Archive for the “Marriage” Category

Story here.

I think we have a real possibility of a major rebound happening once Kasper and the liberals are defeated.

The Church will never accept what Kasper is proposing….never.

Comments No Comments »

Rome ( / KNA) Ignorance of Catholic doctrine among bishops and theologians is in the opinion of Cardinal Walter Brandmüller (photo), the main reason for the current “chaos” in the Church. Given the internal Church debate on marriage and family the “unadulterated Catholic doctrine” is in danger, said the German cardinal and ecclesiastical historian of the Italian newspaper “Il Foglio” (Thursday).

I’m sure glad I didn’t say this.  You know, ’cause I wouldn’t want to be described as a reactionary or somethin’. :roll:

Comments 1 Comment »

Cardinal Müller: I’m not involved as a private theologian, but it is in this function, the CDF is indeed the only one of the Roman congregations, which immediately has a share in providing the Magisterium of the Pope, while others who register here, even if they are of the cardinal rank,  are simply speaking personally for themselves and not to make an official statement.

Tastes great. Less filling.   Talk about a dress-down.  Ooooo-ah.

Comments No Comments »

Cardinal Ruini was also very critical.  He [also]added: “I don’t know if I understood well, but at this moment, about 85% of the Cardinals have expressed opinions apparently contrary to the layout  of the report.”  He added that among those who did not say anything  -  therefore could not be classified – he took from their silence that: “I believe they are embarrassed”.

Let Cardinal Kasper have clenched teeth all he wants.  He’ll have to answer to the Lord for even suggesting “Adultery-by-any-other-name” as an option.  The fact that this man was even given a platform – even for a second – to discuss his pet issue from the 1970s is very disturbing.

Still…we have to give thanks that 85% are against his heretical opinion while the other 14% are too embarrassed to say anything.

Here’s the gong which Socon or Bust has been bonging for some time now:

Cardinal Ruini:  “It would be a fatal mistake” to  follow the pastoral approach without referring to doctrine.

Like no kidding.  Almost every liberal impetus these days in the Church is ass-backwards.  The pastoral approach is supposed to be BUILT on DOCTRINE, the teaching of Christ.  You cannot have an opposite pastoral approach from doctrine…otherwise you simply look like a fool and a hypocrite.


Comments 1 Comment »

I think this kind of frank talk is long needed.

Comments 3 Comments »

At long last, we find a bit of spine (and logic) in some of the faithful Cardinals in Rome.

Speak now.  And do it with the full vigour and responsibility that your office demands!

Fight dammit and blast the stupid diplomacy and deference.  There’s way too much at stake!

The work of the Devil will infiltrate even into the Church in such a way that one will see cardinals opposing cardinals, and bishops against other bishops.  – Akita (approved apparition)

Why do I have the sneaking suspicion that if marriage were overturned tomorrow, the vast majority of the Episcopacy in this country wouldn’t bat an eye?  Rolling with the punches is a phrase I just can’t get out of my head in that eventuality.  You know, for the sake of our faux unity for pastoral sensitivity. 

Speaking of practical and – ahem – “pastoral” effects, I wonder how all those dolt Catholics who forsook second “marriages” for the sake of the Kingdom are going to feel?  Maybe, instead of the useless and stupid surveys the Vatican is collecting these days, it can take a real one and learn what the effect of this disastrous diddling is going to do with REAL faithful Catholics who live celibate lives after broken marriages.  What about them and their sacrifices?

What do we say in response?  Ah well, sorry about that.

I remember hearing from one young man recently – rock solid Catholic – when I pointed out the shenanigans going on in Rome.  “If they do that”, he says, “I’m leaving.”  Just like that.  No apology or excuse or fraudulent “nuance”.   It’s not all lovely roses that Kardinal Kasper is proposing, you know.

I told him not to worry, but I am now starting to wonder if the regular Joe Six-Pack really buys the distinction between doctrine and a largely fraudulent pastoral sexual provision.  It’s a hard sell, and frankly, I’m not going to be the salesman for it, either.

I’m sure many of my contemporaries share my sentiment:  You’re on your own, boys. 

Eucharist, Confession, Last Rites and then exit stage right for me.  And it’s really going to do wonders for the NU Evangelization, donchaknow.

So, uh, what exactly are we converting to now that doesn’t already exist in the greater culture for all intents and purposes?

As for the rest, Bob’s your uncle and where’s the nearest pub?

This man’s canonization can’t come none too soon.  Don’tknowwhatchagottillitsgone.


Comments 4 Comments »

BERLIN (AP) — The new leader of Germany’s Roman Catholic bishops is signaling support for allowing some divorced but remarried Catholics to receive Communion after a “penitential period.”

Cardinal Reinhard Marx, who also sits on a panel that helps advise Pope Francis on Vatican reform, was elected Wednesday to head the German Bishops’ Conference.

Church teaching holds that unless their first marriage is annulled, remarried Catholics can’t receive Communion or other sacraments. The church is now discussing anew how to handle such cases.

In an interview with the Welt am Sonntag newspaper released Saturday, Marx cited a prominent theologian’s proposal that “divorced people who recognize their failure can, after a penitential period, seek readmission to the sacraments.” He’s quoted as saying cardinals’ reactions were varied but he personally considers it “a viable path.” (Source)

It’s not a coincidence that as contraception has become a byword in the Catholic Church so too is marriage to become it – not in terms of doctrine, but as part of the whole “pastoral shtick” floating around in Rome these days.  And the wedge between what the Church formally teaches and what the Church formally practices is driven wider and wider apart.  It’s the new heresy for our days.

I call it….

The Two-Faced Heresy.  Trying hard to believe Pope Francis will squash it.  Really. trying. hard. to. believe. it.

We are becoming as Catholics – not as light to the world, but rather the consummate….


Perhaps it’s time that Pope Francis spend less time in trying to remove the sliver of petty gossip among the courtiers in Rome, and instead focus on the log in the eyes of his favourite Cardinals who are trying to destroy the very basis of civilization and the foundation of Church life which is the family and marriage.


My dear friends, we are here today to affirm the goodness of marriage. We are here to affirm and recognize the inherent dignity of the human body and the complimentary nature of men and women in marriage. We are here to admit the necessity of respecting our own basic humanity. We are not here because of hate – we are here because of love. Love for our country. Love for our children. Love for our faith. Love for our family. Love for freedom. And yes, even love for our opponents. But love does not say “yes” when the truth says “no”.

 My fellow Canadians, marriage and freedom are built on the same foundation of truth. If, as a nation, we deny the very union which sustains our country, what hope will we have in defending our country against attacks on civil and religious liberties? If we will not defend marriage, then we will not preserve freedom. If our government can redefine something so basic and timeless as marriage, they can also re-define our freedoms.
If Bill C-38 becomes law, the fundamental cornerstone of our society will have been toppled. And when a nation fails to recognize the most basic objective moral and physiological truths, democracy itself will be emptied of its power so that only an empty shell will remain. And when a strong wind blows, I ask you, what will happen to that empty shell?

My fellow Canadians, at this critical moment in our history when our country is on the brink of moral collapse, all of us are faced with the central question: Shall we defend marriage or shall we retreat? If we retreat to buy a little time, what will become of our freedoms when our opponents seek to dictate what is taught in our schools, our churches, and even our homes? And what will be left for our children and their posterity? What will become of their freedoms? Of their divine right to practice their faith and enjoy their civil liberties? Will we lie to ourselves today and say it won’t impact us because we fear the sacrifices that come with it?

Ladies and gentlemen, this day is not just about Bill C-38 but about us. We need to look inward, and ask ourselves: How much are we prepared to sacrifice for our country? How prepared are we to recommit ourselves to our marriages, to our children, to our churches, and to our communities? The sacrifices to defend our freedoms are not only fought on the battlefields of far off lands, but also within our hearts and resolve. When Monday morning comes and all of the excitement of this day is gone, will you remain steadfast and move today’s conviction into tomorrow’s action? If we leave here today, and fail to transform this culture – politically, socially, and spiritually – this day will have meant very little.

But I sincerely believe that this is not going to happen, because on this day, those of us united here will rise up and defend this nation and its matrimonial heritage against the forces which seek to tear it down. And if we have to go down and lose on this vote and on this issue, then let’s go down together in unity and solidarity, knowing that after death comes resurrection and new life and freedom!

My Canadian brothers and sisters, in the Christian Scriptures, there is an event which Christians refer to as Pentecost. The followers of Jesus are in the upper room. They are afraid. They are timid. And they are somewhat divided. Suddenly a gust of wind descends upon them and they are emboldened to proclaim their Gospel.

Ladies and gentlemen, this day in our nation’s history is our Canadian Pentecost. The Gospel is Marriage. And all of us here – Muslim, Jew, Christian, Hindu, Sikh – indeed all Canadians – are the Apostles of Marriage. And now the time has come for us to stand and defend the good news of marriage as being only the union of one man and one woman. In the words of the Pope John Paul II: Be not afraid.

Thank you and God Bless you all.

April 9, 2005

Audio version here.

Comments No Comments »

It’s no secret that the greatest cause of poverty today in the Western world is marriage breakdown and the ideological perversion that single parenthood is just as good as the marriage of a man and a woman.

The facts, however, say something quite different.

It’s not politically correct to say that, of course.  But we’re not interested in liberal sensitivities.

Socon or Bust is indeed “one to judge”.  And, we’ll do it, as the Good Lord instructed us to do:

Stop judging by mere appearances, but instead judge correctly. (John 7:24)

This, however, does not mean that all single parents are to blame. What we are talking about here is the ideology of single parenthood which is pushed as normal. That, and that alone, is what we condemn.

Comments No Comments »

Comments No Comments »

Real communion and love….with the truth of human biology and physiology to back it up.

Comments No Comments »

Why You Shouldn’t Sleep With Your Boyfriend

Comments No Comments »

On the Feast of the Holy Family, December 29, 2013, the Archbishop of Bologna, Cardinal Carlo Caffarra delivered a homily defending the family against attacks and from laws “issued on the basis of fashionable trends”. The following translation is by Italian journalist and CWR contributor Alessandra Nucci:

“May God keep us from fearing decrees or laws that are issued on the spur of fashionable trends”
…The Gospel shows us what the situation of the family is even today.
The family is the place where the power of this world clashes with the voice of God.
And where does this confrontation take place? First of all, in the heart  and conscience of every man and every woman. It is here that the voice  of God rings out; it is in the heart that God’s divine project for  marriage and the family is written.
But on the other hand  powerful lobbies which are quite often in control of the means of  producing consensus endeavor to distract men and women from listening to the voice of God speaking to their consciences; from reading that  divine law that is inscribed in the human heart. […]
But the  clash does not take place only within the hearts and minds. It also  takes place on a public level, in the places where laws and made and  decisions are taken; as an ideology, a plan of action and where behavior takes shape; as a public delegitimization of any and all dissent from  that ideology.
Dear brothers an sisters, dear spouses and  parents, how did Joseph defend his family? Simply by obeying God’s plan. He had no other tool at his disposal.
And what about today, dear friends? “The Church, by following Christ, is seeking the truth, which  does not always coincide with majority opinion. The Church listens to  conscience and not to power and in this way it defends the poor and  despised” [Bl. John Paul II, Ap Exh. Familiaris consortio 5].
Herein, dear brothers and sisters, lies your strength: in your docility to the  voice of God as it rings out in your conscience. How does it ring forth? By giving you the light of some original evidence. I would like to  state them here.
The first: marriage is between a man and a woman.
The second: children have a right to be with a man and a women who are their father and mother; and therefore can not be replaced by two adults of the same sex who are not father and mother but “act” as father and mother.
Let us pray, especially today, that the Lord may always keep an upright  conscience within us; so that we may never set aside a healthy  sensitivity to right and wrong. And may God save us from fearing decrees or laws that are issued on the basis of fashionable trends. (…) (Source)

Comments No Comments »

When everyone else is bending the knee or giving the salute to the Gay Stormtroopers, be different.

Don’t be like the mindless mob who go along…stand for the Church, for the Truth, for Jesus.

Defend Marriage.  And pay whatever price is demanded of you.  You are only here for a short time anyway.  Be on the right side of the Lord with the sheep, not on the Left with the goats.

Comments No Comments »

++Müller Complains Against the Lack of Solidarity With Bishop Tebartz-van Elst

Don’t worry everyone, when Pope Francis faces his first showdown with the German bishops over marriage, the light’s gonna blink about the whole collegiality business and giving more power to Episcopal conferences.  Not. such. a. good. idea.

Remember the about-face when it happens and which blog predicted it. 8-)

Comments 1 Comment »

I knew Kasper would eventually come back to haunt Pope Francis.  I remember when the Holy Father praised Kasper as a theologian.

I said, “Uh oh.  That’s all I need to know.  Rough times ahead.”

And I was right.

Comments No Comments »

Müller: Freiburg proposal on Communion for remarried “to be withdrawn and revised”

Comments No Comments »

There appears to be a lot of confusion and angst about why Catholics who divorce and remarry cannot receive Holy Communion. For some, this seems cruel, legalistic and unforgiving. However, a deeper understanding of the true nature of marriage and the Eucharist leads us to only one possible conclusion: it can’t be any other way because remarriage and the Eucharist are exact opposites. Read the rest of this entry »

Comments 7 Comments »

In a lengthy essay strongly reaffirming the Catholic Church’s teaching on the impermissibility of divorced and remarried Catholics receiving Communion, the head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith also linked the validity of Catholic marriages to the couple’s openness to children – a requirement that, he said, is often sadly lacking in marriages today.  (Source)

The great thing about the whole redefinition business which is going on in society today is that the Church has a chance to recover some of that nasty triumphalism that has garnered bad press in these past number of months.  The fact is the Church is triumphant because Jesus is her Head and Jesus is triumphant.  Why shouldn’t we be happy and glorious?  We’re the champs.  We got the belt…not because of our own deeds but because Jesus has deemed that we wear it.   So we’re gonna wear it…the Wrestler’s Urim and Thummim of sorts.  Check it out:

Anyhow, the great thing about the confusion about marriage is that the Church can step up and actually teach about what marriage is and what it is not.  So decent people can be attracted to her common sense answers among an ocean of really stupid definitions and even worse rationale, not the least of which is sodomy-inspired marriage, polygamy, marriage to a dolphin or a chair.  The depravity of humanity knows no boundaries.

If we get our mojo going, it’s going to be the Champ vs. the Chump, the latter being the dolt we use to see during the wrestling matches who everyone knew was going to lose to the Belt holder.

Comments 4 Comments »

I told you so.

Let the hand wringing begin.

Comments No Comments »

You thought that Pope Francis was making questionable and confusing statements? Here’s what the Catholic Register and the chief marriage canonist of the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops are saying about marriage:

Most people on their wedding day are thinking about love. But the Catholic Church rule says that the necessary condition for a sacramental marriage is free and informed consent — not love. When marriages break down and after divorce Catholics seek a declaration of nullity, they are not asked “Did you love him?” They are asked “Did you know what a marriage is and did you freely enter into it?”

“When (I) talk to people who are not canonists, I’m very embarrassed to say that according to canon law it’s not love that makes a marriage but consent,” Canada’s top canon lawyer told The Catholic Register. (Source)

That’s a sloppy and misleading thing to say. It’s borderline defamatory towards Christ and his Church. It makes the Church seem like a  cold, arbitrary law firm.

It’s true that the exchange of vows between the spouses is the key element that ties the knot. But why create a false dichotomy between consent and love? Just what exactly are the spouses consenting to? They’re not consenting to “being married”, as if they were applying for citizenship.  They’re consenting to love as Christ loves us, the Church. This involves a complete and unconditional gift of the spouses to each other, holding nothing back.  As the Catechism says:

The consent consists in a “human act by which the partners mutually give themselves to each other”: “I take you to be my wife” – “I take you to be my husband.” This consent that binds the spouses to each other finds its fulfillment in the two “becoming one flesh.” (CCC #1627)

The wedding vows of indissolubility, fidelity and openness to children are precisely designed to manifest the same qualities of free, total, faithful and fruitful love that Christ has for the Church. A withholding of consent that leads to a decree of nullity really means that at least one the spouses, at the time of the vows on their wedding day, did not intend to love as Christ loves. So consent has everything to do with love and it makes no sense to create a dichotomy between the two.

Perhaps the men in the article were speaking of “love” in the Hollywood sense of the term, meaning a fleeting emotion, infatuation or other elusive state of mind. But that’s not the Christian meaning of love in the context of marriage.

It may be convenient for some circles in the Church to make marriage seem like a legal proceeding devoid of love, because that makes people more pre-disposed to demand changes. Nobody likes legalism and lawyers, right? It’s the good ol’ straw man rhetorical approach.

But there’s another angle they’re missing. Given that the sacrament of marriage is a special sign of Christ’s unconditional and faithful love for the Church, what sacramental image would we be sending by diluting the indissolubility of marriage? The dirty sacramental implication is that Christ isn’t faithful, that he will only love and forgive us until he gets bored, at which point he may dump us any time. You see, the indissolubility of marriage goes to the very heart of the revelation of God to humanity. Good luck evangelizing with a notion of an unfaithful god.


Comments 2 Comments »