In “Song of the Sparrows” Father Murray Bodo, O.F.M. talks about his vows and the significance they make to him as a Franciscan Friar. While Father says that his vows should be a commitment to grow into a new in Christ I believe that as children of God we are all called to grow into new persons in Christ. While priests may be called to this commitment to manifest itself in a more profound way we are each called to transform ourselves to be like Christ. Vows or no vows it is every person’s fundamental call to grow in the Lord. God Bless.
Posts Tagged ‘Catholics’
Posted in Catholic, Christian, faith, God, Jesus, Theology, tagged Catholics, conversion, Dr. Ralph Martin, Dr. Scott Hahn, free captives, Jesus Christ, love, sins, spiritual battle, spiritual warfare, theology, unbelief on February 27, 2013 | 6 Comments »
Here is a piece called Acting On Faith by Cardinal Donald Wuerl:
The Catholic Church is no stranger to criticism from those who disagree with its teachings, but the petition posted recently on the White House Web site to label the church a “hate group” is beyond the pale, even in an age when an aggressive secularism seeks to marginalize the influence of religious belief.
The church has long been criticized as “too dogmatic.” Demands are constantly made that it change its 2,000-year-old teachings on marriage, family, sexuality, morality and other matters related to the truth about human beings. But even if others do not agree, the church understands that what it proclaims is revealed truth — the Word of God. The church’s teachings are timeless. They cannot be changed, even though adherence may be upsetting to some. That the church is built on a rock with fixed beliefs is a positive feature, both because it can withstand the shifting winds of public opinion and because of the cherished content of our faith itself, which fosters love among Catholics and non-Catholics alike.
Although these precepts may be misunderstood by many today, the fundamental vocation of the Catholic Church is to provide the witness of love and truth to the world, including offering the voice of an informed conscience. Catholics are taught to respect the fundamental, inherent dignity of every person, each made in the image of God, and to work to establish a just society. The church teaches that it is our obligation to manifest love of neighbor, to provide charitable service to others, and to promote truth, genuine freedom and authentic humanism. We work for the poor, the oppressed and the suffering, because that is what our faith teaches we must do. There is thus a positive side to being dogmatic: The teachings and works of the church advance the common good throughout civil society. Just as our dogma is constant, so is the work it commands. CONTINUED
Posted in abortion, Catholic, Catholic Church Doctrine, Catholics, Christian, Christianity, Constitution, Culture War, Election, God, Morality, Pro-Life, Religion, tagged abortion, Catholic Church, Catholics, Christian, debate, dw fide doctrine, Joe Biden, Paul Ryan, pro-choice, pro-life, unborn baby, Vice President, views on October 12, 2012 | 6 Comments »
Did you watch VP debate last night? I did. What did you think of it? I thought it was a pretty good debate, pretty fiery at that. Towards the end of the debate Martha Raddatz, the moderator, asked Joe Biden and Paul Ryan this:
This debate is, indeed, historic. We have two Catholic candidates, first time, on a stage such as this. And I would like to ask you both to tell me what role your religion has played in your own personal views on abortion.
Please talk about how you came to that decision. Talk about how your religion played a part in that. And, please, this is such an emotional issue for so many people in this country … please talk personally about this, if you could.
Paul Ryan answered:
I don’t see how a person can separate their public life from their private life or from their faith. Our faith informs us in everything we do. My faith informs me about how to take care of the vulnerable, of how to make sure that people have a chance in life.
Now, you want to ask basically why I’m pro-life? It’s not simply because of my Catholic faith. That’s a factor, of course. But it’s also because of reason and science.
You know, I think about 10 1/2 years ago, my wife Janna and I went to Mercy Hospital in Janesville where I was born, for our seven week ultrasound for our firstborn child, and we saw that heartbeat. A little baby was in the shape of a bean. And to this day, we have nicknamed our firstborn child Liza, “Bean.” Now I believe that life begins at conception.
That’s why – those are the reasons why I’m pro-life. Now I understand this is a difficult issue, and I respect people who don’t agree with me on this, but the policy of a Romney administration will be to oppose abortions with the exceptions for rape, incest and life of the mother. What troubles me more is how this administration has handled all of these issues. Look at what they’re doing through Obamacare with respect to assaulting the religious liberties of this country. They’re infringing upon our first freedom, the freedom of religion, by infringing on Catholic charities, Catholic churches, Catholic hospitals.
Our Church should not have to sue our federal government to maintain their religious liberties. And with respect to abortion, the Democratic Party used to say they wanted it to be safe, legal and rare. Now they support it without restriction and with taxpayer funding. Taxpayer funding in Obamacare, taxpayer funding with foreign aid. The vice president himself went to China and said that he sympathized and wouldn’t second guess their one child policy of forced abortions and sterilizations. That to me is pretty extreme.
Joe Biden answered:
My religion defines who I am, and I’ve been a practicing Catholic my whole life. And has particularly informed my social doctrine. The Catholic social doctrine talks about taking care of those who – who can’t take care of themselves, people who need help.
With regard to – with regard to abortion, I accept my Church’s position on abortion as a – what we call a de fide doctrine. Life begins at conception in the Church’s judgment. I accept it in my personal life.
But I refuse to impose it on equally devout Christians and Muslims and Jews, and I just refuse to impose that on others, unlike my friend here, the – the congressman. I – I do not believe that we have a right to tell other people that – women they can’t control their body. It’s a decision between them and their doctor. In my view and the Supreme Court, I’m not going to interfere with that.
With regard to the assault on the Catholic Church, let me make it absolutely clear, no religious institution, Catholic or otherwise, including Catholic social services, Georgetown Hospital, Mercy Hospital, any hospital, none has to either refer contraception, none has to pay for contraception, none has to be a vehicle to get contraception in any insurance policy they provide. That is a fact.
That is a fact. Now with regard to the way in which the – we differ, my friend says that he – well I guess he accepts Governor Romney’s position now, because in the past he has argued that there was – there’s rape and forcible rape. He’s argued that in the case of rape or incest, it was still – it would be a crime to engage in having an abortion. I just fundamentally disagree with my friend.
Paul Ryan’s answer was beautiful and a great testament to both his Catholic Faith and his pro-life views. Since there are problems with Joe Biden’s answer I am going to focus on his.
While Biden claims to follow the Church’s de fide doctrinal position on abortion he really doesn’t because if he did he would assent to the Church teaching which states that all life is precious and abortion is murder. A law is unjust that doesn’t protect human life at all stages. Biden wouldn’t say that he doesn’t want to impose his personal beliefs on others if he truly had any respect for all human life, especially the most vulnerable.
From the Catechism: “Human life is sacred because from its beginning it involves the creative action of God and it remains for ever in a special relationship with the Creator, who is its sole end. God alone is the Lord of life from its beginning until its end: no one can under any circumstance claim for himself the right directly to destroy an innocent human being.”56
Scripture specifies the prohibition contained in the fifth commandment: “Do not slay the innocent and the righteous.”61 The deliberate murder of an innocent person is gravely contrary to the dignity of the human being, to the golden rule, and to the holiness of the Creator. The law forbidding it is universally valid: it obliges each and everyone, always and everywhere.
2270 Human life must be respected and protected absolutely from the moment of conception. From the first moment of his existence, a human being must be recognized as having the rights of a person – among which is the inviolable right of every innocent being to life.72
- Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you.73My frame was not hidden from you, when I was being made in secret, intricately wrought in the depths of the earth.74
2271 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:
- You shall not kill the embryo by abortion and shall not cause the newborn to perish.75God, 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.76
2272 Formal cooperation in an abortion constitutes a grave offense. The Church attaches the canonical penalty of excommunication to this crime against human life. “A person who procures a completed abortion incurs excommunication latae sententiae,”77 ”by the very commission of the offense,”78 and subject to the conditions provided by Canon Law.79 The Church does not thereby intend to restrict the scope of mercy. Rather, she makes clear the gravity of the crime committed, the irreparable harm done to the innocent who is put to death, as well as to the parents and the whole of society.
2273 The inalienable right to life of every innocent human individual is a constitutive element of a civil society and its legislation:
“The inalienable rights of the person must be recognized and respected by civil society and the political authority. These human rights depend neither on single individuals nor on parents; nor do they represent a concession made by society and the state; they belong to human nature and are inherent in the person by virtue of the creative act from which the person took his origin. Among such fundamental rights one should mention in this regard every human being’s right to life and physical integrity from the moment of conception until death.”80
“The moment a positive law deprives a category of human beings of the protection which civil legislation ought to accord them, the state is denying the equality of all before the law. When the state does not place its power at the service of the rights of each citizen, and in particular of the more vulnerable, the very foundations of a state based on law are undermined. . . . As a consequence of the respect and protection which must be ensured for the unborn child from the moment of conception, the law must provide appropriate penal sanctions for every deliberate violation of the child’s rights.”81
2274 Since it must be treated from conception as a person, the embryo must be defended in its integrity, cared for, and healed, as far as possible, like any other human being.
Prenatal diagnosis is morally licit, “if it respects the life and integrity of the embryo and the human fetus and is directed toward its safe guarding or healing as an individual. . . . It is gravely opposed to the moral law when this is done with the thought of possibly inducing an abortion, depending upon the results: a diagnosis must not be the equivalent of a death sentence.”82
2275 ”One must hold as licit procedures carried out on the human embryo which respect the life and integrity of the embryo and do not involve disproportionate risks for it, but are directed toward its healing the improvement of its condition of health, or its individual survival.”83
“It is immoral to produce human embryos intended for exploitation as disposable biological material.”84
“Certain attempts to influence chromosomic or genetic inheritance are not therapeutic but are aimed at producing human beings selected according to sex or other predetermined qualities. Such manipulations are contrary to the personal dignity of the human being and his integrity and identity”85 which are unique and unrepeatable.
What Biden calls a personal choice for women is not simply a personal preference like choosing between the type of shampoo, soap, hair style, or the make of vehicle one likes. We are talking about a human being which exists or is alive from the moment of conception. Biden doesn’t want to impose his beliefs so women don’t murder these innocent babies. It is sick and sad that murder equals “women’s rights” and “equality” in pro-aborts minds.
Kristi Burton Brown from Live Action News made a great point.
Biden also contradicted his own admission that life begins at conception by stating that he does “not believe that we have a right to tell other people that – women they can’t control their body. It’s a decision between them and their doctor.” However, if he believes that life – presumably a new life – begins at conception, we are not just talking about a woman controlling her own body. We are talking about ending the life of a new, unique human being. Biden seems to personally realize this truth, but refused to publicly acknowledge it.
At 8 weeks….
Posted in Catholic, Catholics, Christian, Dogma, faith, God, Jewish, Mother of Jesus, prayer, Virgin Mary, tagged Catholics, God, Jesus, Mary, Mother, pray, Virgin Mary, worship on October 2, 2012 | 2 Comments »
Posted in Catholicism, Catholics, Christianity, Constitution, faith, First Amendment, God, tagged Catholics, Constitution, faith, Father Z, First Amendment, liberty, Paul Ryan, Religion, religious freedom, unalienable rights on August 23, 2012 | 2 Comments »
Here is a post I found on What Does The Prayer Really Say? :
Presumptive Republican vice presidential candidate Paul Ryan says Catholics must act now to protect their right to religious freedom from being diminished in American society.
“This is a time where people of all faiths – especially Catholics – have to stand up and speak for our rights,” he said. “And if we do, we will rekindle civil society.”
In an August 17 conference call organized by the online fundraising groupCatholics2012.org, Rep. Ryan (R-Wis.) said that he tries to apply the teachings of his Catholic faith to his work.
“I’m proud to acknowledge that it’s why I do what I do,” he said.
[...]Ryan warned that this “assault on our religious liberties” constitutes “a serious threat to all peoples of faith.”
“It is a violation of the First Amendment of our bill of rights,” he said.
The vice presidential contender cautioned that the philosophy behind such actions “seeks to displace civil society” and “crowd out our social mediating institutions,” such as churches, charities and hospitals.
These are “groups that connect the person to the community,” he explained, and they play a role in implementing the principles of subsidiarity, solidarity and the preferential option for the poor that should be practiced in civil society.
Ryan said that he “shudder(s) to think what the world could look like” if President Obama is re-elected and his administration is able to continue eroding religious liberty. [My fear as well. But I think the real problem would come during Obama's third term, if you get my drift.]
There is a need for practicing Catholics to “get the word out” on these important issues, he said.
Congressman Jeff Fortenberry (R-Neb.), who is also Catholic, warned that the mandate presents “an unprecedented form of government coercion.”
“It is a different worldview that is operative,” he stated.
Following the passage of the Affordable Care Act, [OBAMATAX] Fortenberry introduced the Respect for Rights of Conscience Act in the House of Representatives to preserve the conscience rights of employers and health care providers across the country.
[...]“No American should be forced to choose between their faith and their job,” he said. “No one should be forced to choose between their conscience and their livelihood.”
Posted in Catholic, Catholicism, Christian, Constitution, First Amendment, Health Care, Persecution, Prayers, Prolife, Religion, tagged activist, activists, Catholics, Christian persecution, Christians, Constitution, First Amendment, intolerance, prayer, pro-life, Pro-Obamacare, religious persecution, repeal Obamacare on July 25, 2012 | 1 Comment »
Pro-Life activists were peacefully praying the rosary for the repeal of Obamacare when a Pro-Obamacare activist knocked over the U.S. flag and then attacked the volunteers from Tradition Family and Property (TFP).
The group had been passing out flyers describing ObamaCare as a form of Christian persecution, forcing Catholics and other Christians to subsidize abortifacient contraception. They also held pro-life signs.
It looks like TFP has had previous encounters of a similar nature from “tolerant” Obamacare supporters. Why is it that so many on the Left act out like juvenile delinquents when they come in contact with person/s who have different beliefs or opinions than their own? You don’t see people on the Right acting like that.
Posted in Catholic Church, Catholics, Christian, Conservatism, Constitution, Culture Clash, Ethics, First Amendment, Morality, Persecution, Politics, tagged abortion, American holocaust, Anti-Catholic, bigotry, Catholic Church, Catholics, Chancellor, citizens, Conscience, Germany, HHS mandate, issues, liberty, non-negotiables, Obama administration, prudential judgment, religious freedom, The Holocaust, values, vote, voting, WWII on May 24, 2012 | 10 Comments »
This video highlights that the cornerstone of the rights and our most cherished freedoms - the Constitution – is under attack more pervasively than ever, openly being targeted by the Obama administration. This is the first time in American history that our constitutional rights have been put in as grave jeopardy as they are now. One of these most cherished rights is the right to religious freedom and the Obama admin is trying to nullify these rights which are guaranteed by our Creator, specifically the right for Catholics to believe and actively live out the tenets of the Catholic Church, by using coercion to force the faithful to abandon our non-negotiable doctrinal beliefs effectively saying to hell with your conscience.
This Catholic political ad promotes pro-life values such as refraining from voting for those politicians which support abortion and euthanasia which are in accordance with Catholic precepts. The video does not focus on those issues where a Catholic may use their prudential judgement, such as how we assist the poor whether we believe the private sector or government does it best, environmental concerns, immigration policy or those facets which involve war. These matters are not obligatory so therefore these issues should not be allowed to carry undue weight when considering whether to for vote for a particular candidate at the expense of the non-negotiable issue of life. Unfortunately, we have laity these days who treat matters of prudential judgement as if they were doctrine and vice versa.
Question: How could any Catholic morally justify voting for Obama, the Democratic candidate, when his administration has consistently attacked the Catholic Church, and is threatening to undermine Her core beliefs via the HHS mandate, and when he is the most pro-abortion president in the history of our Republic who supports gay “marriage”, and has been thumbing his nose at the Constitution at every turn? Wouldn’t a vote for Obama be a vote against the Catholic Church? Our rights are crumbling from the inside out due to policies being initiated by the Obama administration, just as Alexis de Toqueville warned this nation to avoid so many years ago, so how any person of sound mind but especially Catholics of conscience could possibly think that it is morally licit to vote for Obama (or any Democrat) is beyond me.
If Catholics can actually justify in their minds that it is okay to vote for Obama when he supports unjust laws, pure unadulterated evil, and is openly attacking the Church then what we have is a sad state of affairs regarding the Church my friends. I wonder if these people would have justified voting for a certain WWII German Chancellor because he was a friend to organized labor, being the candidate of the National Socialist German Worker’s Party? Would they have been “Personally Opposed But” about the Final Solution?
Here in America the systematic slaughter of unborn babies has by far surpassed the number of people who were killed during the Holocaust. Even with the knowledge of that fact Catholics keep on voting for Democrat candidates who support the murder of innocent human beings. Many citizens treat abortion as a side issue, as almost nonexistent since they are unable to see and tangibly touch these human beings in the physical here and now since they are hidden away within another human’s body but instead they give the visible,tangible poor much more consideration when they step into that voting booth. Since quite a few Catholics today have followed a moral relativistic Hear No Evil See No Evil mentality I wonder had these same people been alive during the 1930′s and 1940′s would they have ignored those Holocaust victims who were also hidden away from public viewing?
TO ALL CITIZENS, ESPECIALLY CATHOLICS: Are you going to sit idly by and allow our sacred rights to drift off into the sunset, or even worse vote for the Party of Death, the tyrannical anti-freedom party, the party which has displayed anti-Catholic bigotry through their various policies or are you going to be a light in this period of darkness, a soldier in St. Michael the Archangel’s army and stand up for the Catholic Church with all of Her goodness stand up to the test of fire?
Posted in Bible, Catechism, Catholic, Catholic Church, Catholic Church Doctrine, Catholicism, Christian, Christianity, Culture War, Dogma, faith, God, Jesus, Morality, Philosophy, tagged beliefs, Catholic, Catholics, Church, definition, denial, doctrine, doubt, faith, gay, marriage, natural law, philosophy, postmodern, relativism, same-sex marriage, secularism, Traditional marriage, truth on May 20, 2012 | 2 Comments »
*Note* – Some of the content below is specifically directed at Catholics as well as fallen away Catholics.
Kyle’s post, The Benefit of Panic, spurred my thoughts about postmodern thinkers in general. Not all of this is necessarily about him since I am unsure as to what his actual beliefs are now. The first paragraph contains my thoughts specifically on his post.
I can understand Kyle’s denunciation of the quotes that he posted by well-known Catholics which display misogyny. We all should do the same. I am not sure that I understand how he leaps from denouncing some arrogant men and their misogynist beliefs toward women, which is not a doctrinal matter, to seemingly giving sympathies and justification to redefining the meaning of marriage, even when that would mean the reversal of official Church doctrine as well as mean countering 2000 or so years of what we have known to be the definition of marriage – being between a man and women. The reversal of Church doctrine is an impossibility because the Catholic Church is infallible. I also to an extent sympathize with his advocating for some rights for the gay community. It is my belief that homosexuals should have the right to partake in their partner’s medical benefits as well as have the right to visit their partner in the hospital but am adamantly against same-sex marriage. Just because gay rights activists claim that not allowing homosexuals to marry is unfair or a matter of equality doesn’t make it true. Is it really fair to equate a homosexual couple with a heterosexual couple when the homosexual couple has no possibility of being open to procreating naturally and the heterosexual couple has the possibility to be open to procreating naturally? To me it is fallacious and unfair to equate the two sets of different couples as equal.
The postmodern culture today complicates life with their support of gay “marriage”, embryonic stem cell therapy, abortion, sexual promiscuity, replacing fathers with government checks and thrives on the denial of truth, spreading doubt. Is this doubt a sign of Jesus? Is this doubt one avenue being used by Satan to attack all that is good and true in life? The devil lays awake conjuring up ways to prey upon and take advantage of those who are weak of faith. If these temptations were nonexistent would you be questioning the validity of truth and faith?
Doubt has the possibility of festering inside us and morphing into disbelief. One must reflect on how one entered this doubting phase. Was it due to influences outside of the Church? Have the you given in to the secularist, postmodern world that revels in doubt and promotes it as if it were advertising it on a gigantic billboard? Do you have an ulterior motive behind questioning core defining principles of the Church? Is it because you seek truth outside the One,Holy,Catholic and Apostolic Church and see these Churches as equivalent to the Church Christ founded? If so, you are questioning the existential nature of the Church and thus questioning whether the Church was founded by Jesus Christ, the Son of God.
In John 20:24-29 the apostle Thomas needed to see the nail holes in our Risen Lord’s hands and feet in order to believe but Jesus said blessed are those who believe without seeing. Having faith means believing without seeing, without needing empirical evidence to prove the existence of God The Father, Jesus, and The Holy Spirit.