In light of all the scandals oppressing today’s Catholics, a query that needs to be addressed…

Q: Often, we hear about what’s bad within the Catholic church and its history. Tell us of the good you’ve seen within the Catholic church.

A: Peace beyond all understanding and freedom from the fear of death, along with genuine faith, hope and charity, writ large and long, the world over, courtesy of our Savior Jesus Christ, who remains the head of the Catholic Church, the Holy Spirit, who remains its constant Advocate/Spirit of Truth and God the Father, whose inestimable power, love and grace makes it all possible, in spite of rampant, human corruption and sin.

(Posted today on Yahoo Answers)

Once Again, Satan Thanks the U.S. Supreme Court – Near Occasion of Sin!

demcourt

by Larry Douglas

First it was legalized abortion and now it’s legalized homosexual marriage. Both are extremely deadly to the soul and if statistics and common sense are to believed, not very good for the body, either!

The Supreme Court has spoken and homosexual marriage is now the law of the land. The temporal, legal aspects of the matter have been settled, but what about the moral and spiritual issues?

What are the chances that Jesus Christ, the Ultimate Judge of All, will change his mind and decide to back the court’s decision? Slim to none, since the matter of homosexuality has been “spiritually” settled for more than 4500 years and God doesn’t make those kinds of sweeping reversals.

According to God’s Word, homosexual activity is counter to his law and his will, and an abomination in his eyes. Homosexual activity and all that goes with it is described in the plain text of the Bible as one of only a handful of sins that cry out to Heaven for vengeance. A well known pair of flaming cities served to forever emphasize that point and there’s nothing the Supreme Court – or anyone else – can ever do to change that.

Why would anyone choose to ignore a dire warning of that type? Why would anyone – especially the U.S. Supreme Court – choose to encourage others to do so? See the above photo.

The Catholic Church categorizes homosexual activity as (objectively) a grave sin, capable of landing a soul in Hell, for eternity.

(The term “objectively” means “typically and ordinarily – special cases and unusual situations excepted” – so a ray of hope and a bit of “wiggle room” remains. But hey – who am I to judge?)

As with all “mortal” sin, the person committing the act must know that God and the Church consider it to be gravely sinful and the act must be committed with full consent of the will. Otherwise, no harm, no foul – at least, when it comes to Divine Judgment.

Those who claim their conscience tells them that homosexual acts are not sinful will need to bring that issue up directly with Jesus, come Judgment Day. Christ remains the head of the Catholic Church. The Ten Commandments, the Law, the Prophets, the Psalms, the Gospels and Epistles, plus all the moral precepts of the Church are his, so how do you think he’s likely to rule?

In this life, there’s absolutely no getting around the issue. Let’s look at what type of divine punishment the Supreme Court is likely in for, and then we’ll look more closely at the fate of those who choose to actually enter into the spiritually deadly institution known as homosexual marriage – as well as those homosexuals who choose to do otherwise.

By its’ recent decision, the Supreme Court has chosen to define itself as totally lacking in morals and woefully ignorant of the legitimate purposes of institutions like holy matrimony. But that’s not the worst of it: the Supreme Court has – once again – constituted itself as a genuine, official, U.S. Government sponsored “near occasion of sin”.

A near occasion of sin is someone or something that leads others to commit sin, or serves to confirm or justify others in their sin. Such a thing is a grave sin in and of itself, but multiplied by the number of souls the court decision will likely affect, the actual level of spiritual depravity is incalculable.

Absent an effective reversal and/or a spiritually acceptable remedy, death, judgment and Hell are almost certain to follow. Under the present circumstances, I wouldn’t want to be a member of the United States Supreme Court. Much better to resign, repent, confess, do penance and receive absolution, at least for the 6 of 9 who are Catholics. (Oh, the scandal!) I’m not certain they would even qualify for absolution if they did not first, resign.

As for the rest of the Justices, whether they actually believe in God, or not – unless they engage in some prompt, serious, soul searching and repenting – they’re shortly going to suffer the wrath of an angry God, who also happens to be the chief judge of the entire universe – something from which their Supreme Court robes and lofty opinions will offer scant protection.

Such is the level of depravity of today’s Supreme Court. The whole lot of them ought to be impeached – for their own good – and for the good of the country!

Now let’s look at the homosexuals who have received legal approval by the nation’s highest court to engage in an act that will serve to permanently cut them off from the grace of God and – absent timely repentance and conversion – almost certainly lead to a very bad (and eternal) end.

On the one hand, we have the homosexual with absolutely no interest in marriage – or even living with a sexual partner – someone who simply wants to have a little “fun” via an occasional, same-sex “hookup”. On the other, we have a committed, long-term homosexual “couple” who decide to go the marriage route, looking to make their relationship legal and permanent. 

There’s a major difference between the two situations, but neither is really any good – or even acceptable – on a spiritual level – especially for Catholics.

A permanent, live-in, homosexual relationship, “married” or otherwise, serves only to establish a permanent state of mortal sin, which keeps the soul in a decrepit, graceless condition, effectively cutting off such persons from the Sacraments of the Catholic Church, unless and until the elicit living arrangement and the underlying sinful acts (for all intents and purposes) have effectively ceased.

Only then might the Sacraments once again be received, sanctifying grace restored and a “nominal” relationship with Christ and his Church be resumed.

It’s not easy and it’s also very rare for someone to break up a household and call a halt to a long-term, personal (and sexual) relationship in the hope of getting their spiritual affairs in order. It happens, but long experience proves that it’s much more common for people to simply die in their sins and suffer the eternal consequences.

The unmarried, non-cohabiting homosexual is in a much better position, from a spiritual standpoint, than his/her married homosexual counterpart. 

The absence of a permanent, live-in homosexual relationship leaves the practicing, “single” homosexual (potentially) only one good decision away from overcoming his/her disordered sexual inclinations.

Much as any other sinner, a “single” homosexual may confess his/her sins as often as necessary, receiving absolution for those sins and any others, so long as a spirit of repentance and a firm purpose of amendment (the actual intent, as well as the distinct possibility to overcome and do better, in the future) truly exists.

Such a thing may constitute a life-long struggle, and it may prove extremely difficult, but so long as the person does nothing to make the homosexual situation permanent and unalterable (like getting married or cohabiting) hope, grace, the Mass and the Sacraments remain available and effective.

When the Supreme Court of the United States decided to make homosexual marriage legal (and apparently, more acceptable and desirable) all they really did was induce more people to enter into permanent, sinful relationships that will quite likely, lead them straight to hell. They did the same thing with abortion, around forty years ago!

Satan once again thanks the U.S. Supreme Court – Near Occasion of Sin!

Lest anyone attempt to categorize me, the Catholic Church, or God as a hater, please know that the main purpose of this post is to warn people about the inherent dangers of their personal choices, based on the best theological information available, so that those persons might avoid making spiritually “fatal” mistakes that could one day, land them in Hell.

Charity, not hate, is at work here!

Related Link

More Bad Fruit: Confirming our beloved Jewish brethren in a Covenant of Death and Hell, for Passover

passover-eucharist

Abraham, Moses, Jesus Christ and the New Covenant, in his blood.
Only ONE of these is capable of saving a soul. 

The writer of this piece doesn’t want to offend anyone, but unfortunately, she has embraced the Modernist heresy about the nature of the Old Covenant and the “faith” of the Jewish people – and so, miserably fails.

Read the article

Now, read this:

There is absolutely NOTHING in the Old Covenant which is, or was ever capable of saving a soul. Anyone who clings to the Old Covenant embraces only death and hell.

Salvation comes through faith in Jesus Christ and membership in the Catholic Church, which he founded for that express purpose., for if salvation was available by the Old Covenant, there would have been absolutely no need for our Holy Redeemer Jesus Christ, to become man, suffer and die on the cross. for us!

Anyone who – knowing this – fails to accept the divine truth of the matter – is – at the very least – going to have a lot of ‘splainin’ to do, come Judgment Day!

Catholics should understand that confirming our beloved Jewish brethren in their spiritually deadly theological error is not in any way charitable – nor is such a thing appropriate at Passover, or ANY OTHER TIME – even if certain highly place church officials might believe otherwise.

The theological matter was settled, long, long ago. Here are the ERROR-FREE official Catholic Church citations. If the Catholic Church was WRONG then, there is no longer ANY ASSURANCE that it is CORRECT about ANYTHING, today. If the church was RIGHT then, there is no doubt that the Modernists who control today’s church (and teach otherwise) are indeed, WRONG.

The logic is irrefutable.

crucifixion_tintoretto

Pius XIIMystici Corporis, 29: “And first of all, by the death of our Redeemer, the New Testament took the place of the Old Law which had been abolished; then the Law of Christ together with its mysteries, enactments, institutions, and sacred rites was ratified for the whole world in the blood of Jesus Christ…but on the Gibbet of His death Jesus made void the Law with its decrees fastened the handwriting of the Old Testament to the Cross, establishing the New Testament in His blood shed for the whole human race. “To such an extent, then,” says St. Leo the Great, speaking of the Cross of our Lord, “was there effected a transfer from the Law to the Gospel, from the Synagogue to the Church, from the many sacrifices to one Victim, that, as Our Lord expired, that mystical veil which shut off the innermost part of the temple and its sacred secret was rent violently from top to bottom.”

30: “On the Cross then the Old Law died, soon to be buried and to be a bearer of death, in order to give way to the New Testament of which Christ had chosen the Apostles as qualified ministers”

Council of Trent, ch 1, 793: “but not even the Jews by the very letter of the law of Moses were able to be liberated or to rise therefrom”

Council of Trent, Session 6, ch 2: “that He might both redeem the Jews, who were under the Law”

Council of Trent, Canon 1: “If anyone shall say that man can be justified before God by his own works which are done through his own natural powers, or through the teaching of the Law…let him be anathema.”

Council of Florence, DS 695: “There are seven sacraments of the new Law: namely, baptism, confirmation, Eucharist, penance, extreme unction, orders, and matrimony, which differ a great deal from the sacraments of the Old Law. For those of the Old Law did not effect grace, but only pronounced that it should be given through the passion of Christ; these sacraments of ours contain grace, and confer it upon those who receive them worthily.”

Council of Florence, DS 712: “It firmly believes, professes, and teaches that the matter pertaining to the law of the Old Testament, of the Mosiac law, which are divided into ceremonies, sacred rites, sacrifices, and sacraments, because they were established to signify something in the future, although they were suited to the divine worship at that time, after our Lord’s coming had been signified by them, ceased, and the sacraments of the New Testament began; and that whoever, even after the passion, placed hope in these matters of the law and submitted himself to them as necessary for salvation, as if faith in Christ could not save without them, sinned mortally.”

“All, therefore, who after that time observe circumcision and the Sabbath and the other requirements of the law, it declares alien to the Christian faith and not in the least fit to participate in eternal salvation, unless someday they recover from these errors. Therefore, it commands all who glory in the name of Christian, at whatever time, before or after baptism’ to cease entirely from circumcision, since, whether or not one places hope in it, it cannot be observed at all without the loss of eternal salvation.”

Pope Benedict XIV, Ex Quo Primum, #59: “However they are not attempting to observe the precepts of the old Law, which as everyone knows have been revoked by the coming of Christ.”

Pope Benedict XIV, Ex Quo Primum, #61: “The first consideration is that the ceremonies of the Mosaic law were abrogated by the coming of Christ and they can no longer be observed without sin after the promulgation of the Gospel.”

Pius VI, DS 1519-1520 (condemned the following): “Likewise, the doctrine which adds that under the Law man ‘became a prevaricator, since he was powerless to observe it, not indeed by the fault of the Law, which was most sacred, but by the guilt of man, who, under the Law, without grace, became more and more a prevaricator’; and it further adds, ‘that the Law, if it did not heal the heart of man, brought it about that he would recognize his evil, and, being convinced of his weakness, would desire the grace of a mediator’; in this part it generally intimates that man became a prevaricator through the nonobservance of the Law which he was powerless to observe, as if ‘He who is just could command something impossible, or He who is pious would be likely to condemn man for that which he could not avoid’ (from St. Caesarius Serm. 73, in append., St. Augustine, Serm. 273, edit. Maurin; from St. August., De nat, et “rat., e. 43; De “rat. et lib. arb., e. 16, Enarr. in psalm. 56, n. I),– false scandalous, impious, condemned in Baius (see n. 1504).

1520 20. “In that part in which it is to be understood that man, while under the Law and without grace, could conceive a desire for the grace of a Mediator related to the salvation promised through Christ, as if ‘grace itself does not effect that He be invoked by us’ (from Conc. Araus. II, can. 3 [v.n. 176]),– the proposition as it stands, deceitful, suspect, favorable to the Semipelagian heresy.

The Last Supper was the ultimate, eternal fulfillment of the Passover – in Jesus Christ, our Lord.

From the Catechism of the Catholic Church

The institution of the Eucharist

1337 The Lord, having loved those who were his own, loved them to the end. Knowing that the hour had come to leave this world and return to the Father, in the course of a meal he washed their feet and gave them the commandment of love.163In order to leave them a pledge of this love, in order never to depart from his own and to make them sharers in his Passover, he instituted the Eucharist as the memorial of his death and Resurrection, and commanded his apostles to celebrate it until his return; “thereby he constituted them priests of the New Testament.”164

1338 The three synoptic Gospels and St. Paul have handed on to us the account of the institution of the Eucharist; St. John, for his part, reports the words of Jesus in the synagogue of Capernaum that prepare for the institution of the Eucharist: Christ calls himself the bread of life, come down from heaven.165

1339 Jesus chose the time of Passover to fulfill what he had announced at Capernaum: giving his disciples his Body and his Blood:

Then came the day of Unleavened Bread, on which the passover lamb had to be sacrificed. So Jesus sent Peter and John, saying, “Go and prepare the passover meal for us, that we may eat it. . . .” They went . . . and prepared the passover. And when the hour came, he sat at table, and the apostles with him. And he said to them, “I have earnestly desired to eat this passover with you before I suffer; for I tell you I shall not eat it again until it is fulfilled in the kingdom of God.”. . . . And he took bread, and when he had given thanks he broke it and gave it to them, saying, “This is my body which is given for you. Do this in remembrance of me.” And likewise the cup after supper, saying, “This cup which is poured out for you is the New Covenant in my blood.”166

1340 By celebrating the Last Supper with his apostles in the course of the Passover meal, Jesus gave the Jewish Passover its definitive meaning. Jesus’ passing over to his father by his death and Resurrection, the new Passover, is anticipated in the Supper and celebrated in the Eucharist, which fulfills the Jewish Passover and anticipates the final Passover of the Church in the glory of the kingdom.

“Do this in memory of me”

Because he was not open to God’s will, Satan is entrapped in a lower existence, imprisoned in currents of unredeemable chaos below this world.

 

SatansNo

Satan’s “NO” to God
Non serviam – Latin for “I will not serve”

Saint Hildegard sees how the Ancient Adversary is at work to lure and coerce into this same pit all those whose lives he invades and touches.

Obedience begins with the realization that one cannot bring into completion the work God has begun.   The ambiguity surrounding this life is beyond human capacity to understand or master, and left to ourselves, we are always at risk of being mastered by it.  Following our own whims is not enough because even the whims of the heart are subject to this confusion.  Our dignity, our integrity, our existence require firm ground on which to stand, or they all fall.  This understanding, this saving truth is found somewhere beyond our natural capacities, from Someone above us, who comes down to us, who calls to us and who waits for us to welcome Him.

Rather than allowing oneself to be consumed with the confusion of doing what one wishes, we only begin to redeem the ambiguity of life by searching out the most appropriate way of serving the Lord who reveals Himself to us.

Read more

The pope cannot change fundamental Catholic Church doctrine – so why does he go out of his way to make it look and sound like he’s going to?

st-peter-and-st-john-at-beautiful-gate

St. Peter and St. John at the Beautiful Gate

by Doug Lawrence

Vatican II has already fundamentally changed Catholic Church doctrine, so those who claim the Pope cannot or will not do so are being somewhat disingenuous. Our present pope is the biggest “cheerleader” for Vatican II that the world has ever seen.

A “New Evangelization” is necessary in part, because in the wake of Vatican II, the people who ran (and still run) the Catholic Church led many of the faithful (and most of the known world) into ignorance, confusion and apostasy.

Top Church management is not much better enlightened today, so it’s necessary to question precisely what the “New Evangelizers” are asking faithful Catholics to do, that they haven’t been doing all along.

If they’re asking us to spread a “new” gospel that’s based on “freebies alone” (that’s what it sounds like) then we have a big problem, since the secular governments of the world have learned to inflate their tax rolls and and leverage their currencies in ways that allow them to finance massive wealth transfer/social programs which dwarf anything in that regard that individual Catholics (or Catholic parishes, or national bishops councils, or the Vatican) might be able to offer.

So, in a contest based solely on temporal goodies and give-aways, the New Catholic Evangelization is not only bound to fail – it will fail miserably! The sad record of The Catholic Campaign for Human Development and other high-profile Catholic Charities already provides ample evidence of this. When the Church takes government money, supposedly in order to accomplish charitable things, it invariably becomes subject to that very same secular government and the result is almost always something much less than truly charitable – and also something much, much less than authentically Catholic.

True charity, as it’s faithfully described in the authentic Gospels, is freely sharing the grace and love of God with others – not just by providing a modicum of necessary PHYSICAL GOODS – but also – and principally – making freely available those SPIRITUAL GOODS which ONLY the Catholic Church is capable of providing in UNLIMITED, SUPERNATURAL ABUNDANCE.

Now Peter and John went up into the temple at the ninth hour of prayer. And a certain man who was lame from his mother’s womb was carried: whom they laid every day at the gate of the temple, which is called Beautiful, that he might ask alms of them that went into the temple. He, when he had seen Peter and John, about to go into the temple, asked to receive an alms. But Peter with John, fastening his eyes upon him, said:

Look upon us. But he looked earnestly upon them, hoping that he should receive something of them. But Peter said: Silver and gold I have none; but what I have, I give thee. In the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, arise and walk. And taking him by the right hand, he lifted him up: and forthwith his feet and soles received strength. And he leaping up, stood and walked and went in with them into the temple, walking and leaping and praising God.

And all the people saw him walking and praising God. And they knew him, that it was he who sat begging alms at the Beautiful gate of the temple: and they were filled with wonder and amazement at that which had happened to him. And as he held Peter and John, all the people ran to them, to the porch which is called Solomon’s, greatly wondering.

But Peter seeing, made answer to the people: Ye men of Israel, why wonder you at this? Or why look you upon us, as if by our strength or power we had made this man to walk? The God of Abraham and the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob, the God of our fathers, hath glorified his Son Jesus, whom you indeed delivered up and denied before the face of Pilate, when he judged he should be released. But you denied the Holy One and the Just: and desired a murderer to be granted unto you. But the author of life you killed, whom God hath raised from the dead: of which we are witnesses. And in the faith of his name, this man, whom you have seen and known, hath his name strengthened. And the faith which is by him hath given this perfect soundness in the sight of you all.

And now, brethren, I know that you did it through ignorance: as did also your rulers. But those things which God before had shewed by the mouth of all the prophets, that his Christ should suffer, he hath so fulfilled. Be penitent, therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out. That when the times of refreshment shall come from the presence of the Lord, and he shall send him who hath been preached unto you, Jesus Christ. Whom heaven indeed must receive, until the times of the restitution of all things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of his holy prophets, from the beginning of the world. For Moses said: A prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you of your brethren, like unto me: him you shall hear according to all things whatsoever he shall speak to you. And it shall be, that every soul which will not hear that prophet shall be destroyed from among the people. And all the prophets, from Samuel and afterwards, who have spoken, have told of these days.

You are the children of the prophets and of the testament which God made to our fathers, saying to Abraham: And in thy seed shall all the kindred of the earth be blessed. To you first, God, raising up his Son, hath sent him to bless you: that every one may convert himself from his wickedness. (Acts 3:1-26)

We Catholics have no need of any other model or paradigm.  Hence, our reliance on the “Great Commission of Jesus Christ” which explicitly charges Catholics with the duty of continuously, clearly, charitably and unambiguously preaching the divine truth of the authentic Gospels to everyone, without exception – day in and day out – all around the world – as we pray without ceasing!

And the eleven disciples went into Galilee, unto the mountain where Jesus had appointed them. And seeing him they adored: but some doubted. And Jesus coming, spoke to them, saying: All power is given to me in heaven and in earth. Going therefore, teach ye all nations: baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost. Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you. And behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world. (Matthew 28:16-20)

The post-Vatican II Catholic Church leadership has already reasoned, preached and politically negotiated their way around these explicit commands of Jesus Christ, cleverly inferring that some people have no need of the Gospel of Jesus Christ and his Holy Catholic Church. Now, as part of this “New Evangelization” they want us to do the same. That’s certainly new and novel, but it’s also material heresy – and that’s not something that any Catholic should be preaching!

Pope Francis’ attempt at projecting an image of a kinder, gentler, “big tent” modern Catholic Church is something that would be laudable if such had not already been the case since the very beginning, courtesy of its’ divine founder and finisher, Jesus Christ.

If things have gone off the track in recent times, the hierarchy might consider going back to and once again learning to rely on what God has already provided, that which the Catholic Church has always possessed in unlimited, supernatural abundance and which – in every age except perhaps, this present, wicked one – has always proved to be sufficient.

Seen on the web: Surely the Vicar of Christ must know this by the efficacy of the grace of office?

John Hladky

…That the Supreme Vicar of Christ on earth should not also have the grace of office to understand that concern for the (Traditional Latin) liturgy can never be divorced from charity, or that the needs of people in this present time are intimately assumed into the life of Christ through the Holy Mass seems to me incredible, unless there be some great cloak of darkness blinding one to truth.

What is the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass if not Charity itself? What is the Holy Mass if not concern for the concrete needs of the present time? Or that those who wander in darkness, through the Mass, enter into an effulgence of light by the redeeming power of Christ?

Only the powers of darkness would accuse those who love the Holy Mass of some pretentious display, as if love for the exaltation of God did not proceed from charity. Is it possible that Christ who has taken upon Himself all the sins of all peoples of all times should not also be capable of satisfying every need of every soul He came to redeem?

Surely the Vicar of Christ must know this by the efficacy of the grace of office? And if he does not, what then is the nature of the darkness that cloaks him from the light of Christ?…

View this and other relevant coments

Pope Francis’ emotional arguments for economic reforms

Unlike Leo XIII and Pius XI, Francis’ analysis is not rooted in our obligations in justice (although he places a few off hand allusions to justice). The overwhelming thrust of his argument is emotional. Rather than requiring all to fulfill their duties in justice he exhorts those in business to have a sentimental emotional reaction to the plight of the poor. This leads him to plea for mercy and generosity, which are good things to seek, but to neglect claims of justice.

The problem with appeals predominately to mercy and generosity is that such terms suggest that action is optional or discretionary and not required by the moral law. Rather than talking about our sins against justice Francis decries our “being incapable of feeling compassion at the outcry of the poor, weeping for other people’s pain” Whereas the prior popes explained the inherent limits on the use of private property as a principle of Natural Law, for Francis this is only a “spontaneous reaction”

Essentially Francis conceives of Catholic social doctrine as an emotional “option for the poor” to avoid inequality. The ultimate source of this reduction of traditional doctrine lies in the conflation of the supernatural with the natural initiated by the “new theology” of Henri de Lubac.

This theologian accused of Modernism before the Council but rehabilitated by John XXIII to become a Council expert, rejected the Thomistic distinction between the natural and the supernatural. Although for St. Thomas grace builds on nature, nature is not grace and our life here is only our natural end. Our ultimate end is greater and distinct. Our pursuit of our natural end must be in light of and oriented toward our ultimate supernatural end.

This blurring of the distinction results in a theology and philosophy centered on man and his natural well-being, which has now been elevated to a supernatural status rather than centered on God.

Read more