Sunday, May 12, 2013
IN GOVERNING THE CHURCH, ECCLESIASTICAL PENALTIES NEED TO BE USED ON THOSE WHO DISOBEY THE CHURCH AND HER BISHOPS WHICH IS HOLY MOTHER CHURCH'S ONLY LEGITIMATE MAGISTERIUM
Boston College, a Jesuit institution, is honoring the Prime Minister of Ireland, the Hon. Mr. Enda Kenny by awarding him an honorary degree. He is actively promoting in Ireland legislation to allow the murder of innocent unborn children. How can a Catholic institution justify the awarding of an honorary degree to such a Catholic, whom I believe Church law excommunicates when aiding and assisting women in abortion through public or private encouragement?
Pope Francis is beginning to purify the Church of the bogus magisteriums that exist in the Church today striving to usurp the legitimate and God given authority of the Bishop of Rome, successor of Saint Peter and the bishops in union with him, the successors of the other apostles. Together they are the legitimate Magisterium of the Church, they are the living Magisterium.
As it concerns the bogus feminist magisteriums of the Church, Macon's newspaper, the Telegraph ran a "canned" story on Margaret Nutting Ralph’s new book, “Why the Catholic Church Must Change: A Necessary Conversation” (Rowan & Littlefield, $34. You can read the entire article by PRESSING THIS SENTENCE.
The most pertinent part of the interview Nutting gives and the most incredibly shallow, poor in logic and completely opposed to the truth of the Magisterium of the Church is the following statement of Catholics who are pro-choice:
QUESTION: You write that the Catholic Church teaches that people “will be judged, not by their obedience to the law, but by their fidelity to a well-formed conscience.” You discuss the importance of putting Scripture in context. How does that square up with those who quote selected passages from the Bible as “evidence” that they are right to be, say, anti-gay marriage or anti-abortion?
ANSWER: If you don’t put Scripture passages in context, you can use them to support anything you already think; so you can have two people diametrically opposed on an issue, and both of them will be convinced they’re right, because they’ve taken an out-of-context Scripture passage to support what they already think.
QUESTION: In your chapter on abortion, you make a salient point about how many people who are pro-choice are not really pro-abortion. Why do you say that “Catholics also do harm when those who believe that abortion is immoral try to distinguish themselves from all of their opponents by calling themselves pro-life.”
ANSWER: I’ve talked to many people who would never have an abortion themselves and are not pro-abortion at all, but they think that it’s a decision of conscience and that it should be a personal decision and not a decision of the federal government or state government.
They’re not for criminalizing abortion, because that would deprive people of it being a personal choice, but nevertheless they’re against abortion.
QUESTION: You write about gay marriage and emphasize that the greatest mandate we are given by Scripture is to love thoughtfully and to express tolerance and encouragement to others. How does that reflect on the issue of gay marriage?
ANSWER: My thoughts on this have certainly evolved. Initially, not knowing anything about it, I thought it was a choice based in lust.
My husband’s a psychologist, and I asked him, “Do you think people choose this action freely or is it innate to them to be homosexual as I am heterosexual?” He said, “I don’t think they choose it.”
My Comment: Nutting says of pro-choice catholics: "They’re not for criminalizing abortion, because that would deprive people of it being a personal choice, but nevertheless they’re against abortion." This statement is so incredible, because Nutting (and surely she is nuts) doesn't want to deprive those who want to have an abortion from doing so. Would she also state the same of parents who locked their children in their rooms and give them only bread and water for a week at a time in order to punish their bad behavior? Her logic is incredibly shallow, immature and an insult to Catholicism and our great tradition of moral teachings and justice.
On homosexuality she sets up a straw women, the Church does not teach that being a homosexual is a sin or a choice, it is a "disordered" condition that can be genetic or caused by family circumstances and childhood trauma. It is not up to the Church to decide the biological or sociological or psychological reasons why people, male or female have disordered affections, suffice it to say that the affections of homosexuals in the physical and psyche sense are disordered but not necessarily sinful
The choice to act on the disordered affections if not compromised by mental illness or ignorance of the moral law in natural law and Scripture is the sin, it is a mortal sin. Even ordered affections of a heterosexual is considered a sin when the physical act of natural heterosexual sex takes place through fornication or adultery.
But back to Boston College and Sean Cardinal O'Malley. He makes the decision to boycott Boston College's Commencement ceremonies, which is laudable. Here is his very good and salient statement:
BOSTON COLLEGE COMMENCEMENT STATEMENT
Cardinal Sean O'Malley
May 10, 2013
Because the Gospel of Life is the centerpiece of the Church’s social doctrine and because we consider abortion a crime against humanity, the Catholic Bishops of the United States have asked that Catholic institutions not honor government officials or politicians who promote abortion with their laws and policies.
Recently I learned that the Prime Minister of Ireland, the Hon. Mr. Enda Kenny was slated to receive an honorary degree at Boston College’s graduation this year. I am sure that the invitation was made in good faith, long before it came to the attention of the leadership of Boston College that Mr. Kenny is aggressively promoting abortion legislation. The Irish Bishops have responded to that development by affirming the Church’s teaching that “the deliberate decision to deprive an innocent human being of life is always morally wrong” and expressed serious concern that the proposed legislation “represents a dramatic and morally unacceptable change to Irish law.”
Since the university has not withdrawn the invitation and because the Taoiseach has not seen fit to decline, I shall not attend the graduation. It is my ardent hope that Boston College will work to redress the confusion, disappointment and harm caused by not adhering to the Bishops’ directives. Although I shall not be present to impart the final benediction, I assure the graduates that they are in my prayers on this important day in their lives, and I pray that their studies will prepare them to be heralds of the Church’s Social Gospel and “men and women for others,” especially for the most vulnerable in our midst.
MY FINAL COMMENTS: While the statement of Cardinal O'Malley is very good, it amounts to nothing more than an ecclesiastical pout if he doesn't back it up with ecclesiastical sanctions.
My question to those who know canon law, what ecclesiastical sanctions could he impose?
An interdict on the Board of Trustees preventing them from receiving Holy Communion until a public repentance?
Removing the Catholic identity of the school?
Asking the Jesuit Pope, Francis, the Bishop of Rome to intervene with the Jesuits in the most juridical way possible?