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

CORTMAN: Abortion pill mandate, Hobby Lobby and why the Supreme Court should honor faith

supremecourt

Why can’t family business owners — Conestoga Wood Specialties and Hobby Lobby in these cases — have the same freedom from government coercion as other exempt parties? Because the government says they can’t.

Not only is the government arbitrarily selective in how it doles out exemptions, it’s also arbitrary in its argument that business owners can’t exercise religious freedom.

Read more

Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wa: A woman’s right to access free or low-cost contraception under the Affordable Care Act trumps anyone else’s religious freedom.

BSMeter2

The Obama administration is being handed a lesson in Christianity 101 as religious leaders rise up to condemn an Obamacare requirement that forces religious organizations to pay for abortifacients or face crippling financial penalties.

“Christian doctrine states it is a sin for a Christian to enable or aid another in doing what the Christian believes to be sin,” states a brief filed with the U.S. Supreme Court by a coalition of dozens of prominent Protestant theologians, African-American pastors and participants in the Manhattan Declaration.

Dozens of lawsuits have been filed over the requirement in the Affordable Health Care Act that employers pay for abortifacents. Two cases, involving Hobby Lobby and Conestoga Woods, are pending for review before the Supreme Court.

Even members of Congress have weighed in against the provision, which effectively forces Christians to violate their faith by participating in the killing of unborn children.

Read more

Editor’s note: Sen. Murray’s totally wrong-headed point of view is very popular in the Seattle area, where liberal “Catholicism” has been the norm, for many years.

Fr. Pavone: When a person has a reasonable chance of saving a life, it is not only morally permissible to break the law regarding the bubble-zone, but it is virtuous to do so.

The case of McCullen v. Coakley, which is being argued today before the U.S. Supreme Court, illustrates how abortion perverts justice.

So called “bubble zone” laws are the fruit of abortion’s poisonous tree. They violate pro-lifers’ First Amendment free speech rights in order to protect the profits of abortionists who violate the right to life of unborn babies.  They are a wrong committed to perpetuate another wrong.

Link

Injunction: Obama can’t bully Little Sisters of the Poor into paying for contraception

The group Little Sisters of the Poor received a temporary injunction from the Supreme Court protecting them from the controversial HHS contraceptive mandate.  The injunction means that the Little Sisters will not be forced to sign and deliver forms tonight authorizing and directing others to provide contraceptives, sterilizations and drugs and devices that cause abortions.

Link

Inept, unaccountable, liberal elitists

question

Question: The title of this post refers to:

A) The Obama Regime

B) The Supreme Court

C) The Conciliar and Post-Vatican II Catholic Church hierarchy

D) The U.S. Senate

E) The U.S. House of Representatives

F) All of the above (with a few notable exceptions)

Three reasons Roe v. Wade will fall

The U.S. Supreme Court-imposed abortion-on-demand regime of Roe v. Wade will one day fall. Why?

Roe will buckle under the weight of reason. “As a matter of constitutional interpretation and judicial method, Roe borders on the indefensible,” notes Edward Lazarus, former clerk to Justice Harry Blackmun (author of Roe) and supporter of legalized abortion. The U.S. Constitution cannot plausibly or rationally be said to include a right to abortion that precludes states dealing with this issue. Even the Court itself, when narrowly upholding Roe in 1992 (in Planned Parenthood v. Casey), could appeal only to stare decisis (i.e., past decisions should be reaffirmed because they are past decisions) and to virtual nonsense about “the right to define one’s own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life.”

Roe will buckle under the weight of democracy. The Court in Roe, without constitutional warrant, usurped the authority of the American people to determine abortion policy. This “exercise of raw judicial power,” as Justice Byron White put it, struck down the democratically-decided abortion laws of all 50 states and imposed a nationwide policy of abortion on demand whether the people like it or not. The radical extent of the Roe regime was not and has never been even remotely consistent with public opinion (polling on this question is often inaccurate, and ignorance of the extent of Roe is widespread). Roe has disenfranchised millions of Americans, fostering divisive cultural and political battles.

Finally, and most importantly, Roe will buckle under the weight of human rights. It decided that an entire class of innocent human beings must be excluded from legal protection and allowed to be killed for any reason. Roe, like Dred Scott v. Sandford before it, is profoundly unjust and contrary to the equal fundamental dignity and right to life of all members of the human family. And the consequences of the Court’s folly—55 million unborn human beings killed, many women (and men) hurt emotionally, psychologically, physically—have been nothing less than catastrophic.

Full text