Cosmos-Liturgy-Sex

Father Bob out of Australia who gained notoriety for hearing confessions live on a radio show, is of the opinion that it’s morally mandatory that priests should violate the seal of the confessional and report those who confess to child abuse while in the confessional. He said, “I believe everyone should report abuse. It’s their moral duty. If it takes mandatory reporting to make sure, that’s how it will have to be.” What did he think he was actually doing in the confines of the confessional?

“When you go to Confession, know this, that I Myself am waiting for you in the confessional; I am only hidden by the priest, but I Myself act in the soul. Here the misery of the soul meets the God of Mercy.” – Jesus to Saint Faustina

Fr. Bob has a history of dissent, especially as it related to contraception. He was of the opinion that the Church should mind it’s own business on certain matters, so it’s not particularly shocking that it seems as though he believes priests should fall under the authority of the secular state, who screen criminals (vs. repentant sinners) who confess in the confines of a Catholic confession. It must be he also failed to remember that the sacramental seal is inviolable and quoting Canon 983.1 of the Code of Canon Law, the Catechism states:

“…It is a crime for a confessor in any way to betray a penitent by word or in any other manner or for any reason” (No. 2490). A priest, therefore, cannot break the seal to save his own life, to protect his good name, to refute a false accusation, to save the life of another, to aid the course of justice (like reporting a crime), or to avert a public calamity. He cannot be compelled by law to disclose a person’s confession or be bound by any oath he takes, e.g. as a witness in a court trial. A priest cannot reveal the contents of a confession either directly, by repeating the substance of what has been said, or indirectly, by some sign, suggestion, or action. A Decree from the Holy Office (Nov. 18, 1682)

What ever the culprit – yesterday it was murderers and rapists, while today it’s child molesters – there will always be a diabolical assault on the Sacrament of reconciliation specifically because it was given to us by Christ, the Great Physician, who knows everything about us and the healing powers of confession on our soul, in both a supernatural and psychological sense.

“The tears of the penitents are wine for the angels.” — St. Bernard

Those who hate and attack this great sacrament know nothing about it. They have never experienced the depth of God’s forgiveness and mercy available to them in the confessional, nor do they understand the power of God’s grace given freely to our priests to guide them in doing what is righteous. There is No price or potential crime known to man that is worth desecrating the Sacrament of reconciliation. The value of each and every one of our souls are without measure – while the bodies eventually die, the consequences of sin on souls are eternal.

As a side note: the story of a “confession” of a repeat sex offender was from a non catholic denomination, but the press just so happen to get a couple of quotes from a reliable dissenter to bring it back to the Catholic church.

There can be no justice without truth because in the absence of truth, there can be no verdict which separates the guilty from the innocent and justice from injustice. When tolerance supersedes truth, tolerance eventually mutates into intolerance and truth is abandoned altogether; consequently, “tolerance” (term used loosely in context) dictates that we are bound to accept simultaneous contraries and contradictions.  This would ultimately force the hands of society to be reduced to the moral equivalence of hypocrites and liars. In other words, As the Catholic philosopher Jacques Maritain wrote, “The man who says ‘What is truth?’ as Pilate did, is not a tolerant man, but a betrayer of the human race.”

As for the wreckage caused by a relatively unknown amount of oppressive, abusive and cowardly males, we are now dealing with the angry, mutated version of the original feminist movement, now referred to as Radical Feminism (not to be confused with the garden type of new age cafeteria feminists). Many of these women who find refuge in the movement are not equipped with the coping skills and support system with which to help them heal from their emotional scars, and consequently resort to anger and revenge to help them cope with the hurt, because hurt – at its core, is a reminder of our human vulnerability and helplessness. Without the proper coping skills, even if one were to eradicate the person who hurt them, it would only amount to a temporary relief, because they never resolved the cause of their emotional damage nor let go of the anger. Consequently, instead of identifying themselves as a victim of trauma and try to heal themselves from the inside – out, they externally employ the very means of their abusers with the hope of bringing about some sense of safety and security in their lives.

In the world of the radical feminist, a fear of being controlled by men and a patriarchal society dictate that we no longer be recognized as different sexes, but more as androgynous genders. When in reality, radical feminists grasp for a sense of security to become the best they can be through a rejection of the feminine and embracing characteristics of the masculine. This strategy rests on the premise that for women to reach their full dignity and freedom, they must become as much like men as possible. Ironically and irrationally, Radical feminists adopt the very same characteristics they publicly denounce, which is the true measure and embodiment of humanity being man.

Abortion ranks as their number one non-negotiable demand, of which they have successfully disguised among the rhetoric of choice. In this case, “the” choice must always return the the woman, who alone can only judge her specific situation. When does life begin? Do they feel pain? None of these questions in truth really matter, other than in the forum of public opinion. According to the true radical feminist, the defense of abortion is an inalienable right, and is seen as nothing more than a defense of privacy and the individual conscience. Justified killings (although never to the point of murder) is always warranted with or without the pro-abortion rhetoric, here is some of the latter.

Margaret Sanger (Founder Planned Parenthood) – …“ignorance breeds poverty and poverty breeds ignorance. There is only one cure for both, and that is to stoop breeding these things. Stop bringing to birth children whose inheritance cannot be one of health or intelligence. Stop bringing into the world children whose parents cannot provide for them.” “The most merciful thing that a large family does to one of its infant members is to kill it.”

Cynthia Daniels (Political Scientist – Rutgers University) – Urged women to acknowledge the life of the fetus. This does not weaken the case for abortion but strengthens it. In Daniels’ reasoning, if the fetus is living and uninvited, off of the woman’s private resources and must, therefore, be viewed as an aggressor. Since every person is entitled to self-defense, the woman has a right to kill the fetus to defend her own life.

Naomi Wolf (author, 3rd wave feminist) “So what will it be: Wanted fetuses are charming, complex, REM-dreaming little beings whose profile on the sonogram looks just like Daddy, but unwanted ones are mere “uterine material”? How can we charge that it is vile and repulsive for pro-lifers to brandish vile and repulsive images if the images are real? To insist that the truth is in poor taste is the very height of hypocrisy. Besides, if these images are often the facts of the matter, and if we then claim that it is offensive for pro-choice women to be confronted by them, then we are making the judgment that women are too inherently weak to face a truth about which they have to make a grave decision. This view of women is unworthy of feminism. Free women must be strong women, too; and strong women, presumably, do not seek to cloak their most important decisions in euphemism.”

Of course, this type of brutal honesty is not for the faint of heart or the common consumers of abortion nor compatible with the normal decency of human beings . I believe the typical woman who undergoes abortion, hopes upon hope on the truth of the abortion rhetoric in order to reduce the stresses associated with undergoing an abortion. I also find it difficult to imagine that the radicals have a lick of concern or compassion over another human being’s safety or mental health if it has the potential of having a negative impact on the over-all world wide approval rating of abortion. The way I see it, in order to protect the idol of abortion (at the expense of the consumers) and subsequently their own lives – they deny, spin, invent, manipulate and attack with a vengeance anything or anyone whom they deem a threat to their means of survival. As with the wicked servant in today’s gospel, in our selfish blindness, how often do we plead for mercy and forgiveness while denying that very same mercy and forgiveness to others – and in this case I think the refusal to forgive others maybe at the core of radical feminism.

Sources:

Feminism and the Unraveling of the Social Bond

When Tolerance Trumps Truth

I have been made aware in recent months of Belmont Abbey College – a small, Benedictine, liberal arts college in North Carolina. Perusing through various Catholic journals and magazines with a reputation for orthodoxy, I have noticed on a few occasions the college’s “Got Monks” advertising campaign. I found the ad spots somewhat clever, seeming to say that we here at Belmont Abbey College have Catholic identity and stability because we have monks – does your college? I was heartened by the thought of the emergence of another solid Catholic college.

But recently, a reader, who is close to the scene at Belmont Abbey College, sent along an article from CNA reporting on a situation that has caused great turmoil at the college. It seems that the school is being sued by some of the faculty and staff for removing contraception and abortion from their medical benefits. Though it is encouraging that these benefits are being dropped, the reader believes that things are a complete mess at the college. It seems that the faculty is almost uniformly opposed to the administration’s stated desire to stress “Catholic identity.” Though there are only eight signatories to the suit, the faculty is said to be almost entirely in the corner of the signatories. And, I understand, that is only the tip of the iceberg when it comes to faculty dissent at Belmont Abbey College. The reader offers the following assessment: “…as is so often the case with ignorant, post-’68 academes, orthodoxy and fundamentalism are thought by the [Belmont Abbey College] faculty to be equivalent realities.”

I saw a curious post on Catholic Answers as I was looking around to see what others have said about this issue (pasted here for your convenience):

We all like stories where there is a “good guy” and a “bad guy.” Some well-meaning Catholic bloggers seem willing to cast the administration in the white hat, and the lawsuit-threatening faculty members in the black hat. However, the truth is much more complex, and we must wake up to this reality. I caution people to remember that there are always two (or more) sides to a story, and not to jump to conclusions based on the side of the story that comes straight from the college’s highly image-conscious administration.

I certainly applaud President Thierfelder and Abbot Solari for standing firm in the Faith when faced with such strident opposition. Had they been doing their duty, though, they would have noticed this immoral health-care policy years earlier. I also applaud the lone faculty member who had the courage to speak up for the truth and bring this immoral health care coverage to their notice, at the risk of being persecuted by his/her colleagues. This person is unnamed, probably for his/her own protection, but I want him/her to know that some of us recognize the courage it took.

Like many of you, I felt hopeful after Dr. Thierfelder took over at Belmont Abbey – I liked his vision and thought this college might be added to a regrettably small number of truly faithful Catholic colleges. However, shortly after he arrived, serious problems developed between the new administration, faculty and even some students. President Thierfelder and most of the Vice Presidents he’s hired (including the newest VP of Academic Affairs) come from a business background, with little to no understanding of how to run a college. They have implemented a business model, where the CEO (president) makes unilateral decisions and pushes them down to the labor force (faculty and staff), to better serve the clients (students). This is foreign to many in higher ed who are familiar with the “shared governance” model normally used at colleges and universities, but this is exactly what Dr. Thierfelder has done since he first arrived.

As each year passes and more top-down authoritarian decisions are made, it has caused the faculty (including even some of the Catholic members) to feel abandoned and ignored, resulting in a loss of respect and confidence in the administration. (One professor summed up this frustration nicely in an article found at http://crusader.bac.edu/english/crus…n….) After several years of this, the faculty has finally reached a breaking point. Unfortunately, their “line in the sand” was poorly chosen, using the one issue that deals with a higher moral issue.

I’m certainly no fan of some faculty there and I wouldn’t be sorry to see them go. I also agree it is VERY wrong for the 8 complainers and the many others who support them to insist on bringing back immoral and anti-Catholic health benefits. However, to be fair and just, I also understand their growing frustration with the administration’s ill will, incompetence or both. What has surfaced in this controversy is only the tip of an iceberg that has been forming for several years. If President Thierfelder had taken the time in his first year to review all the policies and procedures (including health care) already in place, to learn about higher education processes, to treat the faculty with more respect, and to allow them more input into some of the decisions that affect them, then there might be less hostility today. This is a case where BOTH sides (administration and faculty) share responsibility in the many underlying problems that led up to this controversial “explosion.”

I am grateful that Belmont Abbey students like xsuasox and edward_george have so far not seen the ugliness behind the scenes at the college, and I hope they will keep the fire in their faith as more of this seeps out. However, college-bound students and their parents would do well to look into better alternatives such as Christendom College, FranciscanUniversity, Holy Apostles College, or Wyoming Catholic College.

William Carter

Carter complains about the new administration, though recognizing the goodness of the administration’s actions to eliminate the offending health-care policy. He argues that the school president and his staff have been running things in an autocratic manner in opposition to the secular academic model, which demands running a college in a democratic way, that is, with the input of the faculty. In asserting that the President should have reviewed the policies in place when he took over, one might read him as implying that the policy implementing the democratic model should have been removed years earlier. If that is his intent, then I would wholly assent to that notion (I would hope that he is not advocating for the “democratic” model). The fact that it was not leads one to ask if this was negligence on the part of the administration or a necessity in their strategy to reform the college. Certainly the offending health care offerings should have been eliminated years ago. But, given what we have been hearing about the faculty, it is obvious that they would never have cooperatively allowed the elimination of these “health care” options.

Though not wanting to scapegoat the faculty at the college, Carter recommends that parents send their children to more verifiably Catholic colleges. He may have a good point here. The situation involving the faculty at Belmont Abbey College does seem to present a quandary. The question is this. Apparently, the administration is committed to turning the school around from its secularization of the past decades: at least it’s selling the college in that way. However, with a faculty that appears to be predominantly hostile to all things Catholic, would you encourage anyone to send his children into such an environment? Certainly, one wants to support the attempts to recover a Catholic school for Catholicism. But who wants to subject his children to such a battle? Only children with the most solid faith and strongest character ought to be encouraged to consider attending the school.

Perhaps it is, in the end, a hopeful sign that only a handful of faculty has signed the lawsuit. However, the evidence suggests that the school’s administration still has a long way to go before they are able to bring Belmont Abbey College to the state that one expects them to be in from their advertisements.

On a related note, one may wonder about the condition of Belmont Abbey itself. After all, Benedictine colleges are generally closely connected to the monastic houses that founded them. And the ad campaign plays up the presence of monks on the campus. Unfortunately, our aforementioned “reader-on-the-scene” informs us, Belmont monastery is down to 19 monks (from a height of 60 monks in the ‘50s and ‘60s), most of whom are over the age of 50. So, indeed, one may, in ten or fifteen years, have to ask of Belmont Abbey College itself (if it should somehow survive that long): “Got Monks?” St. Benedict: Pray for us.

“Among thousands of people, there are not a hundred who will arrive at their salvation, and I am not even certain of that number, so much perversity is there among the young and so much negligence among the old.” - St John Chrysostom

Fr. Kimel of pontifications did an interesting piece on questions surrounding how many souls will be saved and how many will be damned.

I have omitted one important fact: as decent as most people I know may be, I have to admit that every person I know is also selfish, even the nicest ones. My experience, in other words, confirms a fundamental teaching of the Catholic Church—the doctrine of original sin.

… Every human being is born into a world dominated by Satan and corrupted by death and sin. And in a mysterious way which I at least cannot explain, these three elements—spiritual alienation from God, oppression by Satan, and deformation by a sinful world—coincide….

A couple of years ago, I came across a piece called, Cry of A Lost Soul , which is a powerful record of events that led a young woman to ultimately lose her soul. The sobering document has been previously printed with imprimatur, and describes the vision of a young, single catholic woman after learning of her friend from work who had recently died as a result of an automobile accident. Right from the beginning of the ghoulish narrative, it was evident how many times I took on the nature of the damned.

When I was jealous of others, wanting them to share in a misery of failure.

“I should like to see you to come to this state where I must remain forever.”

When I did things for others based not in the spirit of charity, but with self centered motivations – doing it out of obligation or out of fear of rejection by saying no.

“Our wills are hardened in evil – in what you call evil. Even when we do something ‘good’, as I do now, opening your eyes about hell, it is not because of a good intention”.

When life seemed so unfair, and I found solace in a state of self-pity and anger.

“We look appalled at our ruined life, hating and suffering. Do you hear? We here drink hatred like water.”

When deep down inside, I secretly took delight in the misfortunes of others of whom I was either jealous of or held in disdain.

“I hate the devil too. And yet I am pleased about him, because he tries to ruin all of you; In truth every time they drag down here to hell a human soul their own torture is increased. But what does one not do for hatred?”

We never know when our time will end, but be assured that God is a the perfect judge.

“Deep down I was rebelling against God. You did not understand it; you thought me still a Catholic. I wanted, in fact, to be called one; The lost Catholics suffer more than those of other religions, because they, mostly, received and despised more graces and more light. He who knew more suffers more cruelly than he who knew less. He who sinned out of malice suffers more keenly than he who sinned out of weakness. But nobody suffers more than he deserves.”

For he even has mercy on those whose souls are eternally destined for hell.

“God was merciful to us by not allowing our wicked wills to exhaust themselves on earth, as we should have been prepared to do. This would have increased our faults and our pains. He caused us to die before our time, as in my case, or had other mitigating circumstances intervene. Now He shows Himself merciful towards us by not compelling a closer approach than that afforded in this remote inferno.”

Humbling.

“Enter by the narrow gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way that leads to destruction, and many there are who enter that way. How narrow the gate and close the way that leads to life! And few there are who find it.” (Matt. 7:13, 14)

Some of us are convinced we love God, but in reality we do more to serve our own self-interests and desires. Instead of surrendering ourselves to serving God in small, simple and selfless ways which allow Him to work in our lives – we seek out “feelings” as a barometer to reassure ourselves that who we are, and what we’re doing is righteous, acceptable and holy. We desire the spiritual delights while ignoring the disciplines which are required to attain them. We hope for miracles, rather than trusting and working hard to repair our broken lives. We wander from the Way of the Cross in order to seek out our own type of spiritual condition with God (hoping that it be similar to that of mystics) – attempting to play God’s hand in our lives, instead of allowing Him to provide the gifts which He desired for us since the beginning.

How sad it is, O Jesus, when we ourselves are the cause of the loss of graces. Whoever understands this is always faithful.

—Saint Faustina
(Diary, 690)

Prolife students at Franciscan University of Steubenville protested Bill Clinton at a speech recently. They put up a video of his heated reaction to their protest on youtube:

Clinton’s reaction is instructive. Now admittedly it is hard to get the entire context of what Clinton is arguing because the voice quality is poor and one cannot make out the question from the Steubenville student. However, from what can be heard it seems that Clinton’s strategy is a form of ad hominem. What he attempts to do is to undermine the student’s credibility. Instead of discussing the issue of protecting the life of unborn children which seems to be that of the questioner, Clinton claims that to be authentically prolife one must want to put all women and their doctors in jail who engage in abortion.

Then he opines that this student will not admit to it because it would deny him political support if he were to admit such a thing. Clinton then makes an interesting claim that there is no one involved in politics today who has done more to reduce real abortions then he did as President…but he does not name any of his policy initiatives which support this claim. Then, he appears then to dismiss the entire prolife movement as nothing but TV adds spewing hot air. Finally he gives a plug for Hillary as one who will not be pushed around when it comes to standing up for personal rights.

It is common for those arguing in favor of abortion to keep the focus of the discussion away from one of whether anyone has the right to deny a human being the rights of personhood and to keep the discussion around the “rights” of previously born women. It is interesting that in his response he suggests that abortion is a bad thing by touting his efforts to decrease abortion but he is not clear as to why this should be so. It is apparently was a good thing that he was able to reduce the number of real abortions but if it is just a medical procedure then why would it matter?

The common ad hominem tactic for the proabort crowd is that once they have moved the discussion to be centered around women’s rights, they then move to cast their opponent as an enemy of women and women’s rights. This ad hominem approach is trotted out almost without exception.

What about his attempt to say that all prolifers must want to put women who abort, and their doctors, in jail? Well, this is a false dichotomy because it already presupposes that women must be able abort their children, at least in some cases. The prolife position need not be that women and their doctors go to jail; another option is that we all come to our senses and the government work together with the prolife movement to “re-educate” the population to understand that abortion is murder because an unborn child is just that…a child.

The claim that the prolifers are not forthright about their position because this would deny them political support says a lot about Clinton himself.  I believe that this is called projection.  While it is clear that the prolife movement ought to be concerned about the best way to save the lives of children, to assume that they are simply interested in putting forth a politically viable message does not look at the reality of the prolife movement itself.  Few prolifers are motivated by the same things that motivate all too many politicians, apparently including Clinton himself.  Rather, they are authentically concerned about the lives of mothers and their unborn children.

I remember the first inauguration of Dubya; it was as if a dark pall had been lifted from over the U.S.  The pall had primarily to do, in my mind, with U.S. policy as having been a world leader in promoting the culture of death world-wide.  Unfortunately, of the three candidates now most likely to be the next U.S. President, two of them are sure to bring back this pall…the third is a little more promising in this regard…but not nearly as much as is needed.  In any case, at least he is not likely to dismiss the prolife movement as a bunch of hot air.

I found an interesting commentary in the London Times Online from a Catholic priest, Fr. James Bell, a convert from Anglicanism. The commentary is sort of a review of a new book on Cardinal Newman entitled “John Henry Newman–A Mind Alive” by Msgr. Roderick Strange. However, Fr. Bell discusses other issues as well. He talks about the announcement of Cardinal Newman’s imminent beatification. He spends most of the commentary discussing Newman’s role in the ecumenical dialog between the Anglican Communion and the Catholic Church. Bell laments that so many members of the Communion have moved much further from their Anglican roots in terms of confession and moral teaching than was the case just 40 years ago. Fr. Bell seems to hold hope that the upcoming beatification can be an impetus for the movement of Anglicanism closer to reunity with the Church, perhaps based upon Newman’s conviction to ecumenism through trust and a radical commitment to Christian truth. However, he does not seem to be very confident this will be the case. He ends the article with the observation that Newman’s grave was desecrated just a few weeks ago and then wonders whether the the fruit from ecumenical talks will be worth the effort spent.

If I read him correctly then I can certainly affirm Fr. Bell’s sentiments. Reunion with Anglicanism seems quite bleak at this point for the reasons Fr. Bell points out: there is very little unity within it. The sense of unity within Anglicanism is one primarily of political unity rather than unity in Truth Himself. If one looks at its history, it would seem likely that this would eventually in our time, be the case.  The Church of England went from still relatively Catholic under Henry VIII, then radically reformed under Edward, and then Catholic again under Mary.  Elizabeth’s rise to the throne saw this see-saw come to an end because she saw the unity of the empire more important that unity in truth.  Elizabeth demanded compromises in the truth of the faith that she hoped would satisfy both the reformers and the Catholics. Thus, the heritage of Anglicanism seems to have been from the earliest days, any compromise in belief that is necessary in order to maintain political unity. Today we see the same thing happening with the ordination of bishops who openly practice their same sex attraction disorder and the attempt to strike whatever compromise is possible to maintain unity. Even Rowan Williams who had openly supported ordaining those with SSAD is now backtracking for the same of political union.

However, as bleak as things seem what is truly impossible for men is possible with God.  If the the Shoot can arise from the stump of Jesse, the dry bones can regather into living flesh, and the springtime in the Church that seems to be blossoming in the US and in other parts of the world is a reality, it is clear that God can bring about life where there appears only death.  Faithfulness and not the prospects of success is the reason why the ecumenical dialog is worthwhile regardless of how useless it might seem to be in human terms.  I am sure that Cardinal Newman and Fr.  Bell would agree. Cardinal Newman: Pray for Us!

From an early age, we like to formulate our own identities from the world around us and create appearances of how we would like to see ourselves, and we go about making ourselves “seen” in the world through our own personal images reflected back to us through the perceived notion of others. This process of “seeing” ourselves reflected in the world as an adolescent or adult has its problems, based on the premise that we want to see ourselves based on the things which appeal to us in the world, so it’s certainly possible that an undesirable type of self-serving and vanity driven social identity could develop. True encounters in life can’t be manufactured, and since so much of our lives are affected by the subconscious and unexpected, it’s only a matter of time until one is faced with the conundrum of either fighting for or fleeing from one’s own real self.

If our values and motives are based on nothing more than imitations of our own projected self, then in moments of crisis and conflict, we’ll find out (quite shockingly) how empty and impotent we really are. If our values are nothing more than a conformity to peer pressure and vanity, then we find out how easily our desires propel us down into the realm of self-destruction. When unexpected situations force us to look deep within ourselves, what can be revealed can be quite ugly and difficult to accept; and consequently, be the basis for trauma. For those who refuse to re-expose themselves and deal with their own darkness, emptiness and misery will ensue while they hopelessly try to seek fulfillment among the addictive and vain attachments to the world.

Some of the afflictions of those who deny the realities of their true selves will typically confuse pride with love, where they “give” with the expectation of receiving a commodity of greater value with the like of authority, positions of power and vain glory. They may cling to what they fear losing and feel unsatisfied regardless whatever is given in return. They may typically act as pure-bred victims, feeling totally dependent and exploited according to the whims of the world. Some may fantasize that sexuality has some sort of mysterious secret which will somehow relieve their social emptiness and ultimately release them of their fears in life and of their own mortality in death. Among all, is the deep loneliness which accompanies everyone who experiences the spiritual pain of losing one’s true-self.

Image Credit

California Catholic Daily had an article yesterday explaining what the San Francisco-based “Gay-Straight Alliance Network” is up to in their latest attempt to promote “marriage” for those who suffer from same sex attraction disorder and number of related affective pathologies. For the upcoming “Freedom to Marry Week” they want clubs in high schools and middle schools to go all out to promote this “fundamental human right — the right to marry those whom we love.”

In order to promote it they are suggesting decorating classrooms and hallways, holding mock weddings complete with wedding receptions with cake and toasts to the “freedom to marry.” One venue aimed at children as young as 14 years old is offering free drag shows and workshops on “safe sex” and “how to do drag.”

Of course, this is the long term strategy. One can see that these activists are hoping to influence enough young minds to become, if not activists themselves, at least favorable to their agenda. The strategy is an appeal to love, human rights, and equality. This seems quite difficult to argue against for many who do not have a solid moral grounding and/or insight into what this lifestyle really entails.

The real difficulty with arguing against this “rights language” is that society has come to distort the meaning of sexuality and marriage so badly that in its present deficient state, there seems little grounds for demonstrating the disordered nature of same sex attraction. This began when we swallowed the error that contraceptive sex within marriage is legitimate. In doing so we separated the inseparable aspects of the marital act–the procreative and the unitive. These two meanings form an inseparable unity just as the body and soul comprise two aspects of one unified human nature. In fact, there is a direct correlation between the marital act and this hylomorphic structure of the human person.

One can see that the procreative aspect of sexual intercourse, the primary end in the biological domain, corresponds to the material/bodily aspect of the human person. Likewise, the unitive aspect of marital intercourse, which weds two souls together, corresponds to the formal/soul aspect of the human person. Just as when one separates soul from body the person dies, when one attempts to separate the unitive from the procreative in marital intercourse, one destroys the marital act. It becomes, what we must admit is the ultimate end of artificial contraception any way, simply an act of hedonism in which pleasure–a fruit of the marital act–becomes the purpose of the act. Making this pleasurable secondary effect an end/purpose results in libidinism. In his work, Love and Responsibility, Karol Wojtyla shows that this libidinism necessarily results in the use (read exploitation) of each person by the other. This is the case even when both consent.

Once we destroyed the meaning of the marital act and treated in such a way that it is now clearly viewed primarily in terms of pleasure, we lost the ability to claim that the act must be reserved to marriage. Thirty years ago living with someone of the opposite sex prior to marriage was still a no no, for the most part, culturally. Today, the average person is often authentically surprised when they hear it suggested that there is actually something morally wrong with premarital intercourse or cohabitation. I see it every year with students and with RCIA.

Now since the marital act has been torn from its unified meaning as procreative and unitive in our culture, it now is free to be redefined however we choose. Add to this the fact that the no fault divorce debacle has led to the annihilation of the meaning of marriage itself, as a life long commitment of two people to one another and to their children. I would argue that the close correlation of the wide availability and “effective” artificial contraception beginning in the 1960s and the radical increase in the divorce rate and the free fall of the nuclear family all represent causally connected phenomena. Because of this destruction of the meaning of marriage and the marital act, some, of course, are choosing to make the case that anyone you can have sex with, you should be able to marry. Now is the opportune time as too many of us have lost the sense of nature and what is natural. All is now all open to redefinition based upon our whims…even the whims of disorder. At least in the sexual sphere, Nietzsche’s nihilistic, deconstructionist dream in his Gay Science is now upon us.

It is not the case that there is a large interest in marriage among those who suffer from these disorders. Rather, what we see in this movement is the manifestation of a phenomenon common to many who find themselves in a perpetual state of moral disorder. These suffering souls need continual reaffirmation that what they are doing is “really ok.” Any sense that there exists anyone, any place who would warn that they are not ok cannot be tolerated. All messages that something is not right with them must be removed.

This is what underlies the movement for “equality” in marriage. SSAD sufferers need continually reaffirmation from all quarters that same sex attraction is not a disorder. They need to hear from everyone that they are normal. This much can be seen from the totalitarian methods taken by many of those suffering from these disorders when they have the power, against anyone who would utter a word suggesting that there might be something wrong with SSAD. And this need for repeated reaffirmation will continue to be the case even when they do not hear anyone telling them they are not.

It is the fault of our society–read those of us in it– that we have promoted the conditions in which the arguments for “equality in marriage” are now compelling to so many. In truth, these disordered efforts to finally destroy the meaning of marriage are not the first volleys in the battle against marriage. Rather, they represent the final assault in a war whose first shot was heard in 1930 in the U.K. when the Anglican bishops meeting in Lambeth agreed that it was permissible to allow artificial contraception in marriage in some restricted cases. That was the initial crack in the windshield; today the windshield is nearing total structural failure.  Don’t be surprised if in the near future, your children or grandchildren will be taking as one of their required courses, How to do Drag…

My posts have been a little sparse around here for a while. Since last December Tricia and I have been looking for new digs as the place we were renting was being sold. Winter time is not an easy time to find a place in Champaign and so it became something of a full time job.  We did eventually find a place and spent the second half of January packing and, last weekend, moving. I will say that I found this experience to be something of a pre-Lenten preparation.

Besides having the house in boxes for such an extended period, we also experienced the movers’ joy of trying to track down everyone we do business with to give them our change of address. Then came the weekend for the move. The previous weekend it had been sunny and in the 50s. The day we picked up the UHaul it was in the 20s and what ended up being a winter storm with 8-10″ of snow was coming upon us. In a rush to get home and start loading the truck before the snow began to fall, I deftly maneuvered the 26′ diesel under… err… into a 10′ railroad bridge. Unfortunately, in my rush I forgot to check to see that the truck’s clearance was 12′. Not an experience I would recommend.

Any way, the damage was not as bad as it could have been (I didn’t peal the top completely off) and didn’t keep us from using the truck. We got home before the snow started to find the dolly had a flat tire. Tricia pulled the pump out from the trunk of her car and as we were filling the tires the snow began to fall. Snow on the deck of the truck works something like a coating of grease on a dance floor but fortunately this did not lead to any serious injuries. Alternating between shoveling the snow out of the way and loading boxes into the truck we actually made decent headway.

We eventually had to quit for the night. The next morning was a slow start as we first had to dig out of the near foot of snow before we could resume loading. Usually after such exercise I am ready for a nap. As further indication that this would be a special move, we heard the loud bang of a transformer blowing and lost power. The power eventually came back and the rest of the day/night of loading the truck and cleaning the old house was not too eventful but it was quite tiring. Unloading the truck went much more quickly. In fact, we had time to do some laundry that evening. Bad idea. The drain for the water exhaust from the washer was clogged and so we ended up with a basement full of water. Oh well, it was our first opportunity to try out the wet function in our wet/dry vac. A couple of days later, we had several inches of rain that melted the almost foot of snow.  Apparently this was too much for the four sets of sump pumps and water came seeping up through cracks in the basement floor…and it was back to the wetvac.

In between wetvac experiences, we had our RCIA retreat.  That was fun, except for falling on the ice on the way to the building and spraining my wrist.  This pain added to the already exquisite pain I already had in my shoulders and back from the moving, except that being my right hand it also slowed down much of my ability to unpack, reassemble furniture, etc.  Needless to say with both of us working, the injuries, and the continually appearing side escapades, the unpacking adventure is going pretty slowly.

So how has this been a pre-Lenten preparation?  Well Lent is ultimately about getting back to the basics in order to learn how to love more fully.  In other words, we were created in the image of Love.  We understand that this means that love is total self donation to God and to others.  However, as JPTG reminds us, we cannot give that which we do not first possess.  In order to love more fully we have to be fully self-possessed.  We have to be masters over ourselves.  This, in large part, is the purpose of Lenten penance, sacrifice, fasting, prayer, and almsgiving.  It is a time to refocus on these essentials of the Christian life.

Believe me; this move has provided ample opportunity to practice self mastery.  It has also given me the opportunity to find God’s blessings in what initially seem to be traumas.  It has allowed me the chance to set aside frustrations, to accept and offer them up along with a plethora of pain, and I think that it has helped me to better prepare to understand what I am supposed to be doing this Lent.  I can’t say that I have achieved the self-mastery and certainly not the depth of love for which I strive; however, I do think that I am a bit better prepared to work on it then I was before our odyssey began.

Holiness is not measured with “spiritual” feelings but with obedient perseverance.

You shall accept all sufferings with love. Do not be afflicted if your heart often experiences repugnance and dislike for sacrifice. All its power rests in the will, and so these contrary feelings, far from lowering the value of sacrifice in My eyes, will enhance it

—as told to Saint Faustina,
Diary, 1767

H/T Fr Alvin Kimel, Pontifications Purgatory as Self-Knowledge :

Humankind cannot bear to see the destruction and horror that it brings into the world, cannot bear to accept the responsibility for the injuries it has afflicted on others. Our offenses, infidelities, greed, lust, and violence ripple through families and communities, affecting people unto the third and fourth generation. We spend much of our time, both individually and corporately, protecting ourselves against this knowledge; – “Human kind”, T. S. Elliot

Like cursed offspring, mankind continues to suffer as a result of the sins of our ancestors past who sought refuge among the destructive sins of abortion, contraception, violence and sexual “freedoms”. In our quest of seeking out happiness and self fulfillment away from God, we develop into a type of spiritual hurricane with the hope of dwelling within the eye of the storm. The quick fixes, “personal choices” and alleged “rights” bring about the false sense of security one usually experiences while in the eye of a storm, holding on to a false hope of totally isolating themselves from the destruction and chaos of the storm swirling about them. The effects of our sins bring about a spiritually blindness, and through fear we learn to justify and accept the horror of abortion, the selfishness of contraception, the immoralities of lust and other immoral and unethical means of protecting the integrity of our selfish pride, comfort and safety. All the while, we believe we are making personal decisions and unaware that our evil deeds have become a new source of spiritual destruction, causing harmful scandal and suffering for generations to come and we allow injustices to go on, saying and doing nothing – out of fear and indifference, and for that we will be held accountable.

We see the meaning and the effects of ALL our sins in Purgatory—their effects on others as well as ourselves, both directly and indirectly, through chains of influence presently invisible, chains so long and effectual that we would be overwhelmed with responsibility if we saw them now. Only a few can endure the saint’s insight that “we are each responsible for all. – “Human kind”, T. S. Elliot

I’m feeling not so much in the judgmental mood right about now.

I know your works; I know that you are neither cold nor hot. I wish you were either cold or hot. So, because you are lukewarm, neither hot nor cold, I will spit you out of My mouth. For you say, “I am rich and affluent and have no need of anything,” and yet do not realize that you are wretched, pitiable, poor, blind, and naked. I advise you to buy from Me gold refined by fire so that you may be rich, and white garments to put on so that your shameful nakedness may not be exposed, and buy ointment to smear on your eyes so that you may see. Those whom I love, I reprove and chastise. Be earnest, therefore, and repent. —Revelation 3:15-19

We go to Mass and know all of our favorite prayers and devotions by heart and give thanks and praise to God for our charmed lives and blessings. We understand grace, sin, humility and so on. So it is, we intellectually practice our faith. We understand that we are ourselves sinners and the importance of showing tolerance, charity, forgiveness, mercy, etc..unto others. – Easy enough to intellectually understand and appreciate, “except for the grace of God – there go I“, but why is it so difficult for some of us to fully accept and embrace, to the point we faithfully live it?

By nature we are prouder than peacocks, we cling to the earth more than toads, we are baser than goats, more envious than serpents, greedier than pigs, fiercer than tigers, lazier than tortoises, weaker than reeds, and more changeable than weather-cocks. We have in us nothing but sin and deserve only the wrath of God and the eternity of hell. —Saint Louis Marie de Montfort, True Devotion to the Blessed Virgin, 79

In the fallen world which we live, there are those among us who develop a type of pathological, self-hating wretchedness and choose to intellectually run away from it’s associated pain by seeking out hedonistic means of “feeling good” while convincing ourselves that we were somehow superior to our enemies (which in itself can become an addictive behavior). Those of us who pick this particular path of self-destruction eventually become blind to one’s own wickedness, and many times project the evil from within onto any enemy of choice.

There are many among us who are in the process of healing from the sins of our past while desperately holding on to this deep seeded, dysfunctional coping mechanism, which ultimately makes for a self-discovery of one’s own wretched heart a slow and often painful process. Many will choose to never venture outside of their spiritual comfort zone and remain neither hot nor cold. Others will buy His gold refined by fire, and despite the struggles and many prideful falls along the way, one may hope to attain the prize of purifying clarity. For those who persevere through divine grace, will be the hope of loving God more deeply and seeking greater and greater purification from our wretchedness, which will ultimately make us free to love others as God loves us.

Image Credit