Sunday, February 21, 2016

YES, THE PASTORAL POPE FRANCIS PULLED A MAJOR THREAD OUT THAT HOLDS TOGETHER THE CHURCH'S TEACHING ON NATURAL LAW AND THE REASONS THE MAGISTERIUM OPPOSES ARTIFICIAL CONTRACEPTION! EITHER BY ACCIDENT OR BY DESIGN IN HIS NON-MAGISTERIAL OFF-THE-CUFF DECLARATION, THIS HAS DAMAGED AN ALREADY DAMAGED TEACHING OF THE CHURCH AND MAY WELL DESTROY IT IF AS SOME BELIEVE THE SMOKE OF SATAN ENTERING THE CHURCH IS GREATER THAN THE HOLY SPIRIT WHO PROTECTS THE CHURCH--TIME WILL TELL OF COURSE THAT THE SMOKE OF SATAN IS NO MATCH FOR THE HOLY SPIRIT THAT WILL REFORM THE POPE AND PAPACY


From Fr. Z's blog you  can read the truth about the lies concerning artificial birth control and nuns by pressing these sentences:

It’s not an urban legend, it’s a LIE: Paul VI did NOT give permission to nuns to use contraceptives.


These are my comments: I can remember when I was a teenager and older that my Protestant anti-Catholic friends (they didn't think they were anti-Catholic, they thought they were evangelizing me by taking me away from the Catholic Church and thus saving me) used the same example that Pope Francis used in his infamous interview above the Atlantic on the way to Rome from Mexico.

That example as the Pope and my anti-Catholic friends used, is that Blessed Pope Paul VI allowed nuns to use artificial birth control in Africa. My anti-Catholic friends didn't make the distinction, though, that the reason the pope allowed it was because of the potential of rape leading to conception. My anti-Catholic friends made is sound like the nuns were routinely having consensual sex. You see where they were going.

I remember at the time asking my parish priest about their example and he said they were anti-Catholic and lying. I believed my priest and not my anti-Catholic friends who routinely used distortions to try to get me to join their denomination. 

But now, Fr. Z makes clear that Blessed Pope Paul VI allowed no such thing! However, evidently this anti-Catholic lie is legend around the world and even Pope Francis had heard of it thinking it was true and used it as an example of allowing artificial birth control in dysfunctional/dangerous situations.

That's the danger of speaking off-the-cuff and not doing one's homework and it is scandalous for a pope, any pope, given the nature of his authority in the Church, to do so.

Thus, Pope Francis extremely and I mean extremely off-the-cuff remarks concerning the use of artificial birth control by married couples engaging in the licit use of the marital act in order to prevent what should happen naturally as natural law codifies, and using a false example, a lie, to back it up is simply irresponsible.

With that said, either intentionally or unintentionally, Pope Francis has pulled the thread that holds together all that the Church teaches concerning Natural Law and thus this will aid and abet those progressive liberals in the Church who want not only to change the Church's teaching as confirmed by Blessed Pope Paul VI in Humanae Vitae, but also as it concerns same sex marriage and women being ordained to Holy Orders.

We are now on the way to becoming what the Anglican Communion is especially its Protestant Episcopal Church in the USA unless there is a clear repudiation by the pope himself about this off-the-cuff remark using a lie to back it up.

Of course, most thinking Catholics know that even if the urban legend that my anti-Catholic friends told me about decades ago were true, for nuns to protect themselves from unwanted conception due to the real possibility of rape which isn't the marital act, by the way, is not the same as those who are married and enjoy the right to the actual marital act using contraception to prevent the conception of a child that might be handicapped in one way or the other.

There are many married men and women who could conceive a child with a genetic disorder inherited from one or the other. Is there now blanket approval from the Church to use artificial birth control to prevent a child from being conceived who has a genetic disorder inherited from one of her parents?

These are pastoral situations best suited to the realm of the secrecy of the confessional and pastoral advice which is never doctrine or dogma.

I would not be surprised at all if Cardinal Mueller and other cardinals issued statement concerning what Pope Francis has said and the potential damage His Holiness could cause to orthodox Catholic teaching concerning natural law.

I would prefer for Pope Francis to issue a statement in writing clarifying Church teaching in this regard. I hope and pray that His Holiness will.

Of course, if a pope teaches that which is false, a Catholic must not accept that as a teaching of the Church and see it only as an opinion.


17 comments:

Gene said...

So, you still defending this guy? How are you on Hillary and Bill?

Anonymous said...

On Feb. 18,2016 this was the headline on an article on your blog:


BOMBSHELLS, YES REALLY, BOMBSHELLS!!!!! THE POPE SPEAKS! AND IT SOUNDS LIKE HE'S EXCOMMUNICATED A NON-CATHOLIC POLITICIAN, DONALD TRUMP! AND IT SOUNDS LIKE HE JUST CALLED ABORTION MURDER, MAFIA STYLE! AND IT SOUNDS LIKE HE HAS COMMON SENSE WHEN IT COMES TO DISEASE AND CONCEPTION!

So what's going on. One minute you say Francis is upholding Catholic teaching and today it sounds like you have doubts after a truly learned priest like Fr. Z you straight. Do you even know the Catholc Faith?

Anonymous said...

Francis wearing a Papal tiara not in a million years my friends. Heck he does not even teach the Holy Roman Catholic Faith.

Victor W said...

It is clear, and I think to many, that the Holy Father still has more tightening up to do with his remarks. This is so reminiscent of the 1970's, when the idea of being "pastoral" connoted forgetting all else that the Church has taught, while accepting any old hearsay to fill the teaching vacuum. Pastoral no longer meant trying to get people into heaven, but meant some sentimental kindness by the clergy towards the people using hearsay if need be.
It seems the Holy Father needs a sabbatical for a refresher course on Catholic teaching. And of course, he needs our prayers more than ever.

Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

While so-called traditionalists obsess on Pope Francis' missteps and misspeaks, intentional or otherwise, I prefer to point out where His Holiness, while making serious mistakes in speech, also upholds the Faith and thus, Catholic must listen.

The feminine nature of the Church, emphasized over and over and over again.

The devil and his temptations

worldliness

abortion

same sex marriage


His missteps or misspeaks on from a pastoral point of view which should not be taught as a norm for the Church in terms of the Deposit of Faith.

In fact today, the pope said that "Thou shalt not kill" is absolute. He's wrong. There are times when killing can be justified in extreme situations, such as self-defense and what is called a "just war" when one is called to serve in the armed forces of their country.

If one of the 10 Commandments and in fact all are not as black and white as the pope believe and so many others, how much more for lesser examples associated with any of the 10 Commandments in particular circumstances that are equally extreme as self defense and just war justifying killing and thus the breaking of that Commandment, at least on the surface?

Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

Amen Victor. I've said that Pope Francis is stuck in the 1970's ideology that was taught in that period especially as it concerns the so-called pastoral theology of that period. It is hard for me to believe that we have a pope like this. But in fact many priests, bishops and cardinals his age,older and younger down to my youthfulness, were formed in the 1970's drivel. Most of us know the time warp we are in when we go to it. Unfortunately, our Holy Father doesn't know and that is concerning to say the least.

Julian Barkin said...

Father, this is a tough question to ask, but it is clear that time catches up. Your "stuck in the 70's" comment really got me thinking: we were blessed with three pope's who were raised pre-Vatican II in upbringing, and because of that as they came into the Vatican II times and thus ascended to the Seat of Rome, they were able to understand and teach by word and by documents a "hermeneutic" of continuity between the two eras, theologcially, doctrinally, and even liturgically (a la Benedict Emeritus XVI.) They also conducted themselves with proper decorum and did their best not to give the wolves of the secular media the upper advantage or sow confusion amongst the faithful and had a more serious respect for the position, politically.

However, it seems that Pope Francis is the first pope of Pure (post) Vatican II education and environment. By this I also include his attitude towards the Papacy and actions such as described in this blogpost. If this is what to expect from these kinds of Pope's in terms of decorum and mannerism, then how likely is our chances that we will have a more centrist, or conservative Vatican II Pope? Rephrased should we be prone to expect a lineage of clones of Pope Francis in the Papal seat until my generation (ordained men in late 20's - early 40's) ascends the ranks and are old enough to become pope?

Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

Julian, the Holy Father is almost 80 but because he joined the Jesuits, his seminary training was much more prolonged. I think it is a 12 to 14 year process. Thus His Holiness was not ordained a priest until 1969, one of the most tumultuous years in Catholic modern history especially for the Jesuits worldwide.

Thus he was well schooled in modern theology of that period which I was well schooled in the 1970's and many of our textbooks were from Jesuits of this period. So when I hear much of what Pope Francis teaches it takes me back to the 1970's. I want to make clear not all was horrible or heterodox but there were some things and all was couched in denigrating the pre-Vatican II Church showing us that finally Vatican II had given us a blueprint and way that pre-Vatican II theology never did or could--this is the fatal flaw of most theology in the 1960's and 70's and this is extended to pastoral theology.

Pope Francis was schooled in the 1960's school of pastoral theology--of the 1960's generation of I'm okay and you're okay. I think he has distanced himself somewhat from that but clearly there are elements of it in his thinking to this day.

Pastoral theology is an art not a science. It cannot be elevated to a science, meaning doctrine or dogma. It is art.

Pope Francis is coming terribly close to elevating art to a science and ultimately a doctrine. But it can't be.

What we saw yesterday with Fr. Scalia's homily tells us of the well-formed generation of priests of his generation and the newer ones. I think this bodes well for the future and the pool of candidates popes will have to choose cardinals who will then elect from their number new popes.

The 1970's generation which Pope Francis is a part along with his cronies, Cardinal Kasper and the southern American mafia are a dying breed but they have had a glorious resurgence these last three years, but that will end through the biological solution.

With that said, I am a defender not only of the papacy but of the reigning pope whether I like this, that or the other of what he does or doesn't do.

I will die a martyr for the cause of defending the papacy. This is what Catholics are to do. That is why I can't stand these faux, pseudo Protestants denigrating Pope Francis in the most harsh of terms, motivated by a deep seated unresolved anger in their lives. It is wrong; it is demonic and it is NOT CATHOLIC!

Anonymous said...

There you go again, projecting the weaknesses of your theological training on to others.

You have NO IDEA what Pope Francis' was like - none. You assume that because it happened around the time you got weak training, his training had to be weak as well. This is utter poppycock.

You assume that if YOU got weak training, then everyone in seminary at roughly the same time had to get weak training as well.

It doesn't work that way.

Anonymous said...

Wrong again Father. Those of use "denigrating" Pope Francis aren't the pseudo Protestants, Francis is the pseudo Protesant. Although I hesitate to qualify it with the word pseudo, but in charity I will.

He is the one who has unresolved anger issues. What pope would have a hizzy tizz in a cafeteria because some cardinals called him out for his heterodox behaviour.

We aren't the ones who are "demonic" and "not CATHOLIC", that would be Francis. After all he is the one who said Our Lady felt betrayed at the foot of the cross. It was Francis who told the atheist that there was no need to convert. It is Francis who told the adulteress that she could receive communion without amendment of life and confession. It was Francis who basically told the whole world that Protestants can come to communion if they want to. It is Francis who just said that contraception can be used in some situations. It was Francis who accepted with glee the filthy communist crucifix and dared to place that image on Our Lady's altar. And the list is basically endless. Who is the pseudo Protestant it's not me.

George said...

Non Catholics with few exceptions, and I dare say far too many Catholics, conflate or impute Church teaching with extemporaneous remarks by the Pope which are in some cases only opinion and conjecture. Because of his position, and the philosophy of many in the media today to edit reported remarks for sensationalist sound bites and headlines , the Holy Father needs to be more circumspect. It would be better if he would just answer questions submitted in advance so he can consult and prepare a response which does not elicit confusion on the part of those who are ignorant and uninformed on what Church teaches. What gets lost in all this is all the times the Holy Father has upheld Church teaching.

A pope can voice his opinions even when it is not always wise to do so, if there is no one to persuade him to do otherwise.
So can a Supreme Court justice- but outside of the courtroom it has no force of law.

Mark Thomas said...

It is imperative that His Holiness Pope Francis respond to the controversy that has flowed from his remarks in question. To his credit, he has responded at times to controversies that have flowed from statements that he's offered to reporters.

Example: Pope Francis uttered his unfortunate "breed like rabbits" remark during an in-flight press conference following his Apostolic Visit to the Philippines. During his first General Audience following his return from that trip, Pope Francis responded to the controversy in question.

Pope Francis praised Catholics who raised large families. The following day, in regard to the Pope's "breed like rabbits" remark, Archbishop Becciu declared that "The Pope is truly sorry that it created such disorientation. He absolutely did not want to disregard the beauty and the value of large families."

Via his book that was published recently, Pope Francis set the record straight in regard to his "who am I to judge?" comment. In fairness to Pope Francis, when he uttered that remark, his words were 100 percent orthodox. He even referenced the CCC's teaching on homosexuality. I don't understand as to why many Catholics had reacted negatively to the "who am I to judge" comment. Anyway, the Pope responded to that controversy.

In light of his history to clarify various controversies that have surrounded him, I expect His Holiness to respond to the "contraceptive" controversy. It is imperative that he reiterate immediately the Church's teachings on contraception.

I believe also that once and for all, Rome must also place the Pope Blessed Paul VI
"Congo contraception" controversy to rest. Is the claim in question about Pope Blessed Paul VI false? Or has Pope Francis viewed a Vatican document(s) that substantiated his claim in question?

Pax.

Mark Thomas

Anonymous said...

Bee here (the posting system won't allow my id. Don't know why.)

I for one never believed Paul VI permitted nuns anywhere to use birth control because of possibilities of rape. Of course, I didn't know for sure, but heck, I've been listening to garbage spewed about the Catholic Church for many decades, and I am sure if there was even a modicum of truth to that it would have been trotted out in every single anti-Catholic and Catholic herterodox article written about birth control in the past 50 years. Yet I never heard it once. So I kind of thought it was far fetched.

And I learned long ago never, ever believe the first report(s) printed or reported about any Pope, Cardinal or priest. Never. I started ignoring the secular media on religious matters, oh, back in the 1980's, when the likes of Fr. Andrew Greeley was pontificating from the pages of a local newspaper, and all kinds of sewage was flowing downstream out of the University of Chicago's Theological Union, Loyola U's theology department, and even out of Mundelein Seminary, and Catholic bashing was all the rage in the newspapers.

I'm just saying Catholics in the U.S. need to catch up to putting up a wall and moat around themselves against the stuff that in reported on Catholicism in the media. And ignore what the Pope says on airplanes.

I really think the Pope's handlers should have a program of religious devotions, including Benediction, on the plane with the Pope. No conversation, no interviews, just prayer. Treat the plane like a monastery. You can ride along if you're willing to fast and pray (in Latin) the whole time. :-)

Bee

Anonymous said...

And you look at the traditional orders i.e. S.S.P.X., F.S.S.P. and Institute of Christ the King, no issues, no fighting just the Holy Roman Catholic Faith boy how simple is that? One does not have to worry about: altar girls, women lectors, giant puppets, hand holding, kiss of peace, rock, mariachi, folk music, felt banners, communion standing and in the hand, women running around the altar pretending to be priests as the priests just sit in chairs on the side line and look bored, 50 years since the Council and the New Springtime is still trying to blossom, such a joke.

Mark Thomas said...

I believe that it is extremely interesting that Pope Francis' promoted the old claim that Pope Blessed Paul VI authorized the use of contraceptives for nuns in Congo. Everybody, and that must include surely Pope Francis, who is aware of said story knows that the authenticity of the story is controversial.

Pope Francis is a very intelligent man. I find it unbelievable that he would have referenced that story without his having absolute proof that the story is valid.

Here is a very interesting comment:

Aline Kalbian is a professor of religion at Florida State University. She authored the book Sex, Violence & Justice: Contraception and the Catholic Church. She has researched the Pope Blessed Paul VI/Congo contraception story. "I didn’t find any evidence of Paul VI saying anything about Congo and nuns," Kalbian said. "And John XXIII didn’t say anything either."

However, Kalbian added the following in regard to Pope Francis' reference to the story: "It’s possible the pope has accessed Vatican archives and knows something about Paul VI and the Belgian Congo that we don’t," Kalbian said.

Rome must address Pope Francis' claim about Pope Blessed Paul VI. Again, does Pope Francis know something about the story that we don't? Why would Pope Francis have referenced such a controversial claim about Pope Blessed Paul VI unless he had information that supported the old claim that Pope Blessed Paul VI had authorized the use of contraceptives?

Pax.

Mark Thomas

Julian Barkin said...

Hello Father,

Back at home, I'll reply to what's happened since my morning.

Thank you Father for your reply to my concern, which was generated in my mind from your comment about the 70's. It was well thought out, and explains what was going on at that time frame that has formed Pope Francis' theology, and his pastoral practice.

To add also why I asked the questions, I just keep getting tired of the pseudo-gaffes that keep happening because the media gets invited to speak with Pope Francis and they keep doing the same thing, and apparently, the Holy Father doesn't want to stop the press junkets for some reason. Maybe he thinks, with the best intentions, that he has to pander to them, to enact "evangelization" of those people on the "peripheries" of the Church, and the media is one means? He is clever politically speaking, so maybe this is part of his grand plan for his Papacy?

I am glad to say it does put me at more ease than before. Essentially, it sounds like there is an equal chance, that even from among your generation, if the Holy Spirit wills it (and perhaps, if we actually pray with an honest heart about it,) there might be someone who will step to the forefront that can be more balanced/orthodox for the Papacy.

As for some of the other commentary seen here, wow that's highly disgusting especially of that Anonymous at 121pm to say what he did about you. You were answering my question/concerns honestly. Clearly his response demonstrates a firm lack of reasoning and evidence based answering to questioning, and he/she is a firm and devout believer of the lies and slander akin to the Radical Traditionalist blogs and some of your other commentators here. Such anger and loathing and UTTER DISRESPECT of your person and of the Holy Orders of a priest who is alter christi.

I will say though I agree with commentator, George. In addition, apparently this is how John Paul II and Benedict Emeritus XVI handled question and answer sessions. While it is not "True" Q and A because it is an "edited" type of format, nonetheless it gives time for us as a Church to formulate answers that do not cause such confusion and is not clearly adhering to the Catechism/clear in the teachings of the Church to Joe Catholic (who likely does NOT go to weekly Mass,) who mainly uses liberal main-stream-media on TV and internet as their sources of news on the Church.

Again Fr. Thanks for your time in addressing my concerns/questions. Pax Tibi Christi.

Joe Potillor said...

Just because one has an opinion on *insert subject here* doesn't mean that one ought to say it....this can apply to anyone and anywhere.

I think I've stated this before and I'll state so again: People tend to get an extreme position of 100% orthodoxy from the Pope or 0% percent orthodoxy. The answer is some unknown percentage in between.

If he (Pope Francis) does not re-state what is previously taught, either through ordinary or extra-ordinary means, he should effectively be ignored, because in that situation it'd be a matter of prudential judgement, in which any Catholic can freely disagree.

There's no teaching this pope prudence, at this point, there's zero way he'll listen.... Let me know when there's something that's actually worth listening to.