ONE SWISS BISHOP REMAINS FAITHFUL TO TRADITIONAL TEACHING ON MARRIAGE IN HIS OWN GUIDELINES

WE ARE AN ANCIENT PEOPLE ON THE VERGE OF EXTINCTION BECAUSE OF OUR COMMITMENT TO OUR FAITH.  WILL ANYBODY PROTEST FOR US? – IRAQI ARCHBISHOP WARDA CONDEMNS PROTESTERS, FAUX-CATHOLICS WHO REFUSE TO LET TRUMP HELP CHRISTIANS

THE PRESENTATION OF JESUS IN THE TEMPLE: THE ANTIDOTE TO NARCISSISM, ELITISM AND OLIGARCHY

FRANCIS: POPE ACCUSES CHRISTIANS OF ‘COWARDLINESS’ FOR OVERFOCUS ON FOLLOWING ‘ALL’ 10 COMMANDMENTS

BISHOP ROBERT BARRON AND THE CULT OF MAN

SOROS-FUNDED CATHOLICS MOBILIZE AGAINST TRUMP IMMIGRATION ORDERS

89 YEAR OLD DES MOINES DEACON ATTACKED BY DISTURBED WOMAN WITH KNIFE IN SACRISTY

HERESY AND LIES: HOW MUCH LONGER WILL THE MULLER-FRANCIS GAME GO ON?

CONTRACEPTION: FRANCIS HAS DIRECTLY CONTRADICTED THE INFALLIBLE TEACHING OF POPE PAUL VI IN HIS ENCYCLICAL LETTER HUMANAE VITAE

WHEN WAS THE LAST TIME WE SAW THIS AT THE WHITE HOUSE?

DISLIKEABLE FRANCIS: BY THEIR FRIENDS….

PRESCRIPTION FOR SINNERS: FRANCIS’ MEDICINE WAS POISON TO CATHOLIC POPE BENEDICT

IT WOULD BE BETTER FOR CARD. MULLER TO CHOOSE THE CHURCH AND HIS OWN SALVATION.

BISHOP BARRON & THE CHURCH OF ACCOMPANIMENT

LOOK UPON THE FACE OF THE SISTER SISTER LUCIA “THE HERETIC” CARAM. TO HER, THE BLESSED VIRGIN MARY, WASN’T!

FR Z. TO FISHWRAP: “WHAT I WRITE HERE IS IS NOT “HEAVY” WITH “SCATHING CRITICISM OF POPE FRANCIS

"Um, I'll have to get back to you on that."

“Um, I’ll have to get back to you on that.”

It seems to me that, up until recently, we could count on the Vatican press people to demonstrate the kind of integrity and honesty you might expect from the center of the Christian world.  In some ways they were an example to others.  Today they spin like the White House.

Why must they treat the Pope’s meeting with Kim Davis the same way they treat his emotional meetings with transsexuals and his supposed phone calls where he tells people in second marriages to go to Holy Communion?

Do they see any difference between these individuals, or are they just engaging in political dialogue with polar ‘extremes?’  Do they have any sense whatsoever of Christian teaching and witness, or are they just ashamed?

At Catholic World Report:

Robert Moynihan, editor of Inside the Vatican (and founding editor of Catholic World Report), has just posted a detailed description of a meeting alleged to have taken place between Pope Francis and Kim Davis, the Kentucky county clerk who was jailed earlier this month for refusing to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples.

UPDATE: Vatican spokesman Father Federico Lombardi, SJ told Reuters that he would neither confirm nor deny that the meeting took place, and that there will be no further statements. 

The Catholic Right is going to jump up and down about this.  “Oh my gosh!  Francis did something Catholic” (in secret).  “Hearsay has it that he thanked a woman who refused to help the state confirm gay couples as spouses and heads of families!  Davis says it happened but Francis and the Vatican are silent” (silenced?)

It’s interesting the two actually got together.  Pope Francis and Davis don’t really have that much in common, do they?

 

No reason to be undignified, uncivil, or disrespectful

Feel the dignity, the civility, and the respect

On Sunday Archbishop Wilton Gregory of Atlanta released a statement on the incoherent, impeachable ruling from the depraved Supreme Court ordering us all to pretend gay people are married when the state says they are; just like we’re forced to pretend men are women, or women are men or something transitional. Being forced to sin, being forced to lie: that’s the rule in the Kingdom of Satan.

Atlanta Archbishop Wilton D. Gregory released this statement in response to the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision legalizing same sex marriage:

Each U.S. Supreme Court decision that has ever been rendered has resulted in deep disappointment for some people and vindication for others. If we all agreed on the outcomes of these divisive cases, there would simply be no reason for the Court to convene. This most recent decision is no different.

Nothing special about this decision, yes?  More of the same, people disagreeing with each other.  Can’t we all just get along?  Whatever happened to love?

By the same token, every court decision is limited in what it can achieve; again, this one is no exception. It does not change the biological differences between male and female human beings or the requirements for the generation of human life, which still demands the participation of both. It does not change the Catholic Church’s teaching regarding the Sacrament of Matrimony, which beautifully joins a man and woman in a loving union that is permanent in commitment and open to God’s blessing of precious new life.

Thank God SCOTUS can’t change Catholic teaching on marriage, yet.  I suppose we should be grateful for that. But what difference does Catholic teaching matter anyway?  What if I’m not Catholic, or I’m a faux-catholic or I’m one of those many people repulsed by the Church for one reason or another? What if I hate the Church, and I’m in position to force the world to obey my commands?

This judgment, however, does not absolve either those who may approve or disapprove of this decision from the obligations of civility toward one another. Neither is it a license for more venomous language or vile behavior against those whose opinions continue to differ from our own. It is a decision that confers a civil entitlement to some people who could not claim it before. It does not resolve the moral debate that preceded it and will most certainly continue in its wake.

This evil and illicit ruling is nothing if not a license for incivility and vile behavior.  The problem is the offense only goes one way.  An attack not resisted is conquest.

Did he really call this a ‘civil entitlement to some people who could not claim it?’  I find the Archbishop’s language ‘venomous’ –  you know, like something a snake might utter.

This moral debate must also include the way that we treat one another – especially those with whom we may disagree. In many respects, the moral question is at least as consequential and weighty as the granting of this civil entitlement. The decision has offered all of us an opportunity to continue the vitally important dialogue of human encounter, especially between those of diametrically differing opinions regarding its outcome.

Who is having a moral debate?  This is a ruling. The debate’s over.  Nor is there a current debate about how we treat each other either.  There is only you and others like you urging decent people to lie down, comply, and neglect to confront evil.  There is no such thing as a ‘dialogue of human encounter.’  There is only right and wrong, life and death, Heaven and…What the Hell is this FrancisBishop talking about?

The decision has made my ministry as a pastor more complex since it demands that I both continue to uphold the teachings of my Church regarding the Sacrament of Matrimony while also demanding that I insist upon respect for the human dignity of both those who approve of the judgment as well as those who may disapprove.”

Everything liberals think is complex.  That’s what they say when they’re getting ready to do something evil.  If you protest you’re just too simple.

You can’t truly ‘uphold’ Catholic teaching without correcting, shaming, silencing, and checking the advance of sin.  You can only pretend to, just like Archbishop Gregory does.  They’re always handing out human dignity like coupons and applying it like Vicks.  But those who approve of this judgment have already abused their own dignity and deserve neither respect nor deference from faithful Christians.  The problem is it’s illegal now in this world of false prelates and corrupted justice.