By Michael J. Gaynor posted Jun 29, 2004, 00:03
I've been really struggling with this conference decision. I don't want to use the Eucharist as a political tool, but I don't think evoking Canon 915 is doing so. Then, when the bishops wont do it, it makes you wonder. Am I missing something here? Where's the unity with the American Catholic Church and the Holy Father? I wish I could speak to a priest or bishop about this, but I fear my pastor and bishop are too liberal.
This article really helps.
Tuesday, June 29, 2004
Scans uncover secrets of the womb
This new science is nothing short of amazing. How one can view these images and deny life doesn't begin at conception is beyond my comprehension.
Sunday, June 27, 2004
New Jersey Bill Forces Catholic Insurance Companies to Pay for Contraception
As Catholic Institutions seek to help people and communities, legislators and organization like the dreaded ACLU feel the need to take a good American resource and mess with it. If the church is not allowed in the state, shouldn't the state stay out of the church?
Saturday, June 26, 2004
Catholic colleges drawn into debate over politicians
An election-year dispute over Roman Catholic politicians and their obedience to church teaching has extended to Catholic colleges, as U.S. bishops collectively warn schools against honoring dissenting lawmakers.
Friday, June 25, 2004
Bishops asked to lobby senators on marriage amendment
July 15th. the U.S. Senate will vote on the Federal Marriage Amendment. That doesn't leave much time to contact our senators. Call or write them today. Urge them to support the FMA, 67 votes are needed for passage. Only 1 in 5 senators who claim to be Catholic (24 in all) actually support this bill. Believe it or not,15 of those 24 senators are currently opposed to the bill, and four more are undecided.
Here are the senators currently opposed to the bill:
Joseph Biden (D-DE)
John Breaux (D-LA)
Maria Cantwell (D-WA)
Susan Collins (R-ME)
Tom Daschle (D-SD)
Christopher Dodd (D-CT)
Richard Durbin (D-IL)
Tom Harkin (D-IA)
Ted Kennedy (D-MA)
John Kerry (D-MA)
Mary Landrieu (D-LA)
Patrick Leahy (D-VT)
Barbara Mikulski (D-MD)
Patty Murray (D-WA)
John Reed (D-RI)
Four senators are still, undecided. They are:
Mike DeWine (R-OH)
Lisa Murkowski (R-AK)
John Sununu (R-NH)
George Voinovich (R-OH)
Catholic senators who support the FMA. They are:
Jim Bunning (R-KY)
Pete Domenici (R-NM)
Peter Fitzgerald (R-IL)
Sam Brownback (R-KS)
Rick Santorum (R-PA)
The Federal Marriage Amendment reads, "Marriage in the United States shall consist only of the union between a man and a woman. Neither this constitution or the constitution of any state, nor state or federal law, shall be construed to require that marital status or the legal incidents thereof be conferred upon unmarried couples or groups"
IRAQI PRIEST CONDEMNS ARAB TERRORISTS
Father Nizar Semaan, a pastor in Mosul,said to the Fides news service, "I will never tire of calling on all Arab leaders to issue a firm condemnation of terrorism, but so far they have failed to do so. "
Thursday, June 24, 2004
Wednesday, June 23, 2004
Yahoo! News - Texas Republicans Urged to Drop 'Christian Nation'
First Europe decides to remove the historical mention of Christianity in shaping Europe as a continent. Now some want to forget about our heritage as well. Can we not honor our founder's understanding of the principles on which our nation and our constitution was framed?
Opinion: Catholic cafeteria coming to a close
With all the catch phrases in this article such as "cafeteria catholic" and "wafer watch," it's really quite sad how the media mistreats the seriousness of the Blessed Sacrament. This one's harsh, but if you can get passed the lingo, there's some truthful reporting here.
I for one, am glad the cafeteria is closing.
I for one, am glad the cafeteria is closing.
Tuesday, June 22, 2004
Santorum Defends Specter Campaign
Rick Santorum, generally regarded as a strong pro-life leader in the U.S. Senate, explained in a Register interview why he supported his pro-abortion colleague over a pro-life challenger. Story
Catholic bishops should let political leaders follow call of their conscience
It's column's like this that confounds me. I can not conceive how a Catholic priest can be so out of touch with the Church's teaching. While I wan't to be charitable in the name of Jesus to all my fellow Catholics, it is precisely in His name that I have to agree with bishops such as Raymond Burke. And please, if you are going to write about one's conscience, please consider the notion of a well formed conscience, one which is formed upon objective truth.
The China Post
The China Post
Monday, June 21, 2004
The Pope: Europe, you must not cut the roots from which you were born
%20(73%20x%20119).jpg)
As the world gets closer and closer to a secularized state, the pope speaks out.
The Pope: Europe, you must not cut the roots from which you were born
Saturday, June 19, 2004
Bishops draw a line on censuring politicians | The San Diego Union-Tribune
Bishops draw a line on censuring politicians --the question is; is the line clear enough?
Here is a clear definition of what the church teaches... so there's no misunderstanding. Perhaps you may want to direct this to a pro-abortion politician.
Here is a clear definition of what the church teaches... so there's no misunderstanding. Perhaps you may want to direct this to a pro-abortion politician.
To make such intrinsically evil actions legal is itself wrong. This is the point most recently highlighted in official Catholic teaching. The legal system as such can be said to cooperate in evil when it fails to protect the lives of those who have no protection except the law. In the United States of America, abortion on demand has been made a constitutional right by a decision of the Supreme Court. Failing to protect the lives of innocent and defenseless members of the human race is to sin against justice. Those who formulate law therefore have an obligation in conscience to work toward correcting morally defective laws, lest they be guilty of cooperating in evil and in sinning against the common good.
Ratzinger joins US debate on withholding Eucharist
Read
Catholics must realize (some do)that something must be done, scratch that, everything must be done to end the "Culture of Death" and the "barbarians of the 21st century."
Catholics must realize (some do)that something must be done, scratch that, everything must be done to end the "Culture of Death" and the "barbarians of the 21st century."
Friday, June 18, 2004
Kerry advisers tell hopeful to 'keep cool' on religion - The Washington Times: Nation/Politics - June 18, 2004
Kerry advisers tell hopeful to 'keep cool' on religion - The Washington Times: Nation/Politics - June 18, 2004
"At the time, the question is whether Kennedy is too influenced by the church. The question now is whether Kerry is influenced too little."
This sums it up perfectly.
"At the time, the question is whether Kennedy is too influenced by the church. The question now is whether Kerry is influenced too little."
This sums it up perfectly.
MSNBC - American hostage reportedly beheaded
MSNBC - American hostage reportedly beheaded
American hostage Paul Johnson is seen in a video released by his captors last Tuesday, a few days after his kidnapping.
'We will continue on this path in fighting the enemies of Allah."
This is the way they praise and worship their God. If the Muslim leaders do not come out in condemnation and work with all people of good will to eradicate this evil now -- then we can only assume they approve. Right?
American hostage Paul Johnson is seen in a video released by his captors last Tuesday, a few days after his kidnapping.
'We will continue on this path in fighting the enemies of Allah."
This is the way they praise and worship their God. If the Muslim leaders do not come out in condemnation and work with all people of good will to eradicate this evil now -- then we can only assume they approve. Right?
Our Children Learn What We Teach Them
by Nick France
The Iraqi prisoner abuse at Abu Ghraib shocked and outraged Americans, and rightly so, but can you honestly say you were surprised? With American Universities such as Penn State University promoting and holding events like "Sex Fair," is it any wonder the generation of the famous Pfc. Lyndie England has become a generation, acting on what they’ve learned from an immoral society? "Sex Fair," included "orgasm bingo" and a "tent of consent." Universities are sponsoring "porn-fests". I was shocked to learn that for eleven years now, Western University celebrates "National Outdoor Intercourse Day" annually. Lecturers sponsor workshops like the "Whip Enthusiasts Group."
While Democrats scream for Rumsfeld’s head, it’s liberals demands for pornography, homosexuality, and access to our youth that set the stage at Abu Ghraib. The ACLU has defiled the very meaning of freedom by defending groups like the North American Man/Boy Love Association (Nambla) where they publish how to molest children.
Americans are no longer free from the constant barrage of in-your-face sexual images on a daily basis, and our youths are the most targeted. Our society is constantly being desensitized and conditioned to sexual deviance. The porn industry has exploded, especially on the Internet, and Congress does nothing. Elicit posters to promote gay and lesbian groups are aloud on campus, but a tile with a Christian message to express grief for murdered classmates from a student at Columbine is forbidden.
Although under legal attack, Shock radio has already left its mark on our young. While our young soldiers were graduating High School, Assemblyman Dennis Mountjoy (R) was working on a bill to combat the sexually explicit materials promoting homosexuality in public schools. Materials include a book called "Young, Gay, & Proud," that states,
"There are a lot of ways for gay men to have enjoyable sex…You may have to practice a bit before it starts feeling really good."
I pity the teacher that gives that book to one of my children.
Yes there's blame to go around in the military for the prisoner abuses, but liberals, legislators, gay activists, Planned Parenthood, and public educators need to accept responsibility for the growing sadistic and sexually perverse nature of American society.
What a stark contrast from the Veterans of WW II’s lyrics of popular music of their day and the pornographic rap lyrics in the minds of soldiers today.
The blame for the abuse at Abu Ghraib rests on those who in-fact committed the abuse, and in no way reflects the behavior of the proud, brave young men and women laying their lives on the line over seas. They are fighting bravely among some of the most barbaric terrorists on the face of the planet.
In fact, the atrocity committed to Nick Berg, in which Nick was be-headed while his executioners screamed, "God is great" then video taped it and then broadcasted on an Islamic web site really paints a picture of the kind of animals our solders are dealing with. It also puts the whole Iraqi prisoner abuse in a different perspective. It certainly did for me. I know if I was in a military prison, and I was given the choice of having my head chopped of or having my head donned by a pair of panties…well, do I even have to say it?
Like all of America, my heart goes out to the family of Nicholas Berg. I felt sick and disgusted when I heard the news of his ordeal. I immediately prayed for them and continue to do so.
Although there is no moral equivalent of what the terrorists did to Nick Berg and what our soldiers did at Abu Ghraib we must not resort to their tactics, and serve and fight with honor. We must teach our children better.
We all must share in the blame for this. Because we didn’t actively complain enough when we heard shock radio, pubic school pornography and rap music lyrics, we contributed to the society we have today, and we failed to protect our children. We need to support organizations that fight for our values and traditions. We should demand our legislators clean up the media and our schools.
Our precious sons and daughters, grandsons and granddaughters, brothers and sisters, husbands and wives are risking it all to secure peace and freedom in Iraq, they need our support and respect as well as our prayers.
It is true that America needs to seriously review what is being taught in our schools, all schools, not just public but private as well. Also, America needs to examine what is being aired and written about in the media. Our children learn what we teach them. †
The Iraqi prisoner abuse at Abu Ghraib shocked and outraged Americans, and rightly so, but can you honestly say you were surprised? With American Universities such as Penn State University promoting and holding events like "Sex Fair," is it any wonder the generation of the famous Pfc. Lyndie England has become a generation, acting on what they’ve learned from an immoral society? "Sex Fair," included "orgasm bingo" and a "tent of consent." Universities are sponsoring "porn-fests". I was shocked to learn that for eleven years now, Western University celebrates "National Outdoor Intercourse Day" annually. Lecturers sponsor workshops like the "Whip Enthusiasts Group."
While Democrats scream for Rumsfeld’s head, it’s liberals demands for pornography, homosexuality, and access to our youth that set the stage at Abu Ghraib. The ACLU has defiled the very meaning of freedom by defending groups like the North American Man/Boy Love Association (Nambla) where they publish how to molest children.
Americans are no longer free from the constant barrage of in-your-face sexual images on a daily basis, and our youths are the most targeted. Our society is constantly being desensitized and conditioned to sexual deviance. The porn industry has exploded, especially on the Internet, and Congress does nothing. Elicit posters to promote gay and lesbian groups are aloud on campus, but a tile with a Christian message to express grief for murdered classmates from a student at Columbine is forbidden.
Although under legal attack, Shock radio has already left its mark on our young. While our young soldiers were graduating High School, Assemblyman Dennis Mountjoy (R) was working on a bill to combat the sexually explicit materials promoting homosexuality in public schools. Materials include a book called "Young, Gay, & Proud," that states,
"There are a lot of ways for gay men to have enjoyable sex…You may have to practice a bit before it starts feeling really good."
I pity the teacher that gives that book to one of my children.
Yes there's blame to go around in the military for the prisoner abuses, but liberals, legislators, gay activists, Planned Parenthood, and public educators need to accept responsibility for the growing sadistic and sexually perverse nature of American society.
What a stark contrast from the Veterans of WW II’s lyrics of popular music of their day and the pornographic rap lyrics in the minds of soldiers today.
The blame for the abuse at Abu Ghraib rests on those who in-fact committed the abuse, and in no way reflects the behavior of the proud, brave young men and women laying their lives on the line over seas. They are fighting bravely among some of the most barbaric terrorists on the face of the planet.
In fact, the atrocity committed to Nick Berg, in which Nick was be-headed while his executioners screamed, "God is great" then video taped it and then broadcasted on an Islamic web site really paints a picture of the kind of animals our solders are dealing with. It also puts the whole Iraqi prisoner abuse in a different perspective. It certainly did for me. I know if I was in a military prison, and I was given the choice of having my head chopped of or having my head donned by a pair of panties…well, do I even have to say it?
Like all of America, my heart goes out to the family of Nicholas Berg. I felt sick and disgusted when I heard the news of his ordeal. I immediately prayed for them and continue to do so.
Although there is no moral equivalent of what the terrorists did to Nick Berg and what our soldiers did at Abu Ghraib we must not resort to their tactics, and serve and fight with honor. We must teach our children better.
We all must share in the blame for this. Because we didn’t actively complain enough when we heard shock radio, pubic school pornography and rap music lyrics, we contributed to the society we have today, and we failed to protect our children. We need to support organizations that fight for our values and traditions. We should demand our legislators clean up the media and our schools.
Our precious sons and daughters, grandsons and granddaughters, brothers and sisters, husbands and wives are risking it all to secure peace and freedom in Iraq, they need our support and respect as well as our prayers.
It is true that America needs to seriously review what is being taught in our schools, all schools, not just public but private as well. Also, America needs to examine what is being aired and written about in the media. Our children learn what we teach them. †
A House Divided
by Nick France
In June of 1858 Abraham Lincoln gave his famous "House divided" speech to the Illinois Republican State Convention that had just nominated him to be their candidate for the U. S. Senate. Lincoln lost the Senate race that year but the principles of his now famous speech live on today. A house divided is certain to collapse, Lincoln asserts, and in this case, the house was the United States. The cause for division was slavery in 1858. Two short years later, South Carolina seceded from the Union, the first of several states, which would lead to the Civil War.
In many ways, our troubled past revisits our great country with an equally damaging and divisive threat in the form of abortion. I don’t believe it will resort to Civil War, but I am certain that it is destroying the moral and cultural fabric of our society.
Are we Catholics, a "House Divided" today?
Slavery, like abortion, had become more than just a political issue, and surfaced as a struggle between good vs. evil. Proponents of slavery, like today’s pro-abortionists, hide the realities behind lies and euphemisms. Many of the arguments for slavery in 1858 are the same for abortion today. "Blacks are not human," said many, just as pro-abortionists’ claim of the unborn today. Proponents of slavery spoke of "states’ rights", pro-abortionists speak today of "reproduction rights."
This issue pitted brother against brother as today’s issue places Catholic against Catholic. I can not rationally explain why many Catholics defend, support and even take part in abortion, but the sad fact is that they do. I guess it’s for the misguided reasons mentioned above –and I pray they change their thinking, and come to know the teaching and guidance of Catholic morality.
Like the parallels of the past and present regarding slavery and abortion, division of Catholics must and should be addressed. In what can only be explained as a calling from my conscience, I am drawn over and over to write about the social climate of our beloved country. This election year is certainly increasing the importance of this discussion, as I am filled with a sense of urgency leading up to November.
I know there are a lot of issues facing the country today, but I focus on this one, because it hinges on the moral climate of our nation. The decisions of the leaders we elect this November will affect our laws and culture for many years to come.
Where do Catholics fall on this issue?
They’re divided. That’s right –long gone are the days when Catholics thought alike, voted alike, and believed alike. And Catholics are worse off for it. We no longer have the political power we once enjoyed, because we are divided. We’re divided politically and we’re divided spiritually, and politicians know it. That’s why the Catholic vote doesn’t count the way it used to.
Catholics used to be predominately Democrats, but that’s when the Democratic Party had a conservative wing. It’s now practically all liberals. While that may still bode well for fiscal issues, it does not bode well for social issues. There seems to be a push for secularism in the Democratic party like never before; and I can’t speak for you, but as for this Catholic, I don’t like it. When you start removing the “Divine Creator” from the government you end up with something similar to the mess they have in Europe today.
What, if anything, is the Church doing about this? Things haven’t changed much over the years. The Church has always struggled with imparting its wisdom to the culture. Not for a lack of will or wisdom, (the Church is very wise) but rather a reluctance from society to accept it’s wisdom. In 1891 Pope Leo XIII’s social encyclical letter (Rerum Novarum/On the condition of Workers) spoke to moral issues and to fight morality. This caused the Church to defend it’s right to fight societal evils against those trying to divert the discussion to the "separation of church and state."
But what is the Church doing today?
As I reported in the March Knightly News (see Catholic Lawmakers take Heed) St. Louis Archbishop, Raymond Burke, bars all Catholic lawmaker in his diocese who favors abortion from receiving Holy Communion. Now it seems there are two Bishops speaking out and taking action. Bishop Fabian Bruskewitz of Lincoln, Nebraska is also refusing Holy Communion to dissenting Catholics. In a recent column, Catholic activist and writer Barbara Kralis reported that Bruskewitz agreed with the position of Archbishop Burke, saying, "We agree completely with Archbishop Raymond Burke in the action he has taken and we would take the same action in the Diocese of Lincoln with regard to manifest, persistent, obstinate sinners, including politicians, regardless of which diocese they are from."
How is it that the Church has let this situation escalate to this level? And is it just the politicians that are disobeying the teachings of the Catholic faith, or is the laity falling away as well? The fact is that the Church has been turning a blind eye to this problem for a long time. The good news is that the United State Conference of Catholic Bishops has formed a committee to acknowledge and deal with this problem, seek forgiveness, and rectify our nation’s sinful behavior.
Short of asking each parishioner if he or she is involved in supporting abortion, and then somehow marking them, how can a priest or a minister of the Eucharist know who is supporting the "culture of death" or not? Well, the answer is… they can’t know. But to identify dissenting Catholic politicians is a much easier thing to do, as they are readily identifiable by their legislative voting record.
The personally opposed argument
I remember quite a few years ago living in New York, the then Democratic Governor Mario Cuomo, used the "personally opposed" argument to justify the ratification of his legislative record on abortion. He did this in an effort to stay in the Church’s good grace while pandering to Democratic pro-abortion voters and secularists. You know the argument, it goes like this; I’m personally opposed to abortion (or cloning, or same-sex unions, or whatever,) but: I can not impose my religious beliefs on those who do not hold the same beliefs, and I must be tolerant of all Americans. Or– they say something similar, or there are more pressing issues, or I’m opposed but there are exceptions.
It is rhetoric like this, which starts at the top and trickles down to the many, that determines the climate of all social issues in this country. And if we do not demand that our leaders hold themselves to a higher standard than mere humanism– then more social depravity is sure to follow. And it’ll only get worse from here. First, it was Mario Cuomo and Ed Kennedy, and then Geraldine Ferraro fell away, Now you have to search far and wide to find a Catholic legislator with religious integrity who is in communion with the Holy See in this country.
Here’s another argument you hear from Catholic politicians; "I represent more than just Catholics, surely I can’t impose "Catholic morality" on non-Catholic citizens." The fact is abortion is a life issue and not strictly Catholic– and it affects Protestants, Jews, Muslims, atheists… all people,
Catholics and the political parties
More and more, Catholics are realizing they are conservatives–particularly on social issues. I said conservative, not Republican; however, polls show the tide is turning in this country for Catholics regarding the political parties.
The results of a recent poll released by the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press: Catholic voters, once considered loyal Democrats, are now more evenly divided, the poll found. While in the late 1980s, 41 percent of Catholics identified themselves as Democrats and 24 percent as Republicans. Today, the gap has closed significantly, as 31 percent now claim to support Democrats and 29 percent Republicans.
Why are Catholics leaving the Democratic Party? I’ve heard so many Catholics say they didn’t leave the Democratic Party, the Party left them. They go on to say how they can no longer support a party that harbors the "culture of death" and "moral decay" that has become the mind-set of the majority of the Democratic Party.
That’s not to say some Catholics don’t struggle with the Republican Party either. However, Republicans tend to respect life in greater numbers. At least where the pro-life movement is concerned, they are.
Let’s face it, Catholics are divided, the numbers above show this, as does the culture. As Lincoln put it, a "house divided" can not stand. It is time for the Catholic laity to unite, to get back to the teaching of the Catholic faith. It is time that the Catholic leaders unite, and uphold the teachings of the Catholic faith with integrity. And it’s time the Church makes every effort to see that we do. If the Church and laity pull together, in the future it’s possible that American Catholics may not be known as a "house divided." †
In June of 1858 Abraham Lincoln gave his famous "House divided" speech to the Illinois Republican State Convention that had just nominated him to be their candidate for the U. S. Senate. Lincoln lost the Senate race that year but the principles of his now famous speech live on today. A house divided is certain to collapse, Lincoln asserts, and in this case, the house was the United States. The cause for division was slavery in 1858. Two short years later, South Carolina seceded from the Union, the first of several states, which would lead to the Civil War.
In many ways, our troubled past revisits our great country with an equally damaging and divisive threat in the form of abortion. I don’t believe it will resort to Civil War, but I am certain that it is destroying the moral and cultural fabric of our society.
Are we Catholics, a "House Divided" today?
Slavery, like abortion, had become more than just a political issue, and surfaced as a struggle between good vs. evil. Proponents of slavery, like today’s pro-abortionists, hide the realities behind lies and euphemisms. Many of the arguments for slavery in 1858 are the same for abortion today. "Blacks are not human," said many, just as pro-abortionists’ claim of the unborn today. Proponents of slavery spoke of "states’ rights", pro-abortionists speak today of "reproduction rights."
This issue pitted brother against brother as today’s issue places Catholic against Catholic. I can not rationally explain why many Catholics defend, support and even take part in abortion, but the sad fact is that they do. I guess it’s for the misguided reasons mentioned above –and I pray they change their thinking, and come to know the teaching and guidance of Catholic morality.
Like the parallels of the past and present regarding slavery and abortion, division of Catholics must and should be addressed. In what can only be explained as a calling from my conscience, I am drawn over and over to write about the social climate of our beloved country. This election year is certainly increasing the importance of this discussion, as I am filled with a sense of urgency leading up to November.
I know there are a lot of issues facing the country today, but I focus on this one, because it hinges on the moral climate of our nation. The decisions of the leaders we elect this November will affect our laws and culture for many years to come.
Where do Catholics fall on this issue?
They’re divided. That’s right –long gone are the days when Catholics thought alike, voted alike, and believed alike. And Catholics are worse off for it. We no longer have the political power we once enjoyed, because we are divided. We’re divided politically and we’re divided spiritually, and politicians know it. That’s why the Catholic vote doesn’t count the way it used to.
Catholics used to be predominately Democrats, but that’s when the Democratic Party had a conservative wing. It’s now practically all liberals. While that may still bode well for fiscal issues, it does not bode well for social issues. There seems to be a push for secularism in the Democratic party like never before; and I can’t speak for you, but as for this Catholic, I don’t like it. When you start removing the “Divine Creator” from the government you end up with something similar to the mess they have in Europe today.
What, if anything, is the Church doing about this? Things haven’t changed much over the years. The Church has always struggled with imparting its wisdom to the culture. Not for a lack of will or wisdom, (the Church is very wise) but rather a reluctance from society to accept it’s wisdom. In 1891 Pope Leo XIII’s social encyclical letter (Rerum Novarum/On the condition of Workers) spoke to moral issues and to fight morality. This caused the Church to defend it’s right to fight societal evils against those trying to divert the discussion to the "separation of church and state."
But what is the Church doing today?
As I reported in the March Knightly News (see Catholic Lawmakers take Heed) St. Louis Archbishop, Raymond Burke, bars all Catholic lawmaker in his diocese who favors abortion from receiving Holy Communion. Now it seems there are two Bishops speaking out and taking action. Bishop Fabian Bruskewitz of Lincoln, Nebraska is also refusing Holy Communion to dissenting Catholics. In a recent column, Catholic activist and writer Barbara Kralis reported that Bruskewitz agreed with the position of Archbishop Burke, saying, "We agree completely with Archbishop Raymond Burke in the action he has taken and we would take the same action in the Diocese of Lincoln with regard to manifest, persistent, obstinate sinners, including politicians, regardless of which diocese they are from."
How is it that the Church has let this situation escalate to this level? And is it just the politicians that are disobeying the teachings of the Catholic faith, or is the laity falling away as well? The fact is that the Church has been turning a blind eye to this problem for a long time. The good news is that the United State Conference of Catholic Bishops has formed a committee to acknowledge and deal with this problem, seek forgiveness, and rectify our nation’s sinful behavior.
Short of asking each parishioner if he or she is involved in supporting abortion, and then somehow marking them, how can a priest or a minister of the Eucharist know who is supporting the "culture of death" or not? Well, the answer is… they can’t know. But to identify dissenting Catholic politicians is a much easier thing to do, as they are readily identifiable by their legislative voting record.
The personally opposed argument
I remember quite a few years ago living in New York, the then Democratic Governor Mario Cuomo, used the "personally opposed" argument to justify the ratification of his legislative record on abortion. He did this in an effort to stay in the Church’s good grace while pandering to Democratic pro-abortion voters and secularists. You know the argument, it goes like this; I’m personally opposed to abortion (or cloning, or same-sex unions, or whatever,) but: I can not impose my religious beliefs on those who do not hold the same beliefs, and I must be tolerant of all Americans. Or– they say something similar, or there are more pressing issues, or I’m opposed but there are exceptions.
It is rhetoric like this, which starts at the top and trickles down to the many, that determines the climate of all social issues in this country. And if we do not demand that our leaders hold themselves to a higher standard than mere humanism– then more social depravity is sure to follow. And it’ll only get worse from here. First, it was Mario Cuomo and Ed Kennedy, and then Geraldine Ferraro fell away, Now you have to search far and wide to find a Catholic legislator with religious integrity who is in communion with the Holy See in this country.
Here’s another argument you hear from Catholic politicians; "I represent more than just Catholics, surely I can’t impose "Catholic morality" on non-Catholic citizens." The fact is abortion is a life issue and not strictly Catholic– and it affects Protestants, Jews, Muslims, atheists… all people,
Catholics and the political parties
More and more, Catholics are realizing they are conservatives–particularly on social issues. I said conservative, not Republican; however, polls show the tide is turning in this country for Catholics regarding the political parties.
The results of a recent poll released by the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press: Catholic voters, once considered loyal Democrats, are now more evenly divided, the poll found. While in the late 1980s, 41 percent of Catholics identified themselves as Democrats and 24 percent as Republicans. Today, the gap has closed significantly, as 31 percent now claim to support Democrats and 29 percent Republicans.
Why are Catholics leaving the Democratic Party? I’ve heard so many Catholics say they didn’t leave the Democratic Party, the Party left them. They go on to say how they can no longer support a party that harbors the "culture of death" and "moral decay" that has become the mind-set of the majority of the Democratic Party.
That’s not to say some Catholics don’t struggle with the Republican Party either. However, Republicans tend to respect life in greater numbers. At least where the pro-life movement is concerned, they are.
Let’s face it, Catholics are divided, the numbers above show this, as does the culture. As Lincoln put it, a "house divided" can not stand. It is time for the Catholic laity to unite, to get back to the teaching of the Catholic faith. It is time that the Catholic leaders unite, and uphold the teachings of the Catholic faith with integrity. And it’s time the Church makes every effort to see that we do. If the Church and laity pull together, in the future it’s possible that American Catholics may not be known as a "house divided." †
My take on the Passion
by Nick France
March, 2004
By now you’ve probably read just about every article and review of Mel Gibsons’ The Passion of the Christ, including the review of the rough cut screening I published on our web site some ten months ago, back in June of 2003, by Barbara R. Nicolosi. Never before has a movie stirred up so much controversy for such a long period of time. The much-anticipated release on Ash Wednesday has proved to be well received. In less than two weeks the movie grossed over 200 million dollars with projections reaching over one and one half billion dollars worldwide.
I saw the movie in a pre-screening the Monday before Ash Wednesday and then again the following Sunday when my wife and I took our oldest daughter to see it. So I saw it twice, and that’s the point I’d like to make about this movie. This is one of those movies that because of its content, you know you’re witnessing something extremely unique and special. Never before has a biblical epic been produced, marketed or distributed like this.
This was the most moving, riveting, visual and intellectual experience in a movie theater I have ever had. And then the second time I saw it, it was the most moving, riveting, visual and emotional experience in a movie theater I have ever had. My point is that the second time was some what different from the first. But how could the same movie have such a profoundly different affect on me the second time around?
Well, the first time, I was in awe of the whole visual experience and had to intellectually digest this epic. This is after all, the single most important event in the history of mankind. And you feel as though you have a ringside seat. Your mind and thoughts are working so rapidly that you hardly have a moment to feel anything. At least that’s the way I saw it.
The second time however, was totally different. The second time around I really felt it, emotionally. I had already thought it through from the first viewing. In fact, I had almost a week to think about it. The second time I just engrossed myself in the emotional sea of the personal sacrifice that Jesus freely made for my salvation my sins, which caused Him to take up the cross. And feel I did– I felt every emotion in the book– I wore them on my sleeve and didn’t care who saw me do so. I wept uncontrollably. I was so connected to the love that Jesus has for me and how he suffered for my salvation. I kept thinking how sorry I was for being such a sinner, and could He ever forgive me?
This is a movie you have to see twice before you can truly understand it, once for the head and once for the heart. So if you’ve only seen it once… or if you haven’t seen it at all, see it twice before you think you’ve seen it for all its worth.
As a Christian, I had pre-conceived notions about this movie and I pretty much knew I was going to love it. But what about others, how would they see it? What about all the controversy surrounding the movie, what about all the claims of anti-Semitism?
The "root" for some of the recent claims of anti-Semitism surrounding the accounts of the "Passion," seems to be centralized around one specific line in the Bible. And certain leaders of the Jewish community have been quick to draw attention to this line. But why draw attention to specific content, if your goal is to divert attention to its significance? So, in an effort to address this issue, let me say this; removing the line 'His blood be upon us and our children.' (Matthew 27:25) brought to light, this content, more so than by leaving it in and leaving it alone. This is part of Matthew’s’ Gospel– should we "tone down" or "tune out " scripture? I would certainly say no, never, but in this case, we know that corporate responsibility is not on the generations that followed those of first century Judea, present at the Passion of Christ, but rather those who were in-fact present that Good Friday.
While it may be true that some in the crowd desired to have their descendants bear the guilt for Jesus’ death, their wish was not commanding. They did not have the controlling force, and simply wishing did not make it absolute. Those who were present, and pressed for His death were responsible. Or were they? Certainly those of later generations were not– unless you position it in the scope of all mankind being responsible collectively. The sins of all made it necessary for God to invoke His redemptive plan of salvation. But are we really responsible?
To understand this concept fully, we must go back to Genesis, chapter 3 (The Fall of Man). This chapter is present throughout the movie, throughout the Gospel accounts of the Passion and central to the need of redemption itself. Adam and Eve committed "original sin," called "original" because it occurred at the origin of the human race. They incurred the guilt for that sin– not us. We have been burdened with, not the guilt, but rather the consequences of their sin. Similarly, with the "Passion," the Jews who called for the death of Christ on Good Friday, incurred guilt for their participation, along with the Romans of course– their descendants did not. Let me literally spell it out, once and for all, only those who instigated His death on Good Friday, bear direct personal guilt. His blood was upon them –not their children.
Now, I would be remiss if I didn’t mention that unfortunately their (the Jews) children, or offspring have been saddled with their consequences. See the parallel? While it is true that Jews have been brutally persecuted over the centuries in the name of Christ, mostly due to the actions, from those who interpreted the Gospel accounts of the Passion and specifically Passion Plays, I have not seen evidence of this in recent times.
Which brings me back to the question; why draw attention to specific content if your goal is to divert attention to its significance? I would guess fear… fear it would spring hatred and violence. Violence to an undeserving group who have endured some of the worst treatment to man in the history of mankind. Can we blame them? I think not.
I can say though, that bringing attention to this has certainly caused quite a stir of controversy and discussion in the world. I know that I, for one, did not see this as an issue to be concerned with until the subject was raised. I was not thinking, nor have I ever before, thought of any ill will or casting blame for Jesus’ death on the Jews. I conscientiously knew, despite the historic label the Jews had of "Christ Killers" that it was God’s plan and we are all culpable.
I also don’t believe this was all a devious plan by Mel Gibson to start a swell of hatred simply to promote his movie. Jewish leaders cast the first stone, so-to-speak. I prayed that this movie would not be a catalyst for anti-Semitism and continue to do so. I can also say with much delight that thus far my prayers and the prayers of like-minded others, have been fruitful. I know of no hate crimes committed as a direct result of the release of The Passion of the Christ.
My hope is that this movie not only brings all Christians together, which it has, (Evangelical Christians have embraced this movie) but that it also reconciles the strained relations between Christians and Jews. I have a profound respect for our Jewish friends, as they are our elder brothers. And as Pope John Paul II has said, "They are the people who gave Jesus Christ to mankind." Jesus was a Jew, all his Apostles were Jewish, Mary his Mother, Mary Magdalene and thousands of his followers were Jews. So how can we have nothing but love for the Jewish people?
Mel Gibson clearly takes artistic license with some scenes in the movie, but was it the Gospel according to Mel? I don’t think so; this was the Passion, as I’ve always known it to be. Nothing, in my opinion detracted from the overall story. It was the Stations of the Cross in Technicolor. This movie accomplished for me, exactly what I had hoped it would. I now have a visual of the Passion that I can draw on each time I feel the need to remind myself of the pain I inflict on Jesus as I try to refrain from sinning against Him. †
But he was pierced for our offenses, crushed for our sins, Upon him was the chastisement that makes us whole, by his stripes we were healed. (Isaiah, 53:5)
March, 2004
By now you’ve probably read just about every article and review of Mel Gibsons’ The Passion of the Christ, including the review of the rough cut screening I published on our web site some ten months ago, back in June of 2003, by Barbara R. Nicolosi. Never before has a movie stirred up so much controversy for such a long period of time. The much-anticipated release on Ash Wednesday has proved to be well received. In less than two weeks the movie grossed over 200 million dollars with projections reaching over one and one half billion dollars worldwide.
I saw the movie in a pre-screening the Monday before Ash Wednesday and then again the following Sunday when my wife and I took our oldest daughter to see it. So I saw it twice, and that’s the point I’d like to make about this movie. This is one of those movies that because of its content, you know you’re witnessing something extremely unique and special. Never before has a biblical epic been produced, marketed or distributed like this.
This was the most moving, riveting, visual and intellectual experience in a movie theater I have ever had. And then the second time I saw it, it was the most moving, riveting, visual and emotional experience in a movie theater I have ever had. My point is that the second time was some what different from the first. But how could the same movie have such a profoundly different affect on me the second time around?
Well, the first time, I was in awe of the whole visual experience and had to intellectually digest this epic. This is after all, the single most important event in the history of mankind. And you feel as though you have a ringside seat. Your mind and thoughts are working so rapidly that you hardly have a moment to feel anything. At least that’s the way I saw it.
The second time however, was totally different. The second time around I really felt it, emotionally. I had already thought it through from the first viewing. In fact, I had almost a week to think about it. The second time I just engrossed myself in the emotional sea of the personal sacrifice that Jesus freely made for my salvation my sins, which caused Him to take up the cross. And feel I did– I felt every emotion in the book– I wore them on my sleeve and didn’t care who saw me do so. I wept uncontrollably. I was so connected to the love that Jesus has for me and how he suffered for my salvation. I kept thinking how sorry I was for being such a sinner, and could He ever forgive me?
This is a movie you have to see twice before you can truly understand it, once for the head and once for the heart. So if you’ve only seen it once… or if you haven’t seen it at all, see it twice before you think you’ve seen it for all its worth.
As a Christian, I had pre-conceived notions about this movie and I pretty much knew I was going to love it. But what about others, how would they see it? What about all the controversy surrounding the movie, what about all the claims of anti-Semitism?
The "root" for some of the recent claims of anti-Semitism surrounding the accounts of the "Passion," seems to be centralized around one specific line in the Bible. And certain leaders of the Jewish community have been quick to draw attention to this line. But why draw attention to specific content, if your goal is to divert attention to its significance? So, in an effort to address this issue, let me say this; removing the line 'His blood be upon us and our children.' (Matthew 27:25) brought to light, this content, more so than by leaving it in and leaving it alone. This is part of Matthew’s’ Gospel– should we "tone down" or "tune out " scripture? I would certainly say no, never, but in this case, we know that corporate responsibility is not on the generations that followed those of first century Judea, present at the Passion of Christ, but rather those who were in-fact present that Good Friday.
While it may be true that some in the crowd desired to have their descendants bear the guilt for Jesus’ death, their wish was not commanding. They did not have the controlling force, and simply wishing did not make it absolute. Those who were present, and pressed for His death were responsible. Or were they? Certainly those of later generations were not– unless you position it in the scope of all mankind being responsible collectively. The sins of all made it necessary for God to invoke His redemptive plan of salvation. But are we really responsible?
To understand this concept fully, we must go back to Genesis, chapter 3 (The Fall of Man). This chapter is present throughout the movie, throughout the Gospel accounts of the Passion and central to the need of redemption itself. Adam and Eve committed "original sin," called "original" because it occurred at the origin of the human race. They incurred the guilt for that sin– not us. We have been burdened with, not the guilt, but rather the consequences of their sin. Similarly, with the "Passion," the Jews who called for the death of Christ on Good Friday, incurred guilt for their participation, along with the Romans of course– their descendants did not. Let me literally spell it out, once and for all, only those who instigated His death on Good Friday, bear direct personal guilt. His blood was upon them –not their children.
Now, I would be remiss if I didn’t mention that unfortunately their (the Jews) children, or offspring have been saddled with their consequences. See the parallel? While it is true that Jews have been brutally persecuted over the centuries in the name of Christ, mostly due to the actions, from those who interpreted the Gospel accounts of the Passion and specifically Passion Plays, I have not seen evidence of this in recent times.
Which brings me back to the question; why draw attention to specific content if your goal is to divert attention to its significance? I would guess fear… fear it would spring hatred and violence. Violence to an undeserving group who have endured some of the worst treatment to man in the history of mankind. Can we blame them? I think not.
I can say though, that bringing attention to this has certainly caused quite a stir of controversy and discussion in the world. I know that I, for one, did not see this as an issue to be concerned with until the subject was raised. I was not thinking, nor have I ever before, thought of any ill will or casting blame for Jesus’ death on the Jews. I conscientiously knew, despite the historic label the Jews had of "Christ Killers" that it was God’s plan and we are all culpable.
I also don’t believe this was all a devious plan by Mel Gibson to start a swell of hatred simply to promote his movie. Jewish leaders cast the first stone, so-to-speak. I prayed that this movie would not be a catalyst for anti-Semitism and continue to do so. I can also say with much delight that thus far my prayers and the prayers of like-minded others, have been fruitful. I know of no hate crimes committed as a direct result of the release of The Passion of the Christ.
My hope is that this movie not only brings all Christians together, which it has, (Evangelical Christians have embraced this movie) but that it also reconciles the strained relations between Christians and Jews. I have a profound respect for our Jewish friends, as they are our elder brothers. And as Pope John Paul II has said, "They are the people who gave Jesus Christ to mankind." Jesus was a Jew, all his Apostles were Jewish, Mary his Mother, Mary Magdalene and thousands of his followers were Jews. So how can we have nothing but love for the Jewish people?
Mel Gibson clearly takes artistic license with some scenes in the movie, but was it the Gospel according to Mel? I don’t think so; this was the Passion, as I’ve always known it to be. Nothing, in my opinion detracted from the overall story. It was the Stations of the Cross in Technicolor. This movie accomplished for me, exactly what I had hoped it would. I now have a visual of the Passion that I can draw on each time I feel the need to remind myself of the pain I inflict on Jesus as I try to refrain from sinning against Him. †
But he was pierced for our offenses, crushed for our sins, Upon him was the chastisement that makes us whole, by his stripes we were healed. (Isaiah, 53:5)
Catholic Lawmakers Take Heed
by Nick France
A wake up call was sent out to all Catholic lawmakers recently, and leading the charge is former the Bishop of La Crosse, Wis.–who was recently installed Archbishop of St. Louis, Archbishop Raymond Burke.
In an effort to make clear the teaching of the Catholic Church, and more importantly the consequences of ignoring the Catholic teaching on the sanctity of life, Bishop Burke issued a formal decree in January.
The decree bars any Catholic lawmaker in his diocese who favors abortion from receiving Holy Communion.
Now I must admit, when I first read this, I thought, "Woah, This is going to ruffle a few feathers." Then I thought, "Why not?" If not Catholic Bishops, then who? Who else will speak up? The laity are certainly not sending the message to dissenting Catholic lawmakers.
In his notification, the Bishop said, "A Catholic legislator who supports procured abortion or euthanasia, after knowing the teaching of the Church, commits a manifestly grave sin, which is a cause of most serious scandal to others. Therefore, universal Church law provides that such persons are not to be admitted to Holy Communion."
Further more, the decree ordered priests to withhold communion from such lawmakers until they "publicly renounce" their support of abortion rights.
The American Life League, a Virginia-based Pro-life group that encourages bishops to take such action, hailed the move as "a historic step forward."
"We have diligently brought to the attention of America's bishops the pro-abortion public comments of Catholic elected officials in each of their dioceses, and the Church's remedy for this disparity," said American Life League's president, Judie Brown.
The American Life League mounted a Crusade for the Defense of our Catholic Church and unveiled its latest ad campaign, "The Way of La Crosse" which pays tribute to Bishop Burke.
"It is our sincere hope that Bishop Burke’s actions will not only inspire similar actions from his brother bishops individually, but that they will also serve as a template for how the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops’ new task force deals with pro-abortion Catholic politicians nationwide," said Joseph M. Starrs, director of American Life League’s Crusade.
"They must send out a clear, unambiguous message, backed by the full authority of their office: you cannot be pro-abortion and Catholic," Starrs added.
Has Archbishop Raymond Burke gone too far? Has he crossed the line? Or is he doing his job, and catching the heat in the process? Surely his critics whom are both Catholic and non-Catholic, have called him a fanatic. Most are liberals, and are insisting that the separation of church and state forbid religious leaders from imposing their views on public officials on matters of public policy.
I dare say he is doing what needs to be done. And I believe it’s time for all clergy in this country to hold all self-proclaimed, religious lawmakers to the faithful teachings of their respective doctrines. These types of actions are much needed by Christian Pastors in the coming months as politician’s justify using their faith as a tool, while failing to uphold their duty, regarding faith in the public square.
I’m proud to see the actions of Archbishop Raymond Burke and similar actions by other Catholic bishops leading the charge. I offer my support in this cause, and I hope that all that read this are moved to do the same. Why? Because, we all know it’s the right thing to do. As Catholic Christians we respect the dignity of life from "conception to natural death."
Politicians often hide behind this indignant notion that they need not hold fast to any integrity regarding their Christian faith because they represent all types of people, both believers and non-believers alike. One cannot go to church on Sunday to worship the Lord and then forget about him the rest of the week. That goes for all of us, not just lawmakers.
We sometimes go to work and disregard Christ. We disregard our faith. We don’t speak of Christ. We don’t speak of our faith. We save it for Sunday only. Why do Americans feel as though we have to hide our faith and our beliefs in the work place, and be made to feel that we can be Christians only on Sundays?
Why can’t we maintain the integrity of Christianity seven days a week? That is the very nature of integrity. I struggle with adhering to it from time to time, but I know I must if I want to claim integrity. We all know this and most strive for it.
If lawmakers were to maintain the integrity of their faith throughout the week, they would be able to search their souls and their beliefs, which would guide them in their decisions as lawmakers. Let’s face it, we look to them to protect us through our laws.
"Every one to whom much is given, of him will much be required; and of him to whom men commit much they will demand more." (Luke 12:48)
Abortion is a grave sin. We know this inherently. If you have Christ in your heart you just know it to be true. Sometimes we get lost along the way, we stumble and we fall. We know the mercy of Christ and we know we can always ask for forgiveness through the sacrament of reconciliation. We have the Church to guide us and ground us. We can always search scripture, the Catechism, or even Canon Law for answers.
Here’s some Church teachings that certainly someone as smart as a politician can research, if it has not already been taught to them some where along their lives.
The Gravity of abortion
"God, the Lord of life, has entrusted to men the noble mission of safeguarding life, and men must carry it out in a manner worthy of themselves. Life must be protected with the utmost care from the moment of conception: abortion and infanticide are abominable crimes."
-- Second Vatican Council, Gaudium et spes, No. 51
"Since the first century the Church has affirmed the moral evil of every procured abortion. This teaching has not changed and remains unchangeable. Direct abortion, that is to say, abortion willed either as an end or a means, is gravely contrary to the moral law."
-- Catechism of the Catholic Church, No. 2271
"A person who procures a completed abortion incurs a latae sententiae excommunication."
-- Canon 1398, CIC 1983
The Responsibilities of Catholics Who Hold Public Office
§1. "Since, like all the Christian faithful, lay persons are designated by God for the apostolate through baptism and confirmation, they are bound by the general obligation and possess the right as individuals, or joined in associations, to work so that the divine message of salvation is made known and accepted by all persons everywhere in the world. This obligation is even more compelling in those circumstances in which only through them can people hear the gospel and know Christ."
§2."According to each one's own condition, they are also bound by a particular duty to imbue and perfect the order of temporal affairs with the spirit of the gospel and thus to give witness to Christ, especially in carrying out these same affairs and in exercising secular functions."
-- Canon 225, CIC 1983
All Catholic politicians should be aware of the various positions of the Church. It’s not as though the pro-abortion politicians from La Crosse didn’t know that this was coming. Deal Hudson, a top Catholic advisor to President Bush, and publisher and editor of Crisis Magazine, a conservative Catholic monthly, reported in an e-letter back in December that Bishop Burke sent politicians in the La Crosse diocese a private letter encouraging them to reconsider their position on abortion.
Hudson went on to say, and I agree whole heartily, "Archbishop Raymond Burke is not demanding that all Seven Sacraments be legally recognized; he is just asking that lawmakers not act contrary to the teachings of their faith."
Last November the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops named a task force of bishops to consider how bishops should deal with Catholic officials who oppose basic Catholic moral tenets. Later that month, they published a complex booklet titled "Faithful Citizenship - A Call to Political Responsibility."
Well, the charge has been mounted and the lawmakers have been warned. I just hope other bishops take the lead of Archbishop Raymond Burke, who is saying, "Catholic lawmakers take heed." †
Side Bar:
Who’s Who of Pro-Abortion Legislators
American Life League publishes the names of public officials who "claim the Catholic faith yet ignore the church's clear teachings on the sanctity of human life." They have identified more than 500 state and federal officials. The full list can be found at http://www. all.org/crusade/whoswho.htm
Here are fifteen pro-abortion U.S. Senators who claim the Catholic faith:
Lisa Murkowski, AK
Christopher Dodd, CT
Joseph Biden, DE
Tom Harkin, IA
Dick Durbin, IL
Mary Landrieu, LA
Edward Kennedy, MA
John Kerry, MA
Barbra Mikulski, MD
Susan Collins, ME
John F. "Jack" Reed, RI
Thomas Daschle, SD
Patrick Leahy, VT
Patty Murray, WA
Maria Cantwell, WA
Here are thirteen pro-abortion Florida legislators who claim the Catholic faith:
FL. St. Rep. Audrey Gibson
FL. St. Rep. Bob Henriquez
FL. St. Rep. Carl Domino
FL. St. Rep. Connie Mack
FL. St. Rep. John Seiler
FL. St. Rep. Juan Planas
FL. St. Rep. Juan Zapata
FL. St. Rep. Julio Robaina
FL. St. Rep. Mary Brandenburg
FL. St. Rep. Nancy Detert
FL. St. Rep. Timothy Ryan
FL. St. Sen. Nancy Argenziano
FL. St. Sen. Walter Campbell
A wake up call was sent out to all Catholic lawmakers recently, and leading the charge is former the Bishop of La Crosse, Wis.–who was recently installed Archbishop of St. Louis, Archbishop Raymond Burke.
In an effort to make clear the teaching of the Catholic Church, and more importantly the consequences of ignoring the Catholic teaching on the sanctity of life, Bishop Burke issued a formal decree in January.
The decree bars any Catholic lawmaker in his diocese who favors abortion from receiving Holy Communion.
Now I must admit, when I first read this, I thought, "Woah, This is going to ruffle a few feathers." Then I thought, "Why not?" If not Catholic Bishops, then who? Who else will speak up? The laity are certainly not sending the message to dissenting Catholic lawmakers.
In his notification, the Bishop said, "A Catholic legislator who supports procured abortion or euthanasia, after knowing the teaching of the Church, commits a manifestly grave sin, which is a cause of most serious scandal to others. Therefore, universal Church law provides that such persons are not to be admitted to Holy Communion."
Further more, the decree ordered priests to withhold communion from such lawmakers until they "publicly renounce" their support of abortion rights.
The American Life League, a Virginia-based Pro-life group that encourages bishops to take such action, hailed the move as "a historic step forward."
"We have diligently brought to the attention of America's bishops the pro-abortion public comments of Catholic elected officials in each of their dioceses, and the Church's remedy for this disparity," said American Life League's president, Judie Brown.
The American Life League mounted a Crusade for the Defense of our Catholic Church and unveiled its latest ad campaign, "The Way of La Crosse" which pays tribute to Bishop Burke.
"It is our sincere hope that Bishop Burke’s actions will not only inspire similar actions from his brother bishops individually, but that they will also serve as a template for how the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops’ new task force deals with pro-abortion Catholic politicians nationwide," said Joseph M. Starrs, director of American Life League’s Crusade.
"They must send out a clear, unambiguous message, backed by the full authority of their office: you cannot be pro-abortion and Catholic," Starrs added.
Has Archbishop Raymond Burke gone too far? Has he crossed the line? Or is he doing his job, and catching the heat in the process? Surely his critics whom are both Catholic and non-Catholic, have called him a fanatic. Most are liberals, and are insisting that the separation of church and state forbid religious leaders from imposing their views on public officials on matters of public policy.
I dare say he is doing what needs to be done. And I believe it’s time for all clergy in this country to hold all self-proclaimed, religious lawmakers to the faithful teachings of their respective doctrines. These types of actions are much needed by Christian Pastors in the coming months as politician’s justify using their faith as a tool, while failing to uphold their duty, regarding faith in the public square.
I’m proud to see the actions of Archbishop Raymond Burke and similar actions by other Catholic bishops leading the charge. I offer my support in this cause, and I hope that all that read this are moved to do the same. Why? Because, we all know it’s the right thing to do. As Catholic Christians we respect the dignity of life from "conception to natural death."
Politicians often hide behind this indignant notion that they need not hold fast to any integrity regarding their Christian faith because they represent all types of people, both believers and non-believers alike. One cannot go to church on Sunday to worship the Lord and then forget about him the rest of the week. That goes for all of us, not just lawmakers.
We sometimes go to work and disregard Christ. We disregard our faith. We don’t speak of Christ. We don’t speak of our faith. We save it for Sunday only. Why do Americans feel as though we have to hide our faith and our beliefs in the work place, and be made to feel that we can be Christians only on Sundays?
Why can’t we maintain the integrity of Christianity seven days a week? That is the very nature of integrity. I struggle with adhering to it from time to time, but I know I must if I want to claim integrity. We all know this and most strive for it.
If lawmakers were to maintain the integrity of their faith throughout the week, they would be able to search their souls and their beliefs, which would guide them in their decisions as lawmakers. Let’s face it, we look to them to protect us through our laws.
"Every one to whom much is given, of him will much be required; and of him to whom men commit much they will demand more." (Luke 12:48)
Abortion is a grave sin. We know this inherently. If you have Christ in your heart you just know it to be true. Sometimes we get lost along the way, we stumble and we fall. We know the mercy of Christ and we know we can always ask for forgiveness through the sacrament of reconciliation. We have the Church to guide us and ground us. We can always search scripture, the Catechism, or even Canon Law for answers.
Here’s some Church teachings that certainly someone as smart as a politician can research, if it has not already been taught to them some where along their lives.
The Gravity of abortion
"God, the Lord of life, has entrusted to men the noble mission of safeguarding life, and men must carry it out in a manner worthy of themselves. Life must be protected with the utmost care from the moment of conception: abortion and infanticide are abominable crimes."
-- Second Vatican Council, Gaudium et spes, No. 51
"Since the first century the Church has affirmed the moral evil of every procured abortion. This teaching has not changed and remains unchangeable. Direct abortion, that is to say, abortion willed either as an end or a means, is gravely contrary to the moral law."
-- Catechism of the Catholic Church, No. 2271
"A person who procures a completed abortion incurs a latae sententiae excommunication."
-- Canon 1398, CIC 1983
The Responsibilities of Catholics Who Hold Public Office
§1. "Since, like all the Christian faithful, lay persons are designated by God for the apostolate through baptism and confirmation, they are bound by the general obligation and possess the right as individuals, or joined in associations, to work so that the divine message of salvation is made known and accepted by all persons everywhere in the world. This obligation is even more compelling in those circumstances in which only through them can people hear the gospel and know Christ."
§2."According to each one's own condition, they are also bound by a particular duty to imbue and perfect the order of temporal affairs with the spirit of the gospel and thus to give witness to Christ, especially in carrying out these same affairs and in exercising secular functions."
-- Canon 225, CIC 1983
All Catholic politicians should be aware of the various positions of the Church. It’s not as though the pro-abortion politicians from La Crosse didn’t know that this was coming. Deal Hudson, a top Catholic advisor to President Bush, and publisher and editor of Crisis Magazine, a conservative Catholic monthly, reported in an e-letter back in December that Bishop Burke sent politicians in the La Crosse diocese a private letter encouraging them to reconsider their position on abortion.
Hudson went on to say, and I agree whole heartily, "Archbishop Raymond Burke is not demanding that all Seven Sacraments be legally recognized; he is just asking that lawmakers not act contrary to the teachings of their faith."
Last November the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops named a task force of bishops to consider how bishops should deal with Catholic officials who oppose basic Catholic moral tenets. Later that month, they published a complex booklet titled "Faithful Citizenship - A Call to Political Responsibility."
Well, the charge has been mounted and the lawmakers have been warned. I just hope other bishops take the lead of Archbishop Raymond Burke, who is saying, "Catholic lawmakers take heed." †
Side Bar:
Who’s Who of Pro-Abortion Legislators
American Life League publishes the names of public officials who "claim the Catholic faith yet ignore the church's clear teachings on the sanctity of human life." They have identified more than 500 state and federal officials. The full list can be found at http://www. all.org/crusade/whoswho.htm
Here are fifteen pro-abortion U.S. Senators who claim the Catholic faith:
Lisa Murkowski, AK
Christopher Dodd, CT
Joseph Biden, DE
Tom Harkin, IA
Dick Durbin, IL
Mary Landrieu, LA
Edward Kennedy, MA
John Kerry, MA
Barbra Mikulski, MD
Susan Collins, ME
John F. "Jack" Reed, RI
Thomas Daschle, SD
Patrick Leahy, VT
Patty Murray, WA
Maria Cantwell, WA
Here are thirteen pro-abortion Florida legislators who claim the Catholic faith:
FL. St. Rep. Audrey Gibson
FL. St. Rep. Bob Henriquez
FL. St. Rep. Carl Domino
FL. St. Rep. Connie Mack
FL. St. Rep. John Seiler
FL. St. Rep. Juan Planas
FL. St. Rep. Juan Zapata
FL. St. Rep. Julio Robaina
FL. St. Rep. Mary Brandenburg
FL. St. Rep. Nancy Detert
FL. St. Rep. Timothy Ryan
FL. St. Sen. Nancy Argenziano
FL. St. Sen. Walter Campbell
The Politicians are coming! The politicians are coming!
by Nick France
Feb, 2004
Hold on to you hats folks. "Super Tuesday" is fast approaching. With the Iowa caucus and New Hampshire primary winding down, the Democratic candidates are starting to court the South.
That’s right, on March 9, it’ll be Florida, Texas, Louisiana and Mississippi’s turn to say who the Deep South prefers to represent the Democratic party for president of these United States of America in November. And you know what that means. They’re breaking out the "Jesus" speak.
I’m sorry, but listening to the Democratic candidates talk about Jesus is very foreign to me. And quite frankly, they don’t sound all that comfortable speaking on the subject.
As you all know, my columns are opinion and this one will be as well. However I will also do some flat-out reporting, just to keep it fair and balanced. I’ll report. You decide. I hope Fox doesn’t sue me for writing that. I’ll stick to the front runners because they are the ones making all the noise anyway.
It has been reported that the Democratic Leadership Council is holding briefings for Democratic candidates– coaching them on how to talk about religion and religious beliefs. To quote Republican pundit, Ann Coulter, "The participants were warned that millions of Americans worship a supreme-being whose name is not Bill Clinton." The Democratic Leadership Council has suggested that the Democrats start referring to "God’s green earth."
Here’s my look at the candidates:
Howard Dean
Front-runner Howard Dean told reporters his favorite book in the New Testament was, "The book of Job." This came after he told the press how well he knew the Bible. Within an hour after the interview, Dean admitted he had made a mistake with the Job reference.
Dean isn’t trying to hide the fact that he is using religion as a strategy he said he would mention God more in his campaign, especially in the South, because of "how important it is."
However it does seem as though Dean is now singing a different tune, compared to a few months ago when he said, "I'm tired of coming to the South and fighting elections on guns, God and gays. We're going to fight this election on our turf, which is going to be jobs, education, and health care."
Dean, whose mother was a Catholic and father was Episcopalian, married a Jewish woman. He allowed his two children to select which religion they wanted to be and they chose to become Jewish. Dean was baptized Catholic but grew up Episcopalian. He left the Episcopalian church after a dispute over property regarding a bike path.
Dean, who is the most secular candidate of the bunch, proved to be just that by saying in an interview a few months ago that he does not think, "religion ought to be a part of American policy."
Wesley Clark
Democratic presidential hopeful Wesley Clark is a Catholic convert, although I’m having a little trouble understanding him as well. He recently told reporters, "I'm spiritual. I'm religious. I'm a strong Christian and I'm a Catholic but I go to a Presbyterian Church. Occasionally I go to the Catholic Church too. I take communion. I haven't transferred my membership or anything. My wife I consider ourselves---she considers herself a Catholic."
I haven’t transferred my membership? Does this guy believe in anything? And he’s a Catholic. When are we going to have a Catholic candidate that is actually a practical Catholic in harmony with the Holy See?
John Kerry
Perhaps Catholic Sen. John Kerry will say something to give us Catholics hope. Is he pro-life? Sorry, none of the Democrats are. How can these politicians call themselves Catholic and not be pro-life? Why aren’t the catholic Bishops in this country holding their feet to the fire?
Well I’m happy to say in November, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops announced the formation of a task force aimed at holding Catholic politicians accountable for their political positions. In fact, Bishop Raymond Burke of La Crosse, Wisconsin, (soon to be Archbishop of St. Louis) made public Jan. 8 a decree ordering priests to bar politicians from receiving Holy Communion until they had renounced their anti-life positions.
Bravo Bishop Burke. I’ll have more about this issue in another article.
Joseph Lieberman
An Orthodox Jew, Sen. Joseph Lieberman speaks openly about his faith and refuses to campaign on the Jewish Sabbath. I believe this is the Democratic candidate with the most integrity when it comes to religion. And I have not heard or read anything to the contrary.
Al Sharpton
Although Rev. Al Sharpton, who was ordained at the age of 9, is not a front-runner— I just had to include these quotes. Sharpton said in a December 2003 Democratic debate, "I can assure you, in my talks with God, he is not a registered member of the right wing of the Republican Party."
He also said in an interview with Rolling Stone magazine, "[Former New York archbishop] Cardinal O'Connor once asked me how I could support a woman's right to choose abortion. I told him, 'God didn't say you have to go to heaven -- he gave you the option of hell. I think you may go to hell, and I defend your right to get there.'"
Who would vote for this man?
Dick Gephardt
Rep. Dick Gephardt told Bill O’Reilly on the FOXNews O'Reilly Factor appearance, Sept. 29, "The fact that we cannot allow the government, we cannot have the government, supporting religious views or supporting religion. We've got to have a wall of separation." Is it me or have all these candidates forgot that the first amendment advocates freedom of religion and not freedom from religion.
Religion is not a dirty word. Nor is it something to throw around because the pollsters tell you the numbers favor doing so. It seems to me, if you praise the Lord in the South and fail to even mention the Lord while campaigning up North; the appearance of insincerity begins to surface.
I can’t read the hearts and minds of these men, but I can discern who has deeply held beliefs and who’s pandering to those who truly do.
George Bush
In fairness to the Republican Party, I won’t leave out my understanding of how President Bush fits in to the religion factor. It has been constantly reported and corroborated that the president has proclaimed his faith in Jesus Christ all along. Bush believes he was called by God to lead the nation at this time, says Commerce Secretary Don Evans, a close friend who talks with Bush every day.
I want to make it clear: I’m not endorsing any one candidate, nor am I trying to sway anyone from supporting any one candidate either.
Well there you have it, "the religion issue." There are many other issues to ponder, but this is in my opinion a big one. It is especially big this election. In fact I believe this issue has never before been so important than now.
The culture is changing rapidly in this country, and secularism is catching on more and more each day. So think about it. Do your homework on all the candidates and be sure to get out and vote. †
Feb, 2004
Hold on to you hats folks. "Super Tuesday" is fast approaching. With the Iowa caucus and New Hampshire primary winding down, the Democratic candidates are starting to court the South.
That’s right, on March 9, it’ll be Florida, Texas, Louisiana and Mississippi’s turn to say who the Deep South prefers to represent the Democratic party for president of these United States of America in November. And you know what that means. They’re breaking out the "Jesus" speak.
I’m sorry, but listening to the Democratic candidates talk about Jesus is very foreign to me. And quite frankly, they don’t sound all that comfortable speaking on the subject.
As you all know, my columns are opinion and this one will be as well. However I will also do some flat-out reporting, just to keep it fair and balanced. I’ll report. You decide. I hope Fox doesn’t sue me for writing that. I’ll stick to the front runners because they are the ones making all the noise anyway.
It has been reported that the Democratic Leadership Council is holding briefings for Democratic candidates– coaching them on how to talk about religion and religious beliefs. To quote Republican pundit, Ann Coulter, "The participants were warned that millions of Americans worship a supreme-being whose name is not Bill Clinton." The Democratic Leadership Council has suggested that the Democrats start referring to "God’s green earth."
Here’s my look at the candidates:
Howard Dean
Front-runner Howard Dean told reporters his favorite book in the New Testament was, "The book of Job." This came after he told the press how well he knew the Bible. Within an hour after the interview, Dean admitted he had made a mistake with the Job reference.
Dean isn’t trying to hide the fact that he is using religion as a strategy he said he would mention God more in his campaign, especially in the South, because of "how important it is."
However it does seem as though Dean is now singing a different tune, compared to a few months ago when he said, "I'm tired of coming to the South and fighting elections on guns, God and gays. We're going to fight this election on our turf, which is going to be jobs, education, and health care."
Dean, whose mother was a Catholic and father was Episcopalian, married a Jewish woman. He allowed his two children to select which religion they wanted to be and they chose to become Jewish. Dean was baptized Catholic but grew up Episcopalian. He left the Episcopalian church after a dispute over property regarding a bike path.
Dean, who is the most secular candidate of the bunch, proved to be just that by saying in an interview a few months ago that he does not think, "religion ought to be a part of American policy."
Wesley Clark
Democratic presidential hopeful Wesley Clark is a Catholic convert, although I’m having a little trouble understanding him as well. He recently told reporters, "I'm spiritual. I'm religious. I'm a strong Christian and I'm a Catholic but I go to a Presbyterian Church. Occasionally I go to the Catholic Church too. I take communion. I haven't transferred my membership or anything. My wife I consider ourselves---she considers herself a Catholic."
I haven’t transferred my membership? Does this guy believe in anything? And he’s a Catholic. When are we going to have a Catholic candidate that is actually a practical Catholic in harmony with the Holy See?
John Kerry
Perhaps Catholic Sen. John Kerry will say something to give us Catholics hope. Is he pro-life? Sorry, none of the Democrats are. How can these politicians call themselves Catholic and not be pro-life? Why aren’t the catholic Bishops in this country holding their feet to the fire?
Well I’m happy to say in November, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops announced the formation of a task force aimed at holding Catholic politicians accountable for their political positions. In fact, Bishop Raymond Burke of La Crosse, Wisconsin, (soon to be Archbishop of St. Louis) made public Jan. 8 a decree ordering priests to bar politicians from receiving Holy Communion until they had renounced their anti-life positions.
Bravo Bishop Burke. I’ll have more about this issue in another article.
Joseph Lieberman
An Orthodox Jew, Sen. Joseph Lieberman speaks openly about his faith and refuses to campaign on the Jewish Sabbath. I believe this is the Democratic candidate with the most integrity when it comes to religion. And I have not heard or read anything to the contrary.
Al Sharpton
Although Rev. Al Sharpton, who was ordained at the age of 9, is not a front-runner— I just had to include these quotes. Sharpton said in a December 2003 Democratic debate, "I can assure you, in my talks with God, he is not a registered member of the right wing of the Republican Party."
He also said in an interview with Rolling Stone magazine, "[Former New York archbishop] Cardinal O'Connor once asked me how I could support a woman's right to choose abortion. I told him, 'God didn't say you have to go to heaven -- he gave you the option of hell. I think you may go to hell, and I defend your right to get there.'"
Who would vote for this man?
Dick Gephardt
Rep. Dick Gephardt told Bill O’Reilly on the FOXNews O'Reilly Factor appearance, Sept. 29, "The fact that we cannot allow the government, we cannot have the government, supporting religious views or supporting religion. We've got to have a wall of separation." Is it me or have all these candidates forgot that the first amendment advocates freedom of religion and not freedom from religion.
Religion is not a dirty word. Nor is it something to throw around because the pollsters tell you the numbers favor doing so. It seems to me, if you praise the Lord in the South and fail to even mention the Lord while campaigning up North; the appearance of insincerity begins to surface.
I can’t read the hearts and minds of these men, but I can discern who has deeply held beliefs and who’s pandering to those who truly do.
George Bush
In fairness to the Republican Party, I won’t leave out my understanding of how President Bush fits in to the religion factor. It has been constantly reported and corroborated that the president has proclaimed his faith in Jesus Christ all along. Bush believes he was called by God to lead the nation at this time, says Commerce Secretary Don Evans, a close friend who talks with Bush every day.
I want to make it clear: I’m not endorsing any one candidate, nor am I trying to sway anyone from supporting any one candidate either.
Well there you have it, "the religion issue." There are many other issues to ponder, but this is in my opinion a big one. It is especially big this election. In fact I believe this issue has never before been so important than now.
The culture is changing rapidly in this country, and secularism is catching on more and more each day. So think about it. Do your homework on all the candidates and be sure to get out and vote. †
Take Action on Catholic Values
by Nick France
December, 2004
We knights have a tremendous responsibility to affirm and protect the beliefs and values of our faith. Why? Well, because we know better. With knowledge comes responsibility. That is why some people say, “Ignorance is bliss.”
In today’s age of mass communication, you would have had to be under a rock not to be aware of the attacks on the family, right to life, the sacrament of marriage and the presence of God in our public squares.
Admittedly so, it’s not easy to deal with all the social issues facing our society today. But if not the knights, then who? We are knights because we care— aren’t we? We pledged our honor to God, family and country. So, it’s time to take action, brother knights. What should we do? What can we do?
First we must understand and examine what the Church teaches—as well as what the Knights of Columbus as an organization has committed to. The Holy Father and the Catholic Church are very clear on the Church’s teachings when it comes to the sacrament of marriage.
Church law is very consistent with natural law. Marriage is a lifelong covenant between a man and a woman, which affirms their cooperation with God’s power. A husband and wife bring forth the foundation of society and civilization.
On Aug. 7, delegates to the 121st annual Supreme Council passed a resolution that read the Order “will oppose any effort to alter the institution of marriage to include unions between persons of the same sex.”
As always, we are in accord with the Holy Father. We should also be mindful to not condone unjust discrimination, harassment or abuse toward homosexual men and women. All God’s children should be treated with respect and dignity.
We are, however, called to protect God’s law, natural law, moral law and civil law, which are all related.
The Catholic Church and the Knights of Columbus have stated their case very clearly and publicly. I’m pleased to say the president has also done the same.
On Oct. 3, President Bush proclaimed in a press release, marriage “to be a union between a man and a woman.” He also proclaimed Oct. 12 through Oct. 18, as Marriage Protection Week. The last paragraph of the press release read:
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this third day of October, in the year of our Lord two thousand three, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and twenty- eighth.
Notice the way he states the year? As for God in the public square…enough said.
We desperately need politicians with “deeply held beliefs” to be courageous and stand up for those beliefs. Very much the way Florida Governor Jeb Bush did in the controversial Terry Shiavo case.
Gov. Jeb Bush stood up for the right-to-life, when he signed the Florida state House Bill 68-23 (Terry’s Law) that gave the governor the authority to order Terry's feeding tube replaced, reversing a judicial order that other judges have upheld.
The Church is clear on this issue as well. Its position is you should not withhold ordinary means of life support such as food and water. Extraordinary means is another thing all together. The governor does not see (and rightfully so) food and water to be extraordinary means of life support.
This is the type of leadership we need. It took tremendous courage to stand up to the media and face them on such heated issues. We as knights must support those types of politicians, as they are the minority and our country needs more of them.
We must write our Senators and let them know we want judges with “deeply held beliefs” and to stop filibustering those nominated. I did, and I encourage all knights and their family members and friends to do the same.
Take action on these issues and others by contacting our elected officials and let them know you are a Catholic, a Knight of Columbus and an American who cares.
An easy way to do this is by going to the Family Research Council’s web site and checking out the current alerts they have posted. Their web address is http://www.frc.org. I go there frequently to stay on top of the issues.
As we enter Advent and get ready for the Christmas season, we should remember in our prayers all the unborn children, all the unprotected families and all of God’s children. As we prepare our hearts for the coming Lord Jesus, let us ask for His healing touch on our society that we all open our hearts to the “Light of the World.”
Let us not forget to be a source of Jesus’ hope and love to all by shining our own lights of Christ bright and strong with charity, unity, fraternity and patriotism. †
December, 2004
We knights have a tremendous responsibility to affirm and protect the beliefs and values of our faith. Why? Well, because we know better. With knowledge comes responsibility. That is why some people say, “Ignorance is bliss.”
In today’s age of mass communication, you would have had to be under a rock not to be aware of the attacks on the family, right to life, the sacrament of marriage and the presence of God in our public squares.
Admittedly so, it’s not easy to deal with all the social issues facing our society today. But if not the knights, then who? We are knights because we care— aren’t we? We pledged our honor to God, family and country. So, it’s time to take action, brother knights. What should we do? What can we do?
First we must understand and examine what the Church teaches—as well as what the Knights of Columbus as an organization has committed to. The Holy Father and the Catholic Church are very clear on the Church’s teachings when it comes to the sacrament of marriage.
Church law is very consistent with natural law. Marriage is a lifelong covenant between a man and a woman, which affirms their cooperation with God’s power. A husband and wife bring forth the foundation of society and civilization.
On Aug. 7, delegates to the 121st annual Supreme Council passed a resolution that read the Order “will oppose any effort to alter the institution of marriage to include unions between persons of the same sex.”
As always, we are in accord with the Holy Father. We should also be mindful to not condone unjust discrimination, harassment or abuse toward homosexual men and women. All God’s children should be treated with respect and dignity.
We are, however, called to protect God’s law, natural law, moral law and civil law, which are all related.
The Catholic Church and the Knights of Columbus have stated their case very clearly and publicly. I’m pleased to say the president has also done the same.
On Oct. 3, President Bush proclaimed in a press release, marriage “to be a union between a man and a woman.” He also proclaimed Oct. 12 through Oct. 18, as Marriage Protection Week. The last paragraph of the press release read:
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this third day of October, in the year of our Lord two thousand three, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and twenty- eighth.
Notice the way he states the year? As for God in the public square…enough said.
We desperately need politicians with “deeply held beliefs” to be courageous and stand up for those beliefs. Very much the way Florida Governor Jeb Bush did in the controversial Terry Shiavo case.
Gov. Jeb Bush stood up for the right-to-life, when he signed the Florida state House Bill 68-23 (Terry’s Law) that gave the governor the authority to order Terry's feeding tube replaced, reversing a judicial order that other judges have upheld.
The Church is clear on this issue as well. Its position is you should not withhold ordinary means of life support such as food and water. Extraordinary means is another thing all together. The governor does not see (and rightfully so) food and water to be extraordinary means of life support.
This is the type of leadership we need. It took tremendous courage to stand up to the media and face them on such heated issues. We as knights must support those types of politicians, as they are the minority and our country needs more of them.
We must write our Senators and let them know we want judges with “deeply held beliefs” and to stop filibustering those nominated. I did, and I encourage all knights and their family members and friends to do the same.
Take action on these issues and others by contacting our elected officials and let them know you are a Catholic, a Knight of Columbus and an American who cares.
An easy way to do this is by going to the Family Research Council’s web site and checking out the current alerts they have posted. Their web address is http://www.frc.org. I go there frequently to stay on top of the issues.
As we enter Advent and get ready for the Christmas season, we should remember in our prayers all the unborn children, all the unprotected families and all of God’s children. As we prepare our hearts for the coming Lord Jesus, let us ask for His healing touch on our society that we all open our hearts to the “Light of the World.”
Let us not forget to be a source of Jesus’ hope and love to all by shining our own lights of Christ bright and strong with charity, unity, fraternity and patriotism. †
Our Holy Mother, the Church
by Nick France
The 1950s —was it the golden age of American Catholicism? If you ask some traditionalists they will answer with a resounding "Amen."
You have to admit, the Fifties were good times for the Catholic Church in America— seminaries full, fish on Friday and Bishop Fulton Sheen coming into our living rooms on television, with his eyes piercing and hand raised high, setting our country straight, teaching us morality and God’s love. Oh yes, and a gentleman by the name of J F K. on the rise and toward the U.S. Presidency. Catholics had a huge influence over American culture and times were good.
But did all Catholics see things as well as I just presented it to be, or were there conflicting opinions? Why were there so many sweeping changes then in the early Sixties from Vatican II?
Are we better off for it now, or did loosing some of our traditions after Vatican II hurt the Church? After all the recent events and scandal our Catholic Church as endured, could it be we need even more change? What will become of our beloved Church?
Let’s examine some trends since Vatican II that are affecting Catholicism today. In the 1950s there was one priest for every 650 American Catholics. A recent survey indicates that by 2005 there will be one priest for every 2,200. Out of 19,000 U.S. parishes, more than 3,000 are without a resident pastor, also, some 2,400 parishes have no other choice but to share one.
More than ever before, the lay faithful participate in parish life. In the1950s, this would be unheard of. Thus, the laity influences the tone of the institution, now, more than ever. The big question is, can American Catholics handle the responsibility of upholding the traditions of the Catholic Church, (what we have left) or with their individualistic approach to everything, does the Church change again— and become more liberal?
In recent years, there have been more schisms in the Catholic Church — spawning so-called traditionalist Catholics, Catholics wanting a Tridentine Mass with some claiming the papacy sedevacant.
We must look at the Church however as a supernatural institution rather than a human institution. She is after all, the "Bride of Christ" and protected by the Holy Spirit. If She were a human institution She would never have survived.
Every assault on the Church has made Her stronger. Even as far back in Her history as the Apostles —her leaders could not harm her (Judas) nor could enemies such as Napoleon bring her down. Even those with good intentions as the Reformers could not hurt her. Should we despair? I think not, we have the promise from Jesus that "the gates of hell shall not prevail against the Church." She has been protected by the Holy Sprit and ever shall be.
We do not ask for forgiveness from the Church either. The Church is supernatural and therefore it is not what we ask forgiveness from. The weak sinners in the Church, the humans, are the ones we forgive. We forgive because we all are sinners and we are called to forgive as Christians. If God can forgive us— if the unblemished, spotless "Bride of Christ" can forgive us, then we can forgive as well.
Whether you’re a traditionalist Catholic, (You wish the Church would go back to before Vatican II, and your favorite Pope is Pius X) or you’re a neo-traditionalist Catholic, (You think Vatican II is just fine, but want liberals to stop pushing for more change, and your favorite Pope is John Paul II) or you’re a liberal Catholic (You love the church, but you'd like to see some changes in certain areas, and your favorite Pope is John XXIII) the fact is, the Roman Catholic Church is here to stay. I’ll leave you with this question: What will the future bring our Holy Mother, the Church? †
The 1950s —was it the golden age of American Catholicism? If you ask some traditionalists they will answer with a resounding "Amen."
You have to admit, the Fifties were good times for the Catholic Church in America— seminaries full, fish on Friday and Bishop Fulton Sheen coming into our living rooms on television, with his eyes piercing and hand raised high, setting our country straight, teaching us morality and God’s love. Oh yes, and a gentleman by the name of J F K. on the rise and toward the U.S. Presidency. Catholics had a huge influence over American culture and times were good.
But did all Catholics see things as well as I just presented it to be, or were there conflicting opinions? Why were there so many sweeping changes then in the early Sixties from Vatican II?
Are we better off for it now, or did loosing some of our traditions after Vatican II hurt the Church? After all the recent events and scandal our Catholic Church as endured, could it be we need even more change? What will become of our beloved Church?
Let’s examine some trends since Vatican II that are affecting Catholicism today. In the 1950s there was one priest for every 650 American Catholics. A recent survey indicates that by 2005 there will be one priest for every 2,200. Out of 19,000 U.S. parishes, more than 3,000 are without a resident pastor, also, some 2,400 parishes have no other choice but to share one.
More than ever before, the lay faithful participate in parish life. In the1950s, this would be unheard of. Thus, the laity influences the tone of the institution, now, more than ever. The big question is, can American Catholics handle the responsibility of upholding the traditions of the Catholic Church, (what we have left) or with their individualistic approach to everything, does the Church change again— and become more liberal?
In recent years, there have been more schisms in the Catholic Church — spawning so-called traditionalist Catholics, Catholics wanting a Tridentine Mass with some claiming the papacy sedevacant.
We must look at the Church however as a supernatural institution rather than a human institution. She is after all, the "Bride of Christ" and protected by the Holy Spirit. If She were a human institution She would never have survived.
Every assault on the Church has made Her stronger. Even as far back in Her history as the Apostles —her leaders could not harm her (Judas) nor could enemies such as Napoleon bring her down. Even those with good intentions as the Reformers could not hurt her. Should we despair? I think not, we have the promise from Jesus that "the gates of hell shall not prevail against the Church." She has been protected by the Holy Sprit and ever shall be.
We do not ask for forgiveness from the Church either. The Church is supernatural and therefore it is not what we ask forgiveness from. The weak sinners in the Church, the humans, are the ones we forgive. We forgive because we all are sinners and we are called to forgive as Christians. If God can forgive us— if the unblemished, spotless "Bride of Christ" can forgive us, then we can forgive as well.
Whether you’re a traditionalist Catholic, (You wish the Church would go back to before Vatican II, and your favorite Pope is Pius X) or you’re a neo-traditionalist Catholic, (You think Vatican II is just fine, but want liberals to stop pushing for more change, and your favorite Pope is John Paul II) or you’re a liberal Catholic (You love the church, but you'd like to see some changes in certain areas, and your favorite Pope is John XXIII) the fact is, the Roman Catholic Church is here to stay. I’ll leave you with this question: What will the future bring our Holy Mother, the Church? †
Cultivating the Vineyard
by Nick France
Have you noticed the difference in our culture today, as opposed to say, 10 or 20 years ago? I have, and the older I get, the more it concerns me. There’s been a steady moral decline for some time now and we Catholics need to take a hard look at what we can do to curtail this current trend in society.
In Pope John Paul II’s 1988 apostolic exhortation "Christifideles Laici (The lay members of Christ’s faithful)," the Holy Father begins the document by reminding us of the richness of teachings of the Second Vatican Council.
He reminds us how, "The council fathers, re-echoing the call of Christ, have summoned all the lay faithful, both women and men, to labor in the vineyard (2.5)." He sent the challenge to not only priest and religious, but also to the lay faithful to cultivate the vineyard.
With the state of affairs today, regarding both the Church and in social, economic, political and cultural life, we, the laity, are called with urgency to take action. That, my brothers, means you and I. We all must continue to spread the gospel and take active roles in the community, thus setting an example of how to cultivate Christ’s vineyard.
We cannot stand by and expect the Church alone to fight the social, political and cultural ills of society. We must let our political leaders hear the voice of the Catholic laity. We need to be heard in numbers.
There are many issues confronting us today. In fact, I for one, see this time in history as pivotal. From same-sex marriages to the abandonment of God in our laws, there is much to be concerned with.
I am reminded of a recent homily from Fr. Ken about this very issue. He tells us how society is becoming accepting of a lesser moral worldview. He went on to say how we should be the people on the inside that we portray ourselves to be on the outside.
As I sat there listening to this homily, absorbing all the words, I began to think how timely Fr. Ken’s words were. I then began to look around at our congregation and I saw it as a microcosm of society.
As I observed those around me, I began to notice that some were listening intently and some not so intently. Some were just "getting it" and some were not.
I began to ask myself the question, "Why is it that when a group of people hear the Word of the Lord, some accept it immediately—They just "get it" – and some do not even hear it? It’s as if they’re deaf, or blocking out the words all together.
Perhaps is it because of the way society is in general. We live in a very secular world, devoid of God in many ways. And if certain groups have their way, they will continue to strip every remnant of God from our society that they can. We as the Catholic laity must not leave this battle to the Church alone. But we must take an active role and get involved. To what extent must we take action?
It does not matter the degree to which we get involved, as long as we do. Like the little boy with a few loaves and fishes, he didn’t think he had enough to help Jesus. But Jesus took the little that the boy had, increased it and turned it into what Christ needed to feed the crowd.
I think if we give society a little of our time, talents, treasure and opinions, or show a little of a shining example of the gospel through our actions and deeds, then that is enough.
We mustn’t think we need to change the world all by ourselves. The task seems insurmountable if we approach it this way. But together, with the Grace of God, expressing our Catholic values in a healthy well-balanced manner, we can make a difference. "With people it is impossible, but not with God; for all things are possible with God." [Matt 19:26]
Are you expressing your moral convictions? Are you standing up for what you believe in? Let our elected officials know how you feel about the issues that effect our futures…our children’s and grand children’s futures. We all need to live the lives in which we believe, for if we do not, we will begin to believe the lives of which we live. We are all called to cultivate the vineyard. †
Have you noticed the difference in our culture today, as opposed to say, 10 or 20 years ago? I have, and the older I get, the more it concerns me. There’s been a steady moral decline for some time now and we Catholics need to take a hard look at what we can do to curtail this current trend in society.
In Pope John Paul II’s 1988 apostolic exhortation "Christifideles Laici (The lay members of Christ’s faithful)," the Holy Father begins the document by reminding us of the richness of teachings of the Second Vatican Council.
He reminds us how, "The council fathers, re-echoing the call of Christ, have summoned all the lay faithful, both women and men, to labor in the vineyard (2.5)." He sent the challenge to not only priest and religious, but also to the lay faithful to cultivate the vineyard.
With the state of affairs today, regarding both the Church and in social, economic, political and cultural life, we, the laity, are called with urgency to take action. That, my brothers, means you and I. We all must continue to spread the gospel and take active roles in the community, thus setting an example of how to cultivate Christ’s vineyard.
We cannot stand by and expect the Church alone to fight the social, political and cultural ills of society. We must let our political leaders hear the voice of the Catholic laity. We need to be heard in numbers.
There are many issues confronting us today. In fact, I for one, see this time in history as pivotal. From same-sex marriages to the abandonment of God in our laws, there is much to be concerned with.
I am reminded of a recent homily from Fr. Ken about this very issue. He tells us how society is becoming accepting of a lesser moral worldview. He went on to say how we should be the people on the inside that we portray ourselves to be on the outside.
As I sat there listening to this homily, absorbing all the words, I began to think how timely Fr. Ken’s words were. I then began to look around at our congregation and I saw it as a microcosm of society.
As I observed those around me, I began to notice that some were listening intently and some not so intently. Some were just "getting it" and some were not.
I began to ask myself the question, "Why is it that when a group of people hear the Word of the Lord, some accept it immediately—They just "get it" – and some do not even hear it? It’s as if they’re deaf, or blocking out the words all together.
Perhaps is it because of the way society is in general. We live in a very secular world, devoid of God in many ways. And if certain groups have their way, they will continue to strip every remnant of God from our society that they can. We as the Catholic laity must not leave this battle to the Church alone. But we must take an active role and get involved. To what extent must we take action?
It does not matter the degree to which we get involved, as long as we do. Like the little boy with a few loaves and fishes, he didn’t think he had enough to help Jesus. But Jesus took the little that the boy had, increased it and turned it into what Christ needed to feed the crowd.
I think if we give society a little of our time, talents, treasure and opinions, or show a little of a shining example of the gospel through our actions and deeds, then that is enough.
We mustn’t think we need to change the world all by ourselves. The task seems insurmountable if we approach it this way. But together, with the Grace of God, expressing our Catholic values in a healthy well-balanced manner, we can make a difference. "With people it is impossible, but not with God; for all things are possible with God." [Matt 19:26]
Are you expressing your moral convictions? Are you standing up for what you believe in? Let our elected officials know how you feel about the issues that effect our futures…our children’s and grand children’s futures. We all need to live the lives in which we believe, for if we do not, we will begin to believe the lives of which we live. We are all called to cultivate the vineyard. †
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)