we need to change a Code that was just put in place in modern times only 34 years ago? That’s right. It doesn’t say what we want it to.
According to Francis, “after the Second Vatican Council [the Church] marked the passage from an ecclesiology [study of the Church] modeled on canon law to a canon law conforming to ecclesiology [the study of the Church]”. So we should make laws to facilitate what we want rather than guard us against what we shouldn’t want. I don’t believe that is the root purpose of a law. This statement is both erroneous and provocative but putting that aside it’s odd to put into question a Code of Canon law that was promulgated in 1983 by St John Paul II well after and in unity with Vatican II. It would seem the current prelates don’t like anything put in place by St John Paul II or Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI. All effort seems to be applied to reversing their works and legacy.
Just so you’re aware. The 1983 Code of Canon Law (abbreviated 1983 CIC from its Latin title Codex Iuris Canonici), also called the Johanno-Pauline Code, is the “fundamental body of ecclesiastical laws for the Latin Church”. It is the second and current comprehensive codification of canonical legislation for the Latin Church sui juris of the Catholic Church. It was promulgated on 25 January 1983 by John Paul II and took legal effect on the First Sunday of Advent (27 November) 1983. It replaced the 1917 Code of Canon Law, promulgated by Benedict XV on 27 May 1917.
This appears to be another effort to suggest change just like having another synod on the family only a few years after St John Paul’s modern day synod on the family in 1980. St John Paul II apostolic exhortation Familiaris Consortio from his synod is strikingly different and superior to Amoris Laetitia. So why another synod and another exhortation? Come on people. The answer is at the end of your nose. They wanted to reform Church teaching. And, yes. We should always read current Church documents in the light of previous documents. This is continuity and not rupture as we were so often warned about by Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI. It is also the proper behavior of any prelate or theologian worth their salt.
Source: A few thoughts on Pope Francis’ remarks on the centenary of codified canon law
Thousands of Catholics lined the Polish borders to pray for the world, but some media found it ‘controversial.’
Let’s get serious. Why would the media ever consider a successful Catholic event as positive? If we’re waiting for the media to embrace real Catholicism and not just a watered down culturally correct man-centered world philosophy we better get ready to take a seat for a while. If the message isn’t pro LGBT, pro immigration, pro climate change, pro global economy, pro open boarders, or pro Islam than the media doesn’t have anything good to say. Ever wonder why we hear so much about pro Islam but not a word about pro Judaism or any other faith? Aren’t all faiths worth defending or is there really another Islamic conquest happening through migration.
As Christ said, our message is in opposition to the world. It’s a cross to bear everyday and a message that can even divide a family. Why would we think the world should love us? Why do Church leaders act like Hollywood stars craving for the love of the masses when they should demonstrate the life of a martyr?
A great thing just happened and it’s a shining example that should encourage or shame Catholics around the world. Something like this can and should happen in every country. Poland has set its light on a lamp stand for all to see.
Source: Massive turnout for rosary crusade in Poland. Liberals furious
For several years I and others have argued that the question of admitting divorced-and-remarried Catholics to holy Communion turns primarily on Canon 915…
A nicely stated position on the importance of this specific canon. So why haven’t we heard supporters of Communion for the civilly remarried discuss the Canon, the Catechism, Doctrine, or even Scripture. Why have they only treated the subject as if it touched on small “t” traditions or disciplines of the Church? Why is it all about if someone feels they have sinned instead of considering the scandal their sins cause the Church.
The answer is what Cardinal Mueller continues to state and that is that Canon, Doctrine, Tradition and Scripture can’t be changed and that Amoris Laetitia as a Church document can’t logically suggest a change in what has always been held. If it did the bishops, as protectors of the Church, would certainly see it as heresy. So it can’t conceivably allow Communion, right?
What we do see the reformers trying to change is the focus of the argument. If they can hold and promote reception of Communion as a personal right based on personal conscience then all other considerations, they would argue, can be considered secondary. This is clearly a “my faith alone” attitude and diminishes or ultimately removes the importance of the Church and the responsibilities Christ charged it with to guard and protect.
Why do you think anyone arguing Canon, Catechism, or Scripture have been called rigid and Pharisees by the Pope? Martin Luther used the term “papist donkey’s”. It meant the same thing.
Source: Disregarding the divinely-rooted Canon 915 portends serious consequences for the Church and her faithful
Catholics who frequently use sacramentals (brown scapulars, St. Benedict medals, blessed rosary beads, etc.) often run into a problem when the object breaks or wears out. What should be done with it?
Source: How do you dispose of old sacramentals?
What does it really matter if a religious object is blessed or not?
If you’re not sure if your Rosary is blessed don’t worry. Just stop by your parish or grab your priest after mass and ask him to bless it.
Source: What does it matter if my rosary is blessed?
The pontiff is weakening millennia-old beliefs because they are “too hard.” But they were never meant to be easy.
A portion of the article gives multiple concrete examples of the Pope’s duplicitous comments as he says one thing or the other based on the situation he is facing but I thought focusing on Henry VIII, who took a man-centered step away from the Church on the issue of divorce, a reasonable example to consider.
To believe that family issues caused by divorce are today any different or harder than 500 years ago is frankly ignorant. Likely the consequences were even societally more severe then than now. Ostracism and severe neglect likely faced the suffering divorcee and children.
So we see Henry VIII asking for a divorce so he can wed again in hopes of siring a son to continue his family name. Isn’t this a reasonable request based on the difficult position and reality he faced? Isn’t this the best he can do in trying to reach the unlikely “ideal” of marriage being asked for by the Church? The Church says, no. It is against Church teaching. Today the leaders want to say, maybe. What has changed? Cultural issues? No. People? No. The effects of divorce? No. The desire for sex? No. Christ’s words? No. The Church? YES!!!
I guess the Church and by extension Christ thought people 500 years ago were stronger and more faithful than today. We are just to weak today to live up to what others in the past were asked to. We just can’t follow the old faith and need something easier to meet OUR needs and wants.
Its interesting to consider how the Church leadership argues that someone who is divorced and then remarried outside the Church on purpose, who is then living in a state of adultery, should be considered not adulterous and allowed to receive the Eucharist because if we ask them to live as brother and sister the sexual desire might cause them to go out and commit adultery again. Hmm. Are we to ignore and actually accept as normal ongoing thieving because if we ask the thief to stop it might cause the person to steal again because he has a habit of stealing. This seems like fearfully trying to stay out of sight of an abusive parent because if you cause an issue you might get beat again. Is that really resolving the issue? Is it the right thing to do because you can’t see a way out? What would you advise that abused child to do?
Source: Pope Francis: As Revolutionary As Henry VIII Via @dailycaller