MARIO CUOMO - THE CINOP BRAIN -1
The pursuit of the truth access – cinops be gone - Wednesday, Jan. 7, 2009
It is an honor to return to the Catholic author, David Carlin and his book, “Can a Catholic Be a Democrat.” This is the 23rd letter in about 600 in our blog. Mario is the patron saint of the CINOP. Here is David Carlin’s analysis: 201-2
Cuomo proceeds to offer a fourfold defense of the right of Catholic politician to support pro-choice public policies despite his pro-life religious convictions.
*The Pluralism defense: “I protect my right to be a Catholic,” he says, “by preserving your right to believe as a Jew, a Protestant, or nonbeliever, or as anything else your choose. We know that the price of seeking to force our belief on others is that they might someday force theirs on us.
As an American, I’m free, Cuomo grants, to press for a law banning abortion. “But should I? Is it helpful? Is it essential to human dignity? Does it promote harmony and understanding? Or does it divide us so fundamentally that it threatens our ability to function as a pluralistic society?”
He answers these question by saying, “Our public morality … depends on a consensus view of right and wrong. The values derived from religious belief will not – and should not – be accepted as part of the public morality unless they are shared by the pluralistic community at large, by consensus.”
This answer has a number of defects. First, although he doesn’t precisely (or even approximately) define how broad a “consensus” has to be to qualify as a consensus, Cuomo seems to have something like this in mind: that any group constituting a good-size or important minority in society has in effect the right to exercise a veto.
Hence the presence of secularism, almost all of whom support a legal right to abortion, and liberal Christians, most of whom support such a right, would be enough to establish that there’s no “consensus” in the United States in favor of abortion-restricted legislation.
But by this standard, Cuomo would have to say that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was illegitimate since it wasn’t based on a “consensus” – being strongly opposed by white racist, who certainly at the time constituted a good size and important minority in American society. And for the same reason, the Supreme Court’s Brown vs. Board of Education ruling of 1954 would have to be judged illegitimate. And so would the Court’s 1973 Roe v. Wade decision, since at the time the decision was handed down, almost all religious conservative – Catholics, Protestants, Mormons, Orthodox Jews, and others – disapproved of the ruling. Ironically, using his “there must be a consensus” standard, Cuomo should have denounced as illegitimate the Court decision that created the legal right to abortion that he was now defending as public policy.
Second, while Cuomo insists that Catholics have no right to create a “public morality” that includes values not accepted on a consensus basis, he doesn’t apply this rule the other way around: he doesn’t equally insist that secularists have no right to create a public morality that includes values not accepted on a consensus basis. Secularists don’t accept anti-abortion values; hence, says Cuomo, Catholics mustn’t make anti-abortion values part of our public morality.
But he has no objection when secularists (with the very generous help of the U.S. Supreme Court) make pro-abortion values part of our public morality. .. To be continued.
George H. Kubeck
Wednesday, January 7, 2009
The Secular Religious Crazies
The Secular Religious Crazies
For a pursuit of the truth access - cinops be gone – Wednesday, January 7, 2009
We have two Americas. The following is an example of Secular America from Dr. Paul Kengor, Jan. 1, 2009 – LifeNews.com, “Safe, Legal and Rare? ….
There is a Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice. (RCRC). It is a coalition of so-called religious groups and denominations that support legalized abortion. Their backgrounds are Christian to Jewish to Unitarian Universalists. Some mainline denominations have formally joined the coalition’s “pro-choice” gospel, including the Episcopal Church, the United Methodist Church, Barack Obama’s United Church of Christ, and several Presbyterian Church USA (PCCUSA) groups. Please study the sick religious mind-set that follows:
RCRC was elated with Obama’s election. They sent out a press release to congratulate this “PRO-CHOICE MAN OF FAITH.” Obama’s message that “America is one nation” holds great promise for defusing the culture wars over abortion that have too often distracted us. We urge President-elect Obama to be Pro-Faith, Pro-Family, Pro-Choice: to uphold Roe vs. Wade and reproductive choice, {and} foster respect for diverse views about abortion.
RCRC encourages Obama to plow full steam ahead with unrestricted abortion-on-demand at all stages of pregnancy, aided and abetted by taxpayer funding, with abortion promotion at home and abroad, and possibly – albeit unbelievably – WITH STUNNING ELIMINATION OF FREEDOM-OF-CONSCIENCE EXEMPTION FOR MEDICAL PERSONNEL WHO CHOOSE NOT TO PARTICIPATE IN ABORTION PROCEDURES. ALL OF THIS WILL CLOSE CATHOLIC AND OTHER CHRISTIAN HOSPITALS THROUGHOUT THE COUNTRY.
RCRC is gung-ho for FOCA, the Freedom of Choice Act which is fundamentally unconstitutional. They want to do away with the Hyde Amendment. The want to do away with the old slogan, “safe, legal and rare,” to “safe, legal, rare – and subsidized and promoted, and without freedom of conscience….”
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Maybe all the so-called Catholic organizations that voted for Obama will come out with a press release to counter the above RCRC's press release. You may want to contact them and see if they are sincere and have the guts to do it. (“Catholics United”, “Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good”, “Catholic Democrats”, and “Roman Catholics for Obama-Biden ’08” etc.) They had all this talk of Obama’s social justice and preferential option for the poor.
In the letter dated Thurs. Oct. 23rd, 2008, I had an investigative report on Catholics United# 3. Catholic League President Bill Donohue took a look at the list of contributors to the above organizations. “It seems liberal financier George Soros has been pouring money into Catholic groups that are painting Obama in a favorable light. According to IRS records, both “Catholics United” and “Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good” have benefited by tens of thousands from the unlikely partnership with “Move.Org” founder. Donahue who exposed the link, said, “The reason Soros fund the Catholic left is …{because} they all serve his agenda … to make support for abortion rights a respectable Catholic position.”
George H. Kubeck
For a pursuit of the truth access - cinops be gone – Wednesday, January 7, 2009
We have two Americas. The following is an example of Secular America from Dr. Paul Kengor, Jan. 1, 2009 – LifeNews.com, “Safe, Legal and Rare? ….
There is a Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice. (RCRC). It is a coalition of so-called religious groups and denominations that support legalized abortion. Their backgrounds are Christian to Jewish to Unitarian Universalists. Some mainline denominations have formally joined the coalition’s “pro-choice” gospel, including the Episcopal Church, the United Methodist Church, Barack Obama’s United Church of Christ, and several Presbyterian Church USA (PCCUSA) groups. Please study the sick religious mind-set that follows:
RCRC was elated with Obama’s election. They sent out a press release to congratulate this “PRO-CHOICE MAN OF FAITH.” Obama’s message that “America is one nation” holds great promise for defusing the culture wars over abortion that have too often distracted us. We urge President-elect Obama to be Pro-Faith, Pro-Family, Pro-Choice: to uphold Roe vs. Wade and reproductive choice, {and} foster respect for diverse views about abortion.
RCRC encourages Obama to plow full steam ahead with unrestricted abortion-on-demand at all stages of pregnancy, aided and abetted by taxpayer funding, with abortion promotion at home and abroad, and possibly – albeit unbelievably – WITH STUNNING ELIMINATION OF FREEDOM-OF-CONSCIENCE EXEMPTION FOR MEDICAL PERSONNEL WHO CHOOSE NOT TO PARTICIPATE IN ABORTION PROCEDURES. ALL OF THIS WILL CLOSE CATHOLIC AND OTHER CHRISTIAN HOSPITALS THROUGHOUT THE COUNTRY.
RCRC is gung-ho for FOCA, the Freedom of Choice Act which is fundamentally unconstitutional. They want to do away with the Hyde Amendment. The want to do away with the old slogan, “safe, legal and rare,” to “safe, legal, rare – and subsidized and promoted, and without freedom of conscience….”
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Maybe all the so-called Catholic organizations that voted for Obama will come out with a press release to counter the above RCRC's press release. You may want to contact them and see if they are sincere and have the guts to do it. (“Catholics United”, “Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good”, “Catholic Democrats”, and “Roman Catholics for Obama-Biden ’08” etc.) They had all this talk of Obama’s social justice and preferential option for the poor.
In the letter dated Thurs. Oct. 23rd, 2008, I had an investigative report on Catholics United# 3. Catholic League President Bill Donohue took a look at the list of contributors to the above organizations. “It seems liberal financier George Soros has been pouring money into Catholic groups that are painting Obama in a favorable light. According to IRS records, both “Catholics United” and “Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good” have benefited by tens of thousands from the unlikely partnership with “Move.Org” founder. Donahue who exposed the link, said, “The reason Soros fund the Catholic left is …{because} they all serve his agenda … to make support for abortion rights a respectable Catholic position.”
George H. Kubeck
Tuesday, January 6, 2009
HOW WE GOT INTO THIS ABORTION MESS? - 2 OF 2
How we got into this Abortion Mess? – 2 of 2
The website- cinops be gone – Tuesday, January 6, 2009
Anne Hendershott continues to pursue the truth in her Wall Street Journal, article:
Former Jesuit priest Albert Jonsen writes that the Hyannisport colloquium was influenced by the position of another Jesuit, the Rev. John Courtney Murray, a position that “distinguished between the moral aspects of an issue and the feasibility of enacting legislation about that issue.” It was the consensus at the Hyannisport conclave that Catholic politicians “might tolerate legislation that would permit abortion under certain circumstances if political efforts to repress this moral error led to greater perils to social peace and order.”
{This is a cop-out. There were no greater perils to social peace and order. ghk}
Father Milhaven later recalled the Hyannisport meeting during a 1984 breakfast briefing of Catholics for a Free Choice: “The theologians worked for a day and a half among ourselves at a nearby hotel. In the evening we answered questions from the Kennedys and the Shrivers. Though the theologians disagreed on many a point, they all concurred on certain basics … and that was that a Catholic could in good conscience vote in favor of abortion.”
{I graduated from a Jesuit College and the above is malarkey. ghk)
But can they now? There are signs today that some of the bishops are beginning to confront the Catholic politicians who consistently vote in favor of legislation to support abortion. Charles J. Chaput, the archbishop of Denver, has been on the front lines in encouraging Catholics to live their faith without compromise in the public square. Most recently in his book “Render Unto Caesar,” Archbishop Chaput has reminded Catholic politicians of their obligation to protect life.
{This whole business of abortion has morphed into the evils of same-sex marriage, embryonic stem-cell research, assisted-suicide and euthanasia. All of these evils, the pro-choice Catholic politician is now supporting. ghk}
The archbishop is not alone. The agenda at the November’s assembly in the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops included a public discussion of abortion and politics. The bishops’ final statement focused on concern about the possible passage of the “Freedom of Choice Act,” and referred to it as “an evil law that would further divide our country.” The bishops referenced their 2007 document, “Faithful Citizenship,” which maintains that the right to life is the foundation of every other human right. In it, they promised to “persist in the duty to counsel, in the hope that the scandal of their {‘Catholic congregants’} cooperating in evil can be resolved by the proper formation of their consciences.”
{There are consequences to voting for the Democratic Party. Maybe the staff at USCCB will learn on what happens.}
Whether the bishops truly will persist remains to be seen. New York’s Cardinal Edward Egan, for instance, has not publicly challenged Ms. Caroline Kennedy’s pro-choice promises. This is unfortunate. Until the clerics begin to counter the pro-choice claims made by high-profile Catholics such as Nancy Pelosi, Caroline Kennedy, faithful Catholics will continue to be bewildered by their pastoral silence. {But, there will be no silence by informed Catholic laity. ghk}
George H. Kubeck
The website- cinops be gone – Tuesday, January 6, 2009
Anne Hendershott continues to pursue the truth in her Wall Street Journal, article:
Former Jesuit priest Albert Jonsen writes that the Hyannisport colloquium was influenced by the position of another Jesuit, the Rev. John Courtney Murray, a position that “distinguished between the moral aspects of an issue and the feasibility of enacting legislation about that issue.” It was the consensus at the Hyannisport conclave that Catholic politicians “might tolerate legislation that would permit abortion under certain circumstances if political efforts to repress this moral error led to greater perils to social peace and order.”
{This is a cop-out. There were no greater perils to social peace and order. ghk}
Father Milhaven later recalled the Hyannisport meeting during a 1984 breakfast briefing of Catholics for a Free Choice: “The theologians worked for a day and a half among ourselves at a nearby hotel. In the evening we answered questions from the Kennedys and the Shrivers. Though the theologians disagreed on many a point, they all concurred on certain basics … and that was that a Catholic could in good conscience vote in favor of abortion.”
{I graduated from a Jesuit College and the above is malarkey. ghk)
But can they now? There are signs today that some of the bishops are beginning to confront the Catholic politicians who consistently vote in favor of legislation to support abortion. Charles J. Chaput, the archbishop of Denver, has been on the front lines in encouraging Catholics to live their faith without compromise in the public square. Most recently in his book “Render Unto Caesar,” Archbishop Chaput has reminded Catholic politicians of their obligation to protect life.
{This whole business of abortion has morphed into the evils of same-sex marriage, embryonic stem-cell research, assisted-suicide and euthanasia. All of these evils, the pro-choice Catholic politician is now supporting. ghk}
The archbishop is not alone. The agenda at the November’s assembly in the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops included a public discussion of abortion and politics. The bishops’ final statement focused on concern about the possible passage of the “Freedom of Choice Act,” and referred to it as “an evil law that would further divide our country.” The bishops referenced their 2007 document, “Faithful Citizenship,” which maintains that the right to life is the foundation of every other human right. In it, they promised to “persist in the duty to counsel, in the hope that the scandal of their {‘Catholic congregants’} cooperating in evil can be resolved by the proper formation of their consciences.”
{There are consequences to voting for the Democratic Party. Maybe the staff at USCCB will learn on what happens.}
Whether the bishops truly will persist remains to be seen. New York’s Cardinal Edward Egan, for instance, has not publicly challenged Ms. Caroline Kennedy’s pro-choice promises. This is unfortunate. Until the clerics begin to counter the pro-choice claims made by high-profile Catholics such as Nancy Pelosi, Caroline Kennedy, faithful Catholics will continue to be bewildered by their pastoral silence. {But, there will be no silence by informed Catholic laity. ghk}
George H. Kubeck
St. Thomas More - 6
St. Thomas More – 6
The website – cinops be gone – Tues. Jan. 6, 2009
This the 6th report on James Monti’s book on St. Thomas More.
More’s Early Years – 5 - p. 41-44
The concluding words of the 12th and last rule reflect a common-place of More’s meditations and a recurring motif in his life: the remembrance of death:
…{P}eradventure death within one hours,
Shall us bereave, wealth, riches and honour,
And bring us down full low both small and great,
To vile carrion and wretched worms’ meat.
The “Twelve Rules” are followed by reflections on what are termed the “Twelve Weapons of Spiritual Battle”, 12 considerations that can be brought to mind when confronting temptation. The soul is advised to recall in the face of such a trial that the pleasure from the proposed sinful act will be short-lived and minimal, only to be followed by sorrows and even greater loss: …
There is also the need to remember that life is as fleeting as “a dream or shadow on the wall” and that death is ever near, with the danger that the soul in serious sin will die unrepentant, doomed to eternal torments. But in addition to the sad consequences of succumbing to temptation, the soul is also advised to weigh the good that comes from resisting temptation, for all the joys one can experience in this life, “Thou shalt no pleasure comparable find / To the inward gladness of a virtuous mind.” The examples of the saints and martyrs prove that temptation can be with God’s assistance be resisted….
Pico’s seventh property, “To love all things that pertaineth unto his love,” provides More with the opportunity to advocate the reverencing of relics and religious images, thereby demonstrating that his belief in these traditional Catholic devotional practices can be trace back to his early life. It dispels any notion that his impassioned defense of these practices years later in the wake of the Reformation somehow represented a break with the spirituality of his youth: ...
As his edition of Pico draws to a close with a prayer of the latter, More makes the Italian humanist’s thoughts distinctively his own by rendering the original into beautiful English verse, as in the following stanza that describes the Passion as a work of divine love….
The theme of God’s love is carried with commensurate eloquence onward to the end of the prayer, which closes with the vision of heaven and God’s unfathomable mercy:
Grant me good Lord, and Creator of all,
The flame to quench of all sinful desire,
And in thy love set all mine heart afire.
That when the journey of this deadly life
My silly ghost {soul} hath finished, and thence
Depart must, without his fleshly wife
Alone into his Lord’s high presence
He may thee find, O well of indulgence,
In thy lordship not as a lord, but rather
As a very tender loving Father.
George H. Kubeck
The website – cinops be gone – Tues. Jan. 6, 2009
This the 6th report on James Monti’s book on St. Thomas More.
More’s Early Years – 5 - p. 41-44
The concluding words of the 12th and last rule reflect a common-place of More’s meditations and a recurring motif in his life: the remembrance of death:
…{P}eradventure death within one hours,
Shall us bereave, wealth, riches and honour,
And bring us down full low both small and great,
To vile carrion and wretched worms’ meat.
The “Twelve Rules” are followed by reflections on what are termed the “Twelve Weapons of Spiritual Battle”, 12 considerations that can be brought to mind when confronting temptation. The soul is advised to recall in the face of such a trial that the pleasure from the proposed sinful act will be short-lived and minimal, only to be followed by sorrows and even greater loss: …
There is also the need to remember that life is as fleeting as “a dream or shadow on the wall” and that death is ever near, with the danger that the soul in serious sin will die unrepentant, doomed to eternal torments. But in addition to the sad consequences of succumbing to temptation, the soul is also advised to weigh the good that comes from resisting temptation, for all the joys one can experience in this life, “Thou shalt no pleasure comparable find / To the inward gladness of a virtuous mind.” The examples of the saints and martyrs prove that temptation can be with God’s assistance be resisted….
Pico’s seventh property, “To love all things that pertaineth unto his love,” provides More with the opportunity to advocate the reverencing of relics and religious images, thereby demonstrating that his belief in these traditional Catholic devotional practices can be trace back to his early life. It dispels any notion that his impassioned defense of these practices years later in the wake of the Reformation somehow represented a break with the spirituality of his youth: ...
As his edition of Pico draws to a close with a prayer of the latter, More makes the Italian humanist’s thoughts distinctively his own by rendering the original into beautiful English verse, as in the following stanza that describes the Passion as a work of divine love….
The theme of God’s love is carried with commensurate eloquence onward to the end of the prayer, which closes with the vision of heaven and God’s unfathomable mercy:
Grant me good Lord, and Creator of all,
The flame to quench of all sinful desire,
And in thy love set all mine heart afire.
That when the journey of this deadly life
My silly ghost {soul} hath finished, and thence
Depart must, without his fleshly wife
Alone into his Lord’s high presence
He may thee find, O well of indulgence,
In thy lordship not as a lord, but rather
As a very tender loving Father.
George H. Kubeck
Monday, January 5, 2009
HOW WE GOT INTO THIS ABORTION MESS? - 1
How we got into this Abortion Mess? 1 of 2
The website – cinops be gone – Monday, Jan. 5, 2009
We covered this topic in Feb. 22nd, 2008 with Faithful Departed, “The Collapse of Boston’s Catholic Culture.” Let’s check out Anne Hendershott’s article in The Wall Street Journal, Jan. 1, 2009 How Support for Abortion Became Kennedy Dogma. Ms. Hendershott is a professor of urban studies at The King’s College in New York, She is the author of the “The Politics of Abortion”(Encounter Books, 2007). Sadly, we may have to censure some Catholic theologians.
Caroline Kennedy of New York knows that any Kennedy desiring higher office in the Democratic Party must now carry the torch of abortion rights …
Even Ted Kennedy, who gets 100% pro-choice rating from the abortion-rights group NARAL, was at one time pro-life. In fact, in 1971, a full year after New York had legalized abortion; the Massachusetts senator was still championing the rights of the unborn. In a letter to a constituent dated Aug. 3, 1971, he wrote:
“When history looks back to this era it should recognize this generation as one which cared about human beings enough to halt the practice of war, to provide a decent living for every family, and to fulfill its responsibility to its children from the very moment of conception.”
{Today, Ted Kennedy has also a cafeteria conscience on the evils of same-sex marriage, embryonic stem cell research, etc.ghk}
But all that changed in the early 70’s, when Democratic politicians first figured out the powerful abortion lobby could fill THEIR CAMPAIGN COFFERS (and attract new liberal voters). Politicians began to realize that, despite the Catholic Church’s teachings to the contrary, its bishops & priests had ended their public role of responding negatively to those who promoted a pro-choice agenda.
{All of this happened within the Kennedy Democratic party leadership? So to cater to the Kennedy clan and be an enabler of the Democratic Party, let’s find out what happened. Notice it’s all about money and the devil has a lot of it. ghk}
In some cases, church leaders actually started providing “cover” for Catholic pro-choice politicians who wanted to vote in favor of abortion rights. At a meeting at the Kennedy compound in Hyannisport, Mass., on a hot summer day in 1964, the Kennedy family and its advisers and allies were coached by leading theologians and Catholic college professors on how to accept and promote abortion WITH A “CLEAR CONSCIENCE.”
{So we had a mindset within the U.S. Church similar to what produced the Bishop’s sex scandal. It was wrong then & 45 years later it is wrong now.ghk}
The former Jesuit priest Albert Jonsen, emeritus professor of ethics at the University of Washington, recalls the meeting in his boot “Birth of Bioethics” (Oxford, 2003). He writes about how he joined with the Rev. Joseph Fuchs, a Catholic moral theologian: the Rev. Robert Drinan, then dean of Boston College Law School; and three academic theologians, the Revs. Giles Milhaven, Richard McCormick and Charles Curran, to enable the Kennedy family to redefine support for abortion....
George H. Kubeck
The website – cinops be gone – Monday, Jan. 5, 2009
We covered this topic in Feb. 22nd, 2008 with Faithful Departed, “The Collapse of Boston’s Catholic Culture.” Let’s check out Anne Hendershott’s article in The Wall Street Journal, Jan. 1, 2009 How Support for Abortion Became Kennedy Dogma. Ms. Hendershott is a professor of urban studies at The King’s College in New York, She is the author of the “The Politics of Abortion”(Encounter Books, 2007). Sadly, we may have to censure some Catholic theologians.
Caroline Kennedy of New York knows that any Kennedy desiring higher office in the Democratic Party must now carry the torch of abortion rights …
Even Ted Kennedy, who gets 100% pro-choice rating from the abortion-rights group NARAL, was at one time pro-life. In fact, in 1971, a full year after New York had legalized abortion; the Massachusetts senator was still championing the rights of the unborn. In a letter to a constituent dated Aug. 3, 1971, he wrote:
“When history looks back to this era it should recognize this generation as one which cared about human beings enough to halt the practice of war, to provide a decent living for every family, and to fulfill its responsibility to its children from the very moment of conception.”
{Today, Ted Kennedy has also a cafeteria conscience on the evils of same-sex marriage, embryonic stem cell research, etc.ghk}
But all that changed in the early 70’s, when Democratic politicians first figured out the powerful abortion lobby could fill THEIR CAMPAIGN COFFERS (and attract new liberal voters). Politicians began to realize that, despite the Catholic Church’s teachings to the contrary, its bishops & priests had ended their public role of responding negatively to those who promoted a pro-choice agenda.
{All of this happened within the Kennedy Democratic party leadership? So to cater to the Kennedy clan and be an enabler of the Democratic Party, let’s find out what happened. Notice it’s all about money and the devil has a lot of it. ghk}
In some cases, church leaders actually started providing “cover” for Catholic pro-choice politicians who wanted to vote in favor of abortion rights. At a meeting at the Kennedy compound in Hyannisport, Mass., on a hot summer day in 1964, the Kennedy family and its advisers and allies were coached by leading theologians and Catholic college professors on how to accept and promote abortion WITH A “CLEAR CONSCIENCE.”
{So we had a mindset within the U.S. Church similar to what produced the Bishop’s sex scandal. It was wrong then & 45 years later it is wrong now.ghk}
The former Jesuit priest Albert Jonsen, emeritus professor of ethics at the University of Washington, recalls the meeting in his boot “Birth of Bioethics” (Oxford, 2003). He writes about how he joined with the Rev. Joseph Fuchs, a Catholic moral theologian: the Rev. Robert Drinan, then dean of Boston College Law School; and three academic theologians, the Revs. Giles Milhaven, Richard McCormick and Charles Curran, to enable the Kennedy family to redefine support for abortion....
George H. Kubeck
Sunday, January 4, 2009
On Obedience to Local Bishops
On Obedience to Local Bishops
The website – cinops be gone – Sunday, Jan. 4, 2009
Canonist Dominican J.D. Brunetta, Faith and Family, Sep. /Oct. 08 – p. 43:
If the pope is the head of the Church, why do we need to follow the precepts of the local bishop?
Answer: The pope is “the bishop of the Church of Rome, in whom continues the office given by the Lord uniquely to Peter, the first of the apostles,” and he “is the head of the college of bishops, the Vicar of Christ, and pastor of the universal Church on earth.”
By virtue of his office, the Holy Father therefore possesses “supreme, full, immediate and universal ordinary power in the Church (Canon 331).
Yet while the pope possesses this universal power in the Church, the authority of the diocesan bishops is not merely delegated to them by the pope. Rather, the bishops, “who by divine institution succeed in the place of the apostles through the Holy Spirit who has been given to them” (Canon 375, 1), form a single college, i.e., collegial body, with the pope as its head, “by virtue of sacramental consecration and hierarchical communion with the head and members” (Canon 336). As the apostles did not receive their authority from Peter, but from Christ, so the bishops receive their authority not from the pope but through the power of the Holy Spirit.
By virtue of the fullness of the sacrament of holy order, the bishops “are constituted pastors of the Church, so that they are teachers of doctrine, priests of sacred worship, and ministers of governance” (Canon 375). As successors to the apostle, our local bishops have “all ordinary, proper, and immediate power which is required for the exercise of {their} pastoral function (Canon 381, 1)….
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
“THE TASK OF THE BISHOP: HE TOO, AND ESPECIALLY HE, IS A “CO-WORKER”, THAT IS, HE DOES NOT ACT IN HIS OWN NAME BUT ALWAYS AND TOTALLY TO A “WITH”. ONLY WHEN HE ACTS “WITH” CHRIST AND “WITH” THE WHOLE BELIEVING CHURCH OF ALL TIMES AND ALL PLACES DOES HE WHAT HE IS MEANT TO DO. IT IS NOT HIS TASK TO FASHION A COMMUNITY FOR HIMSELF, BUT, RATHER TO FASHION THE CHURCH FOR CHRIST. THAT MEANS HE MUST POINT TO HIM WHO IS THE WAY BECAUSE HE IS THE TRUTH. (JN 14:6)
“For the simple reason that it comes from the truth and leads to the truth, the love that is the goal of faith is, in a very real sense the hope and redemption of the human race, A MERE COMMUNITY OF INTERESTS WITHOUT TRUTH WOULD BE JUST A DRUG, NOT A HEALING….”co-workers of the truth” is the relationship between truth and love.” Pope Benedict XVI in Co-Workers of the Truth.”
Our Holy Father’s Monthly Intentions for January: Family: - That the family may increasingly be a place of formation in charity, personal growth, and the transmission of the faith. Christian Unity: - That Christian denominations may strive for full unity so as to be more credible witnesses of the Gospel to a world in need of a “new evangelization.”
From Pope Benedict’s visit to America in 2008, truth and pro-life are the future; status quo and religious correctness are the past. Evangelize - orthodoxy.
George H. Kubeck
The website – cinops be gone – Sunday, Jan. 4, 2009
Canonist Dominican J.D. Brunetta, Faith and Family, Sep. /Oct. 08 – p. 43:
If the pope is the head of the Church, why do we need to follow the precepts of the local bishop?
Answer: The pope is “the bishop of the Church of Rome, in whom continues the office given by the Lord uniquely to Peter, the first of the apostles,” and he “is the head of the college of bishops, the Vicar of Christ, and pastor of the universal Church on earth.”
By virtue of his office, the Holy Father therefore possesses “supreme, full, immediate and universal ordinary power in the Church (Canon 331).
Yet while the pope possesses this universal power in the Church, the authority of the diocesan bishops is not merely delegated to them by the pope. Rather, the bishops, “who by divine institution succeed in the place of the apostles through the Holy Spirit who has been given to them” (Canon 375, 1), form a single college, i.e., collegial body, with the pope as its head, “by virtue of sacramental consecration and hierarchical communion with the head and members” (Canon 336). As the apostles did not receive their authority from Peter, but from Christ, so the bishops receive their authority not from the pope but through the power of the Holy Spirit.
By virtue of the fullness of the sacrament of holy order, the bishops “are constituted pastors of the Church, so that they are teachers of doctrine, priests of sacred worship, and ministers of governance” (Canon 375). As successors to the apostle, our local bishops have “all ordinary, proper, and immediate power which is required for the exercise of {their} pastoral function (Canon 381, 1)….
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
“THE TASK OF THE BISHOP: HE TOO, AND ESPECIALLY HE, IS A “CO-WORKER”, THAT IS, HE DOES NOT ACT IN HIS OWN NAME BUT ALWAYS AND TOTALLY TO A “WITH”. ONLY WHEN HE ACTS “WITH” CHRIST AND “WITH” THE WHOLE BELIEVING CHURCH OF ALL TIMES AND ALL PLACES DOES HE WHAT HE IS MEANT TO DO. IT IS NOT HIS TASK TO FASHION A COMMUNITY FOR HIMSELF, BUT, RATHER TO FASHION THE CHURCH FOR CHRIST. THAT MEANS HE MUST POINT TO HIM WHO IS THE WAY BECAUSE HE IS THE TRUTH. (JN 14:6)
“For the simple reason that it comes from the truth and leads to the truth, the love that is the goal of faith is, in a very real sense the hope and redemption of the human race, A MERE COMMUNITY OF INTERESTS WITHOUT TRUTH WOULD BE JUST A DRUG, NOT A HEALING….”co-workers of the truth” is the relationship between truth and love.” Pope Benedict XVI in Co-Workers of the Truth.”
Our Holy Father’s Monthly Intentions for January: Family: - That the family may increasingly be a place of formation in charity, personal growth, and the transmission of the faith. Christian Unity: - That Christian denominations may strive for full unity so as to be more credible witnesses of the Gospel to a world in need of a “new evangelization.”
From Pope Benedict’s visit to America in 2008, truth and pro-life are the future; status quo and religious correctness are the past. Evangelize - orthodoxy.
George H. Kubeck
Saturday, January 3, 2009
GIVE ME A BREAK!
Give Me a Break!
The website – cinops be gone – Saturday, January 3, 2009
The following from LifeSiteNews.com, Monday, Dec. 22, 2009:
This job applicant for U.S. Senator wants to use her maiden name and not here married name. She wants to be appointed by Gov. David Patterson of New York to take the place Hillary Rodham Clinton.
OK, she is the daughter of President John F. Kennedy. What are Caroline Kennedy’s qualifications? She is a Harvard and Columbia-educated lawyer. She is an author and prodigious fundraiser for New York City public schools.
But the following has not been pointed out by the news media and journalists. Caroline is firmly entrenched in favor of abortion and same-sex marriage. She supports “full equality and marriage rights for gay and lesbian couples.” This means that in California, Florida and Arizona she would have been opposed to Proposition 8 that marriage legally is only between a man and a woman. She is like California’s Gov. Arnold, Jerry Brown and Nancy Pelosi.
Also, “Caroline believes that young women facing unwanted pregnancies should have the advice of caring adults, but this should not be required by law.” In other words she is opposed to parental notification laws which are in about 35 states. Caroline would have worked for the defeat of Proposition 4 in California.
On the question of late-term abortions, Kennedy was said to “support Roe
Vs. Wade, which prohibits third-trimester abortions except when the life or health of the mother is at risk.” In other words, she is for partial-birth abortions.
What’s my beef? She calls herself a Roman Catholic. She is living a lie in the public arena. She needs to be exposed and censured by Catholics individuals, organizations and Catholic bishops. She is using the Catholic-label for electioneering purposes and is a horrendous scandal for the faithful and a role model for the second or third largest religious group in America. (Ex-Catholics)
Will she remain a Trojan horse for a Secular America within the Catholic Church?
Root Cause of War on Christmas
Catholic League president Bill Donohue hit the nail on the head.
“The root cause of the war on Christmas, which is conducted almost exclusively by well-educated white people in the U.S., Canada, Europe and Australia – the very same people who like gay marriage – has almost nothing to do with fidelity to law (the First Amendment in the U.S.): it has to do with ideology.”
“The ideology is plainly an expression of left-wing secularism, and it is nothing if not anti-Western and anti-Christian. At its worst, it is driven by hatred; at its best, it is driven by a defensive posture, a deep sense of embarrassment over the legacy of Western civilization. There is no historical or moral justification for either. Moreover, those who are pursuing this agenda generally lie about their work.
“Want proof that hate is driving this assault?” The head of the ACLU in New Hampshire, Claire Ebel, advises that if crèches are allowed in parks, it is permissible ‘for a display of satanic ritual.’ And this hatred of Christmas is not exclusive to the U.S. In England, Muslim preacher Anjem Choudary called Christmas ‘evil’ in a recent sermon. No wonder they are banning words like ‘bishop,’ ‘chapel.’ and ‘nun’ from the Oxford Junior Dictionary. And all of this is being endorsed, by self-hating Christians, as well.”
George H. Kubeck
The website – cinops be gone – Saturday, January 3, 2009
The following from LifeSiteNews.com, Monday, Dec. 22, 2009:
This job applicant for U.S. Senator wants to use her maiden name and not here married name. She wants to be appointed by Gov. David Patterson of New York to take the place Hillary Rodham Clinton.
OK, she is the daughter of President John F. Kennedy. What are Caroline Kennedy’s qualifications? She is a Harvard and Columbia-educated lawyer. She is an author and prodigious fundraiser for New York City public schools.
But the following has not been pointed out by the news media and journalists. Caroline is firmly entrenched in favor of abortion and same-sex marriage. She supports “full equality and marriage rights for gay and lesbian couples.” This means that in California, Florida and Arizona she would have been opposed to Proposition 8 that marriage legally is only between a man and a woman. She is like California’s Gov. Arnold, Jerry Brown and Nancy Pelosi.
Also, “Caroline believes that young women facing unwanted pregnancies should have the advice of caring adults, but this should not be required by law.” In other words she is opposed to parental notification laws which are in about 35 states. Caroline would have worked for the defeat of Proposition 4 in California.
On the question of late-term abortions, Kennedy was said to “support Roe
Vs. Wade, which prohibits third-trimester abortions except when the life or health of the mother is at risk.” In other words, she is for partial-birth abortions.
What’s my beef? She calls herself a Roman Catholic. She is living a lie in the public arena. She needs to be exposed and censured by Catholics individuals, organizations and Catholic bishops. She is using the Catholic-label for electioneering purposes and is a horrendous scandal for the faithful and a role model for the second or third largest religious group in America. (Ex-Catholics)
Will she remain a Trojan horse for a Secular America within the Catholic Church?
Root Cause of War on Christmas
Catholic League president Bill Donohue hit the nail on the head.
“The root cause of the war on Christmas, which is conducted almost exclusively by well-educated white people in the U.S., Canada, Europe and Australia – the very same people who like gay marriage – has almost nothing to do with fidelity to law (the First Amendment in the U.S.): it has to do with ideology.”
“The ideology is plainly an expression of left-wing secularism, and it is nothing if not anti-Western and anti-Christian. At its worst, it is driven by hatred; at its best, it is driven by a defensive posture, a deep sense of embarrassment over the legacy of Western civilization. There is no historical or moral justification for either. Moreover, those who are pursuing this agenda generally lie about their work.
“Want proof that hate is driving this assault?” The head of the ACLU in New Hampshire, Claire Ebel, advises that if crèches are allowed in parks, it is permissible ‘for a display of satanic ritual.’ And this hatred of Christmas is not exclusive to the U.S. In England, Muslim preacher Anjem Choudary called Christmas ‘evil’ in a recent sermon. No wonder they are banning words like ‘bishop,’ ‘chapel.’ and ‘nun’ from the Oxford Junior Dictionary. And all of this is being endorsed, by self-hating Christians, as well.”
George H. Kubeck
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)