A bad fruit of Vatican Council II and the Novus Ordo, one which stinks to high Heaven (and you may take that literally), like the Durian or the 'Corpse Flower' (Amorphophallus titanum), is Cardinal Reinhard Marx's recent statement that homosexual couples can receive 'a blessing in the sense of a pastoral accompaniment'.
A couple of days ago I posted a list of the evil 'fruits' of Vatican II and the 'New Mass', and as if the Cardinal wished to furnish an example, and the Christchurch Botanic Gardens an illustration, it coincided with the story yesterday about the Cardinal's recent chat about homosexuals belonging to the Church's 'sacramental community', and 'blessing' homosexual couples.
A percipient reader of this blog wishes to add this fruit to my list. She asks "what the term 'pastoral accompaniment' means, and does it have the same meaning for all accompanying individual priests? Also if two people are in an active sexual homosexual relationship, how can their sin be blessed?"
She "flippantly" suggests that eventually all sin may be eliminated except for climate change denial and ant-'immigration sentiments. Many a true word is spoken in jest.
Cardinal Marx, head of the German Bishops' Conference, stated in an interview with the German magazine Der Stern, that he insisted on welcoming homosexuals. "They belong to the Church, also to the sacramental community".
At the Synod of Bishops on the Family (2014/2014) he said, "When people in a homosexual relationship are loyal to one another (sic) over years, are available to one another, and even take care of each other until death; then we as Church cannot make a bracket around this entire life, placing a minus sign in front of it and say that all of this has no worth because it takes place in a homosexual relationship."
Well excuse me, but in the eyes of the Church Marx quotes so freely, active homosexual relationships are seriously sinful. Marx may as well say that a couple of serial axe murderers who are 'loyal to one another, are available to one another' etc etc, they also belong to the Church's sacramental community and that he insists on welcoming axe murderers too.
The Church teaches that those who live in the state of mortal sin without the intention of changing their way of life are absolutely to be excluded from the sacraments.
What's more, what's the point of blessing active homosexuals or axe murderers? They have placed themselves outside grace; they have cut themselves off from Christ and His Church. "Christ is our life," says St Paul (Col 3:4) and so as St Thomas Aquinas says, "He is the source of our life."
If we are living in serious sin we are incapable of deriving any benefit from blessings, no matter how good it makes Cardinal Marx feel, or how much the media approve.
My reader says quite rightly that to be consistent, Cardinal Marx should also bless the sin of couples living in adultery and fornication (okay, I agree that 'axe murderers' is stretching the point somewhat).
"A blessing in the sense of a pastoral accompaniment" means, apparently, to Cardinal Marx, that "we can pray together". Fine for the Cardinal to pray - that is, if he's in a state of grace - but the prayers of people living in serious sin cannot be heard by God; spiritually speaking they are dead. "As a branch can't live once it's broken away from the trunk, neither can the soul live if separated from God" (Divine Intimacy, Fr Gabriel of St Mary Magdalen).
So Cardinal Reinhard Marx should certainly pray, not with active homosexuals because their prayers cannot be heard, but for them. So, of course, should we. As Father Gabriel adds:
"Every Christian ... must throw himself ardently into the battle against sin and fight it with the proper weapons: penance, expiatory prayer, and most of all, love.
When the love of charity is perfect, it destroys sin more efficaciously than the fire of purgatory. We see why the saints were able to convert so many souls. God used the fire of their charity to do away with sin in sinners."
Helen Carver says (in answer to my Facebook comment, "If the Cardinal wants to bless active homosexuals, why not axe murderers):
Probably because being
an axe murderer is completely different to loving another person also possibly
because Jesus Christ never mentioned homosexuality he only ever talked about
not being judgemental He told us to love each other unconditionally 💜
I say:
Admittedly - as I say above, and at the risk of repeating myself - axe murderers are an extreme example of my point, which is that in this context what active homosexuals and axe murderers have in common is that both types are in a state of serious sin, also called 'mortal sin' because the sin of both cause spiritual death to the soul. That may be all they have in common, but I draw the comparison only to show that both types of sinner have put themselves beyond the reach of God's grace. They have destroyed their spiritual life in its constituent elements of charity and grace.
Any kind of mortal sin, not just axe murders and sodomy, has this terrible effect: one might say that the soul has committed suicide.
Jesus never mentioned homosexuality because he didn't need to: it's condemned in Jewish law, and Jesus said, "Do not think I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets. I am come not to destroy, but to fulfil" (Mt 5:17).
Yes, judgment is reserved to God alone, but the fact is that God has judged sodomy as seriously sinful, and to judge the sin of sodomy doesn't mean condemning the sinner. I hope you see the difference.
The only real motive for loving one another is our love for God - to love others "propter Deum". Then we wish and work for others what God wishes and works for us: eternal life with Him, and for that we must ask forgiveness for our sins.
Bruce Tichbon says:
Julia, you say “The Church teaches…” By what "the Church teaches ..." I assume you mean the traditional teaching of the Church. I suspect that Cardinal Marx is developing a new 'teaching of the Church'.
Does Cardinal Marx care about the traditional teaching of the Church? Isn't 'pastoral accompaniment' most likely a way of saying he can ignore the traditional teaching of the Church?
Cardinal Marx acts as a lightning rod but do our bishops agree with what he says? I suspect so. Does the Pope agree with what he says? I suspect so. Are we being eased towards an LGBT-friendly Church? I suspect so.
A steady drip, drip of water wears away the stone. Will we wake up one morning and discover the liberal Catholic Church has officially accepted the LGBT agenda? I suspect so.
The United Methodist Church is about to split over the LGBT issue. They will even split their Church assets among those who accept LGBT, and those who do not. This appears to have happened because, I think, they have had the guts to confront the issues.
I suspect our hierarchy think a drip, drip approach will ease us to LGBT acceptance without a confrontation or splitting of assets.
When did the hierarchy even tell us what assets the Church has? Do they think it's our duty to stay, pray, pay and obey?
I suspect so.
Bob Gill says:
Without rocking the boat, I'm thinking.
I say:
It will cheer you up, I hope, to hear that a Brazilian bishop, Argemiro de Azevedo, has exemplified faith and courage by temporarily suspending a priest who had the cheek to defy Church teaching by blessing a homosexual partnership of two men.
A video - https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/brazilian-bishop-suspends-priest-for-blessing-homosexual-partnership
- shows this Judas priest miming the aversion he should properly feel by turning his back, and covering his eyes, while the men kissed after exchanging promises, as he'd invited them to do.
It makes your blood run cold.
Would the Judas priest have dared to do it if he were not encouraged by the Pope's 'inclusive' attitude towards LGBTQ++++ you-name-it?
Teresa Coles says:
Illumination of conscience can't come soon enough for the world.
Bob Gill says:
Fair comment, Teresa.
Helen Carver says:
Good points but Jesus did say do not kill, do not steal which also should have gone without saying I do find it curious that He doesn't mention homosexuality whereas he was always telling women not to be promiscuous albeit in a context of trying to protect them. I cannot believe that it is wrong for two men to be in a consensual loving exclusive relationship I know quite a few gay couples who are very happy together after many years of personal torment trying to find themselves and, having endured contempt and judgment from family members and others, have finally felt free to be who they really are I feel it is would be cruel and wrong for the Church to exclude them
I say:
Jesus had nothing to say about homosexuality because – believe it or not – homosexuality is a modern concept which would have been unintelligible to the Jewish society of His time.
St Paul said that male prostitutes and sodomites, among other ‘bad people’ will not inherit the kingdom of God, but he named them as only two categories of sinners among multiple others. We can infer that homosexuality was not the obsession for Jesus and the New Testament writers that it is for us in the 21st century. In fact it was unheard of.
Bruce Tichbon says:
Julia, you say “The Church teaches…” By what "the Church teaches ..." I assume you mean the traditional teaching of the Church. I suspect that Cardinal Marx is developing a new 'teaching of the Church'.
Does Cardinal Marx care about the traditional teaching of the Church? Isn't 'pastoral accompaniment' most likely a way of saying he can ignore the traditional teaching of the Church?
Cardinal Marx acts as a lightning rod but do our bishops agree with what he says? I suspect so. Does the Pope agree with what he says? I suspect so. Are we being eased towards an LGBT-friendly Church? I suspect so.
A steady drip, drip of water wears away the stone. Will we wake up one morning and discover the liberal Catholic Church has officially accepted the LGBT agenda? I suspect so.
The United Methodist Church is about to split over the LGBT issue. They will even split their Church assets among those who accept LGBT, and those who do not. This appears to have happened because, I think, they have had the guts to confront the issues.
I suspect our hierarchy think a drip, drip approach will ease us to LGBT acceptance without a confrontation or splitting of assets.
When did the hierarchy even tell us what assets the Church has? Do they think it's our duty to stay, pray, pay and obey?
I suspect so.
Bob Gill says:
Without rocking the boat, I'm thinking.
I say:
It will cheer you up, I hope, to hear that a Brazilian bishop, Argemiro de Azevedo, has exemplified faith and courage by temporarily suspending a priest who had the cheek to defy Church teaching by blessing a homosexual partnership of two men.
A video - https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/brazilian-bishop-suspends-priest-for-blessing-homosexual-partnership
- shows this Judas priest miming the aversion he should properly feel by turning his back, and covering his eyes, while the men kissed after exchanging promises, as he'd invited them to do.
It makes your blood run cold.
Would the Judas priest have dared to do it if he were not encouraged by the Pope's 'inclusive' attitude towards LGBTQ++++ you-name-it?
Teresa Coles says:
Illumination of conscience can't come soon enough for the world.
Bob Gill says:
Fair comment, Teresa.
Helen Carver says:
Good points but Jesus did say do not kill, do not steal which also should have gone without saying I do find it curious that He doesn't mention homosexuality whereas he was always telling women not to be promiscuous albeit in a context of trying to protect them. I cannot believe that it is wrong for two men to be in a consensual loving exclusive relationship I know quite a few gay couples who are very happy together after many years of personal torment trying to find themselves and, having endured contempt and judgment from family members and others, have finally felt free to be who they really are I feel it is would be cruel and wrong for the Church to exclude them
I say:
Jesus had nothing to say about homosexuality because – believe it or not – homosexuality is a modern concept which would have been unintelligible to the Jewish society of His time.
St Paul said that male prostitutes and sodomites, among other ‘bad people’ will not inherit the kingdom of God, but he named them as only two categories of sinners among multiple others. We can infer that homosexuality was not the obsession for Jesus and the New Testament writers that it is for us in the 21st century. In fact it was unheard of.
One of my closest friends ever is a homosexual who is assumed
to be living in a homosexual relationship. But the fact that I love him dearly doesn’t
make his putative relationship right in the eyes of God.
Your belief - widely held among intelligent Mass-going Catholics - is yet another sour fruit of the years of Novus Ordo and its terrible, short-hand delivery of Catholic teaching.
'Many years of personal torment' doesn't even begin to compare with the eternity of torment that awaits practising homosexuals and the priests and bishops and popes who have been 'cruel and wrong' in failing to teach the Gospel truth on this issue.
No comments:
Post a Comment