Conservative Catholic John Vennari on the Pope’s latest (La Repubblica) interview

This comprehensive 16 minute video is well worth viewing. Liberals won’t see anything wrong with the Pope’s comments , but for everyone else, this video should be a “wake-up call” and a stark object lesson, directly from the old Baltimore Catechism.

Unlike many of today’s Catholic clerics, academics and theologians, traditionalist layman John Vennari is quite capable of explaining and defending the Catholic faith as it always has been, as opposed to what apostates and heretics would like it to become.

Visit his Catholic Family News website.

Editor’s note: CHANGE has once again come to (what remains) of the Catholic Church. Barack Obama or Nancy Pelosi could have done the same interview and provided many of the exact, same answers. The Pope’s contra/leftist side is beginning to publicly assert itself. May God help us all!

Submitted by Mark H.

Seen on the web: The U.S. Constitution and the political philosophy it implies is essentially a Catholic document, even though Protestants put it to paper.

Comments by conservative commentator
George Kocan (slightly edited):

    ‘As a former libertarian, I offer some comments. The Constitution and the political philosophy it implies is not a libertarian document. It is a Catholic document, even though, ironically, Protestants put it to paper. This assumes certain truths about the human condition. It assumes the active existence of original sin, a Catholic doctrine. It assumes that man was created in the image and likeness of God, a condition requiring respect from other men. It assumes the relevance of the moral law, which means the moral law exists and cannot be ignored by any government. (For example, the libertarian assumption that all economic activity is morally based on free exchange rather than fraud or violence is part of the moral law.)

    ‘One of the implications of the moral law is that homosexuality is immoral and that institutionalizing it in a legal union is absurd. That is to say, the government has no right to re-define marriage as it has no right to re-define a dog as an elephant. It means also that society, acting through the government, has an obligation to suppress blatant immorality, especially when it takes on the dimensions of a mass political movement.’

    Read more