CMTV's New Series: "Dispatches"

Michael Voris and CMTV have created a new series of shows called "Dispatches" - as in "important communications sent from the front lines of battle". 

This week's Vortex episodes will be debuting 5 "Dispatches" subtitled "The Demolition of the Faith".  It's loaded with statistics about the state of the Church, and while they are depressing stats, they are necessary. After all, how many priests and prelates are still denying that there even IS a crisis? 

This is well worth watching; I'm looking forward to the rest of the segments.

Fr. Belitz Undermines Catholic Identity in Perth Parishes

Fr. Justin Belitz, OFM, has recently been in Perth, Australia, giving his "Success: Full Living" mission at various schools and parishes. Never heard of him? Well…you might consider that a blessing. He was born and raised in Omaha, Nebraska; entered the Franciscan Order in 1954; and was ordained a priest in 1961. See his website here; his “Franciscan Hermitage” in Indianapolis, Indiana is described as:

...an international, inter-faith, life center dedicated to the spiritual, emotional, physical, intellectual and professional growth and formation of persons of all persuasions and circumstances.

We offer a variety of workshops, lectures, classes and support groups, each designed to empower individuals on their journeys of faith and wholeness.

It’s not even Christian, let alone Catholic. In a video on his website, Fr. Belitz justifies the non-Catholicity of his organization by saying that Vatican II told us to “reach out to other traditions” because no one religion has a monopoly on the whole truth. (Funny…I thought Catholicism had the fullness of the truth!) Fr. Belitz is all about "personal success and fulfillment". I don't see much about sacrifice on his website, or about happiness in Heaven rather than "happiness" on earth. There's not much to support a Catholic identity, and much to undermine it.

Before we go any further, let’s look at what Fr. Belitz has been up to Down Under.

Fr. Belitz has led retreats entitled “Success: Full Living” at several parishes in the Perth (Western Australia) area. For instance, the Parish of Sts. John and Paul in Willetton advertised the September 1-5 event at their parish/school website, saying in part:

Fr. Justin is able to help people of every age, race or religion to find their way to a full happy life, promised to us by Jesus. He shares how relaxation, meditation and prayer are keys to achieving that goal by integrating mind, body and spirit. Most of all, he is a very engaging and entertaining speaker who helps us all to cope and thrive with the daily challenges that life throws to us.

Similarly, there was Fr. Belitz-led “Parish Mission and Renewal” at Floreat Wembley Parish (an “amalgamation” of two parishes) from Sept. 15-20. A description of the event appears on the parish website; it says, in part:

The integration of mind, body and spirit will form the agenda for Fr. Justin over the course of our parish mission and renewal. It is his belief that meditation is a key tool in dealing with life's problems. Through the use of meditation and quietly turning inward, one is able to tap into a source of unlimited energy.

There are certainly some red-flag type words there…but of course, it’s all intentionally vague so as to avoid any hint of not-quite-Catholic teaching.  

Fr. Belitz’s background is hardly that of a priest any faithful Catholic would want to listen to! For one thing, his participation in a blasphemous 2004 film entitled “Jesus and Her Gospel of Yes”…that’s right, Jesus portrayed as a woman. You can see the trailer here (though I don’t really recommend watching it; still, I leave you the choice); the closing line is something about “a gospel of hope from God’s little girl”. Ugh.

The director’s summary of the film is available here and leaves no doubt that the film is intentionally blasphemous! Further, the director describes Fr. Belitz:

Fr. Justin Belitz gives us an erotic sermon. Fr. Justin is, admittedly, a bit of a guru to me and possibly the most profound influence I've had in my life. He is certainly not a typical priest and in short, his is an avant-theology. Many of his homilies focus on sensuous spirituality and meditation. Fr. Justin also never refrains from displaying a sense of humor and here we have all that in abundance.

Flame Ministries International, which is a canonical Public Association of Christ’s Faithful headquartered in Perth, has an article about Fr. Belitz; the article touches on everything that is wrong with this man’s “theology” and “ministry”. It’s a long list, including a history of involvement with Silva Mind Control. The article begins with a quote allegedly from Fr. Belitz: “I think that the Christian tradition has done a great disservice to organized religion by concentrating on adoration of Jesus Christ.”

With that background, one wonders why the hierarchy in the Perth area has essentially condoned Fr. Belitz’s appearances there. In fact, here we see “Justin” (as he calls himself) with Archbishop Timothy Costello.

And the sad fact is, Fr. Belitz has been offering this non-Catholic (if not anti-Catholic) twaddle to CATHOLICS with the consent of their bishops, for decades.

But Michael Voris? Naaah. He doesn't have the right "tone".

Feast of St. Michael the Archangel

In the old calendar, today is the Feast of the Dedication of the Basilica of St. Michael the Archangel. The new calendar calls it the Feast of the Saints Michael, Gabriel, and Raphael, Archangels. In the old calendar, the feastof St. Michael takes precedence over the Sunday after Pentecost, but in the new calendar, the Sunday is given priority.

The excerpt below is from the lessons for the office of matins in the Divine Office. The archaic translation may cause a little stumbling in your reading of it, but it still makes the point!

The Lesson is taken from the Sermons of Pope St Gregory the Great.
 34th on the Gospels.

 

We say that there are nine Orders of Angels, for, by the witness of the holy Word, we know that there be Angels, Archangels, Mights, Powers, Principalities, Dominions, Thrones, Cherubim, and Seraphim. Nearly every page of the holy Word witnesseth that there be Angels and Archangels. The books of the Prophets, as is well known, do oftentimes make mention of Cherubim and Seraphim. Paul, writing to the Ephesians, counteth up the names of four Orders, where he saith

The Father of glory.. raised (Christ) from the dead, and set Him at His own right hand in the heavenly places, far above all Principality, and Power, and Might, and Dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this world, but also in that which is to come.

And the same, again, writing to the Colossians, saith:

(By (the Son) were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible,) whether they be Thrones, or Dominions, or Principalities, or Powers; (all things were created by Him and for Him.)

If, then, we add the Thrones to the four Orders of which he spake unto the Ephesians, we have five Orders; and when we add unto them the Angels and the Archangels, the Cherubim and the Seraphim, we find that the Orders of Angels are beyond all doubt nine.

But we must know that the word Angel is the designation, not of a nature, but of an office.  

Those holy spirits in the heavenly fatherland are always spirits, but they may no wise be always called Angels, (which is, being interpreted, messengers,) for they are Angels only when they are sent as Messengers. Hence also it is said by the Psalmist, ciii. 5, Who makest spirits thine Angels! x as if it were, Of them who are always with Him as spirits, He doth somewhiles make use as Messengers. They who go on the lesser messages are called Angels they who go on the greater Archangels.

Hence it is that unto the Virgin Mary was sent no common Angel, but the Archangel Gabriel. For the delivery of this, the highest message, it was meet that there should be sent the highest Angel. Their individual names also are so given as to signify the kind of ministry wherein each is powerful. Michael signifieth Who-is-like-unto-God? Gabriel, the Strength-of-God,and Raphael, the Medicine-of-God.

As often as anything very mighty is to be done, we see that Michael is sent, that by that very thing, and by his name, we may remember that none is able to do as God doeth. Hence that old enemy whose pride hath puffed him up to be fain to be like unto God, even he who said, I will ascend unto heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God… I will be like the Most High, (Isa. xiv. 13, 14,) this old enemy, when at the end of the world he is about to perish in the last death, having no strength but his own, is shown unto us a-fighting with Michael the Archangel, even as saith John, Apoc. xii. 7:  

There was war in heaven Michael and his Angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels.  

Unto Mary is sent Gabriel, whose name is interpreted the Strength of God, for he came to herald the appearing of Him Who was content to appear lowly that He might fight down the powers of the air.  

Raphael, also, as we have said, signifieth the Medicine-of-God, and it is the name of him who touched as a physician the eyes of Tobias, and cleared away his blindness.

*****     *****     *****

We need the St. Michael prayer now more than ever! The well-known short version of this prayer follows in English and Latin. The Pope ordered this prayer to be recited daily after Low Mass in all the churches throughout the Catholic world. However, this practice was almost completely swept away in the 1960s by liturgical changes made in the wake of Vatican Council II.

Saint Michael the Archangel, defend us in battle,

be our protection against the malice and snares of the devil.

May God rebuke him we humbly pray;

and do thou, O Prince of the Heavenly host,

by the power of God,

 thrust into hell Satan and all evil spirits

who wander through the world

for the ruin of souls. Amen.

Sancte Michael Archangele, defende nos in praelio.

Contra nequitiam et insidias diaboli esto praesidium.

Imperet illi Deus, supplices deprecamur.

Tuque princeps militiae caelestis,

Satanam aliosque spiritus malignos,

qui ad perditionem animarum pervagantur in mundo

divina virtute in infernum detrude. Amen.

Vortex: "New Tone"?

Michael Voris nails it again, concerning the alleged "obsession" of the Church with abortion, homosexual marriage, and contraception. The gist of the September 25 Vortex is this:

…[E]xactly when and where was this “obsession” on the part of Church leaders and her clergy on preaching about, for example, contraception, that so many church leaders are all rushing to the barricades now to foreswear, to pledge to TONE down their incessant preaching about because there is suddenly a new “TONE”.

What’s new about it? How is being silent for the past 40 years going to be different from being silent moving forward from here. Silence is pretty silent and sounds pretty much like any other silence.

 MV isn’t alone in this appraisal, either. LifeSiteNews quoted Bishop Robert F. Vasa ‘s reaction to the media reports that the Pope has said that the Church must not be “obsessed” by issues like abortion, homosexuality, and contraception.

 “I certainly do know that there are individuals, and I certainly would probably be among them, who firmly believe that these are core cultural issues about which we must be vocal,” the prelate told the Press Democrat on Friday. “But I'm not obsessed about them. A vast majority of the things that I write do not include abortion as a topic or contraception or divorce and remarriage.”

“Is there a need for teaching about those things? Absolutely. Are there some folks who overstep the boundary and say, 'OK we're preaching about this every single Sunday?' Well, there may be. But there's a vast majority of people who never talk about it,” he continued.

“[If] everyone talked about it a little, there would be fewer who feel the need to talk about it more,” he added. [go here for the rest of the story]

MV notes that “the application of ‘new tone’ hasn’t worked for 50 plus years” and adds:

The churches are emptying out and closing and yet Church leaders are positively giddy about now being able to stop talking about the sins that send souls to Hell and start speaking with a “new tone”.

And that “new tone” is being met with glee by the secular media and others:

When Jane Fonda and Chris Rock are cheering on you and your new tone, you better watch out. They aren’t cheering you on because they have suddenly had a Damascus moment and are agreeing with you. They are cheering you on because they hope or actually think that YOU now agree with THEM, or at the very least can now be persuaded to come over to their side.

 MV also mentions that notorious meme gleaned from the NARAL website that thanks Pope Francis on behalf of "pro-choice women". Says MV:

They aren’t saying thank you for showing us the light so that we can now convert to the truth.

They aren’t saying thank you for bringing us to the realization of the paschal mystery and our path to salvation.

They aren’t saying thank you for bringing to them the light of revelation and the glorious mysteries of the Catholic Church.

They are saying thank you for giving them the moral license to now fire back at pro-lifers and faithful Catholics who have spent decades in front of the abortion chambers praying for the killing to end.

Here's the Vortex:

The script:

Lots of cowardly clerics are most delighted at the Pope’s interview because they feel and are even saying, in so many words, that they are now off the hook. For years, they’ve kept their mouths shut about the hot button issues of sexual morality. Cardinal Dolan even admitted that – as if ANYONE needed his guilty admission to know the truth of the matter.

Unlike John Paul and Benedict, who many of them just ignored when it came to stressing the importance of defeating these evils, now they finally have a Pope who they can interpret to mean, “Phew, glad we don’t have to mention those things anymore” as if they had ever in reality lifted one blessed finger to preach against these evils in the first place.

And to the precise point, exactly when and where was this “obsession” on the part of Church leaders and her clergy on preaching about, for example, contraception, that so many church leaders are all rushing to the barricades now to foreswear, to pledge to TONE down their incessant preaching about because there is suddenly a new “TONE”.

What’s new about it? How is being silent for the past 40 years going to be different from being silent moving forward from here. Silence is pretty silent and sounds pretty much like any other silence.

Please. The mainstream MEDIA is the institution that informed the world of the Church’s teaching about sexual morality in an obsessed fashion – non-stop, 24hrs a day, every 24 hour news cycle you can imagine.

Most clergy, including bishops, were already ignoring the sins that send more souls to Hell than any other, so warns the Queen of Heaven at Fatima, or they were busy in confession outright denying that any of these acts are sinful.

You will have to hunt from here into eternity on the US Bishops website for statements condemning contraception for example, which threatens an everlasting damnation of the person, and you will have to hunt under mountains of press releases stressing immigration reform and welfare policy which have no intrinsic power to damn a soul.

John the Baptist had no such tone that some bishops and others are ascribing to Pope Francis.

Our Lord had no such tone. St. Peter had no such tone. It’s not clear that St. Paul even would have understood what the word “tone” even meant.

The application of “new tone” hasn’t worked for 50 plus years.

The churches are emptying out and closing and yet Church leaders are positively giddy about now being able to stop talking about the sins that send souls to Hell and start speaking with a “new tone”.

The churches are emptying out and closing and yet Church leaders are positively giddy about now being able to stop talking about the sins that send souls to Hell and start speaking with a “new tone”.

Again – how will the new tone, be anything different from the old current tone? When Jane Fonda and Chris Rock are cheering on you and your new tone, you better watch out. They aren’t cheering you on because they have suddenly had a Damascus moment and are agreeing with you. They are cheering you on because they hope or actually think that YOU now agree with THEM, or at the very least can now be persuaded to come over to their side.

Why else does anyone think they are all tripping over each other to issue press releases and statements praising the pope? Funny…didn’t see ONE statement or press release from them the next day when the pope roundly and solidly condemned abortion in the strongest tone AND words he has used since his election.

Same question - Why else would the pro-abortion group NARAL almost immediately create and post a meme on their Facebook page saying “Thank you, Pope Francis from pro-choice women everywhere.”

They aren’t saying thank you for showing us the light so that we can now convert to the truth.

They aren’t saying thank you for bringing us to the realization of the paschal mystery and our path to salvation.

They aren’t saying thank you for bringing to them the light of revelation and the glorious mysteries of the Catholic Church.

They are saying thank you for giving them the moral license to now fire back at pro-lifers and faithful Catholics who have spent decades in front of the abortion chambers praying for the killing to end.

The issue is about saving souls. Every action done, every word uttered must be measured against this standard.

Will this encourage Jane Fonda to REPENT and become an authentic Catholic? Will she hang up her weapons of mass contraception and renounce a lifetime strategy of global population reduction through abortion and contraception?

Just what part of the “good news” has she suddenly embraced, so much so that she is praising the Vicar of Christ on earth? Same types of questions for Chris Rock and all the other cultural elitists who have lived against and even actively fought against the truth with every fiber of their beings for most of the lives.

These statements about “loving the pope” and “the pope is great” aren’t born out of any conversion and desire to repent; they are born out the smell of blood in the water. They are moving in for the kill – they think.

But at the end of the day, the Church is Christ’s. Not the pope’s, not the bishops’ or any other cowardly clerics’.

She is His Bride, and He will not suffer forever Her mourning in the marketplace and desecration of Her altars and confessionals. He is allowing this scourge of contradiction and humiliation, of being mocked and laughed to scorn by Her enemies, to bring about salvation for some souls, somewhere at some time.

In the meantime, amidst all the verbal and emotional stoning going on, stand fast – while the faith is full of mystery, it is also quite simple.

Loving God means more than just feeling a certain way. He Himself has told us what it means – if you love me, you will keep my commandments.

Another Diocese Bans Michael Voris

UPDATE: thanks to Christine Niles for this comment:

Contact info for Diocese of Evansville: (812) 424-5536
Bishop Charles Thompson: cthompson@evdio.org 

We should each contact the diocese to let them know we are unhappy with their double standard. That won't necessarily change anything, but at least they are on alert that people are aware of the hypocrisy. 

***   ***   ***   ***

My friend “CK” reported to me a few weeks ago that some of his cohorts had been able to arrange a talk by Michael Voris at “The Centre” in Evansville, Indiana – MV will be there this coming Saturday, September 28.

But CK also tells me that a priest of that diocese reported to another correspondent:

 “…Just for your information, the bishop spoke about this at the priests' meeting earlier today. He instructed us that we are not to promote Mr. Voris' events, and that Mr. Voris is not to appear on diocesan property. I don't know the story behind the directive; I just know what the bishop has told us. We can talk about it more tomorrow, if you'd like. Peace!"

Well, of course it seems to be not all that unusual for MV to be banned from speaking on parish/diocesan property in various dioceses around the nation. But CK brings up this point about the Evansville Diocese:

So, it's okay for a known dissident, Sr. Joan Chittister, to "appear on diocesan property" but  not  Michael Voris, who is totally and completely orthodox and has support of certain bishops.  

The event CK was referring to occurred last April 12 and 13; here’s an excerpt from an eye-witness summary of what Sr. Joan discussed:

On April 12 and 13, the tri-state area had a nationally known guest speaker, Sister Joan Chittister, O.S.B. Sister Chittister's speech on April 12 was entitled, "God: the Feminine in the Divine," and was funded by the Sisters of Benedict of Ferdinand, along with the Women of the Rule, a philanthropic circle sponsored by the Sisters.  

…I had the opportunity to listen to both of her speaking engagements, and I would like to quickly touch on one issue she indirectly mentioned and another that was a major focus of one of her speeches. Though the idea of women's ordination was never directly raised, there were vague references that questioned the sanity of male leadership in many areas.

…It has also become a popular myth in certain circles to commit a major error by implying that God is feminine, that God has a feminine nature or that God has both a feminine and masculine nature. This was a main focus during Sr. Chittister's Friday night presentation…

Now, of course, the Diocese of Evansville could claim – as happened recently in the Archdiocese of Detroit – that these talks were not held on Diocesan property. However, Sister Joan did get a mention in the Diocesan newspaper:

Dissident nun: IN

Benedictine Sister Joan Chittister Presentation at Monastery Immaculate Conception, April 13, 2 p.m., Ferdinand; Sister Joan Chittister will speak on “The Radical Christian Life: Rediscovering Benedictinism for Our Times,” question and answer period will follow; for more information contact Benedictine Sister Maureen Tobin at mtobin@benetvision.org or Greg Eckerle at geckerle@thedome.org.

The topic of MV’s presentation this Saturday will be: “Catholics Must Stand Up Against the Intrinsic Evil of Abortion”, and yet priests are not to promote the event! Oh yeah…that’s one of those issues we’re obsessing over…

Anyway, the reason MV is speaking on that issue is that a local hospital in Evansville performs abortions. And while the hospital is not itself a Catholic hospital (though that doesn’t make its practice of abortion any less egregious), the physician who does occasional abortions is alleged to be a "practicing" Catholic (in a neighboring diocese, though; not Evansville).

CK notes that:

The CEO of Deaconess Hospital's "Women's Clinic" is allegedly a practicing Catholic. This is where the terminations [abortions – the hospital’s official documents use the euphemism] are taking place.

The person who oversees all of the Deaconess Hospital agencies and/or affiliates is a former nun (OSB, as I understand it) and wrote the policy on Deaconess' position on pregnancy termination. From my source, this lady is also allegedly a practicing Catholic. The main "campus" for Deaconess Hospital is downtown Evansville.

My source also told me that the board members for Southwest Indiana Right to Life have spoken with our bishop on this situation.

So…liberal, progressive, modernist, dissident nuns: IN. Orthodox faithful Catholic layman: OUT.

Sounds like business as usual. But really, why in the world are Sr. Joan Chittister and her ilk allowed to speak anywhere that boasts of a Catholic affiliation?

Vortex: The Pope's Interview

Frankly, I’m a little weary of all the haranguing over “the Pope’s 12,000 Word Interview”, which seems to have taken on a life all its own. But in the September 24 Vortex episode, MV makes his usually good points – and it’s not about defending the Pope, or making sure we know what the Pope really said, either.

MV notes that

…there is a tension in living out of Catholic life.  Every Catholic who cares for and loves the faith knows this and has experienced it.

The tension is brought about by trying to hold two (or more) SEEMING contradictions in balance with one another.

No, he’s not talking about apparent contradictions between Church teaching and what the Pope is quoted as saying. He’s talking about the profound and sublime teachings of the Church:

Three Persons in One God; two natures in One person; the Immaculate Conception; Jesus Christ under the appearance of bread and wine; victory through death and so forth. None of these is a contradiction – they just need deep, deep reflection because they are difficult to get our little finite minds around. They are paradoxes – not contradictions.

And then he comes to the heart of the issue that has arisen from the Pope’s Interview:

Today, the Church finds Herself in a state of paradox that many wrongfully claim is a contradiction. It is the tension between the DOCTRINAL approach and the PASTORAL approach.

They have been set in opposition to each other – almost as if one is right and the other is wrong.

Exactly!! And of course that’s the wrong way to look at it. Both “approaches” are necessary, and they are both inherent in Church teaching, which reflects, of course, the teaching and example of Her Founder, Our Lord Jesus Christ. MV explains:

[Setting them in opposition] is not only stupid, it’s also un-Christlike. Did the good shepherd not come to earth and impart sound teaching THAT MUST BE FOLLOWED for our salvation? “If you love me, you will keep my commandments (there’s the doctrinal part) and my Father and I will come to you and We will make Our home in you (there’s the pastoral part).

MV also touches on that unfortunate remark of the Pope’s that the Church is too focused on abortion, same-sex “marriage”, and contraception.  He says:

The one thing that is curious about some of the Pope’s impressions is that the Church is always going on about abortion and same-sex marriage and contraception. REALLY?

When is the last time a priest strode into the pulpit and gave a fire and brimstone about contraception that you can remember? When is the last time a bishop – or a bishops’ conference issued any statement about the depravity of an unmarried couple living together.

Yes. I must say, my jaw certainly dropped when I read that the Pope was saying that we talk about these things too much. I’ve seldom heard a homily touching on any of those issues. I have heard a little about abortion in the last few years, and I’ve heard one priest has vehemently denounced same-sex “marriage” from the pulpit. I have never, ever heard a homily that condemns artificial contraception.

Back to MV:

It is the MEDIA which has painted this picture of a Church constantly hammering these themes.

The vast majority of faithful Catholics know these things are seldom, if ever mentioned in any substantive way on the parish level – they aren’t even talked about and requests TO talk about the doctrines is usually swept away with an excuse that it wouldn’t be pastoral.

So one does wonder where His Holiness’ perception comes from of a Church emphasizing doctrinal over pastoral care – obsessing about them.

Here’s the Vortex:

The script:

Many words have been spoken and much ink has been spilled these past few days about the Pope’s recent interview that the media ran wild with.

But something to keep in mind is this – there is a tension in living out of Catholic life.  Every Catholic who cares for and loves the faith knows this and has experienced it.

The tension is brought about by trying to hold two (or more) SEEMING contradictions in balance with one another. The faith is rife with these things – Three Persons in One God; two natures in One person; the Immaculate Conception; Jesus Christ under the appearance of bread and wine; victory through death and so forth.

None of these is a contradiction – they just need deep, deep reflection because they are difficult to get our little finite minds around. They are paradoxes – not contradictions.

Today, the Church finds Herself in a state of paradox that many wrongfully claim is a contradiction. It is the tension between the DOCTRINAL approach and the PASTORAL approach.

At the heart of all the heartache by faithful Catholics VERSUS the celebration and party atmosphere of unfaithful Catholics over the Pope’s interview is the failure to fully appreciate this tension between pastoral and doctrinal.

They have been set in opposition to each other – almost as if one is right and the other is wrong. That is not only stupid, it’s also un-Christlike. Did the good shepherd not come to earth and impart sound teaching THAT MUST BE FOLLOWED for our salvation? “If you love me, you will keep my commandments (there’s the doctrinal part) and my Father and I will come to you and We will make Our home in you (there’s the pastoral part).

This pastoral vs. doctrinal false dichotomy that first arose in the seminaries near the end of the 19^th century has rained down mass confusion on the Church by being exploited by many clergy.

Down here, on the street level where the ground troops are, it has resulted in the falsely expressed notion that God is so loving that he would never throw anyone in Hell forever – and of course, the quite logical extension of that premise is therefore, leading an immoral life, while regrettable isn’t THAT big a problem.

The Pastoral VERSUS Doctrinal battle has created the further erroneous perception that there is opposition between God’s Mercy and His Justice. Again, a massively absurd and ill-conceived proposition.

It is the tension between Pastoral and Doctrinal dimensions of the Church that we find so very present in the Pope’s interview. Living with life’s tensions is part of life. Parents are most familiar with this in the case of raising their children.

When a child desperately wants something which MAY be harmful to him – MAY be – and a parent’s first reaction is to say no because of the POSSIBLE harm, then the protests or arguments of the child tend to have the effect of perhaps softening the parents initial sense. They consider, for example, if perhaps their firmness might have the effect of alienating their son – which could be an even worse harm than the initial possible harm.

This is one of life’s millions of tensions, so we shouldn’t be surprised in seeing this exhibited in the Pope’s own thoughts – none of which by the way here are infallible – they are his considered opinions born of his life experience and circumstances expressed in an off-the-cuff kind of way.

For the media and many unfaithful Catholic and enemies of the Faith – they get great glee from these words and play them up incessantly because in many, many cases, they live lives of gross depravity and sexual immorality and DON’T WANT TO CHANGE. So to them, this feels like a triumph – “see, even the Pope agrees,” they claim. “Stop telling me I can’t live with my same sex partner or my live in girlfriend.”

For the faithful beleaguered Catholic who is down in the trenches doing everything to fight the good fight and hold back the flood, the spin on the pope’s words is massively deflating.

It IS pastoral to tell someone they need to live a moral life. Is there a way to say it that such a person might respond to it better than another way it would be presented – sure, but that depends on the hearer. Some people need to hear things bluntly. Others don’t like hearing things directly because they get their feelings hurt to easily and so forth.

The one thing that is curious about some of the Pope’s impressions is that the Church is always going on about abortion and same-sex marriage and contraception. REALLY?

When is the last time a priest strode into the pulpit and gave a fire and brimstone about contraception that you can remember? When is the last time a bishop – or a bishops’ conference issued any statement about the depravity of an unmarried couple living together.

It is the MEDIA which has painted this picture of a Church constantly hammering these themes.

The vast majority of faithful Catholics know these things are seldom, if ever mentioned in any substantive way on the parish level – they aren’t even talked about and requests TO talk about the doctrines is usually swept away with an excuse that it wouldn’t be pastoral.

So one does wonder where His Holiness’ perception comes from of a Church emphasizing doctrinal over pastoral care – obsessing about them.

Nonetheless, it is this false dichotomy between pastoral and doctrinal - set up by the media and by many in the Church who want to undo Her moral teachings – that is to blame for much of the deep concern over the Pope’s interviews.

For example, for the intrepid souls of the 40 Days for Life Campaign, are they being too “doctrinal” “too obsessed” by standing outside abortion chambers – highlighting the sanctity of life AND the evil of child murder?

Or are they motivated by pastoral love and concern for the child and the mother – and the abortionist for that fact?

And what about the parents pleading with their homosexual son to not go down that path of giving into his passions – wherever they come from? Are they being doctrinal by warning him of Hell or are they being pastoral in wanting to help him choose the path to heaven. Again – a false dichotomy. They are being both!

For the past 50-60 years, there has been an effort on the part of many in the Church to play up pastoral care to such a degree that essentially ignore doctrine.

Many times, this is to make them feel good about their own moral failings – which often times are sexual and frequent. Sometimes, it is owing to a worshipping at the altar of feelings and emotions – where they place too much emphasis on these things to the detriment of truth.

But these things cannot be separated any more than you can separate the heads from the tails of a coin.

A perfect example of this is the very next day after the Pope’s interview was released and his words created headlines about abortion not being that big a deal,His Holiness blasted abortion at a meeting with gynecologists who he told, that every child that is killed, that child bears the face of Our Blessed Lord and that every child aborted has been unjustly condemned.

What needs to be addressed in the Church today is this false notion that doctrine and pastoral care are opposed to each other and one is right, the other wrong.

If anything beyond headlines and excuses for peddling more immorality by the media comes from all uproar, hopefully it will be this: The tension between doctrinal and pastoral has been abused and lived out in an unbalanced manner in the Church for two generations now – it’s time to right the ship and correct course.

Does "Choice" Make Us Happy?

This post was written by a friend who shared his thoughts with me.  Although he was addressing NFP in this essay, his thesis that choice does not make us happy can also be seen as a more general proposition that applies to many areas of our lives where we have, perhaps, too many choices.

The Libertarian philosophy is based on the fundamental presupposition that "Choice makes us happy." I am not simply attributing this to them, any libertarian would be in complete agreement with this statement. This applies to both the intellectual libertarians like Ron Paul as well as to the lower-class libertines for whom "libertarianism" is just a euphemism for smoking pot, free sex and royalty-free downloads. Both classes of libertarians share the fundamental philosophy that "Choice is what makes us happy." This philosophy has spread to the wider society as well, and most Americans are philosophically libertarian.

I thought about this again after watching the "Mic'd Up" video about NFP (embedded below). Dr. Mike Manhart from the Couple-to-Couple League said (rather disingenuously) that NFP is not about Catholic birth control, it is about information and choice. He presented NFP in a libertarian context. NFP provides you with information so that you can choose. He saw this as a proposition which is self-evidently a good thing. He assumed that no one could argue against information and choice.

The problem with this philosophy is not its pragmatic consequences but its foundational philosophy. Choice does not make us happy, choice makes us miserable. Choice is the source of anxiety and ennui. Choice is the real reason for the misery of modern life. Choice is fundamentally antithetical to the life of the soul.

Imagine a mother who has just finished giving birth. She is joyful at seeing her newborn child. But then someone comes to give her some information. "We have finished genetic testing, and it turns out that your child has some anomalies which might cause health problems in the future. You have the choice to terminate your child. What do you choose to do?"

Suddenly she has been presented with information and choices. Does this make her happy? No, it makes her miserable. It sucks all the joy out of her childbirth. It crushes her soul. It places a tremendous, insupportable weight upon her shoulders. One choice will make her much more unhappy than the other, but whichever choice she makes, the knowledge will continue to eat away at her, destroying the delight she should have experienced.

Lack of choice, on the other hand, is the foundation of the religious life. The reason why religious practice poverty, chastity and obedience is because these virtues destroy all possibility of choice. What one eats, what one wears, whom one loves, what one does all day, none of these things are any longer within our choice once we take religious vows.

To the worldly person, a life of poverty, chastity, and obedience is the ultimate misery. But the reality is that the religious life properly lived results in a sort of ecstatic state. Relieved of the burden of choice, the soul is free to breathe and grow and be happy.

Unfortunately, we are like monkeys with our hands in the cookie jar of choice. We have to let go in order to free ourselves, but it is very difficult to release from our grasp the choices which we have made and intend to make in the future.

It is also the case that we cannot effectively make the argument against NFP and similar projects if we ourselves continue to believe in the myth of choice. If we at heart believe that choice makes us happy, then we don't really have a good argument against the guy from the CCL. It's true that NFP is fundamentally a libertarian proposition, and that is what makes it attractive to modern people, but that is also what makes it anti-Catholic. Only by recognizing that choice is what makes us miserable can we effectively argue for the providentialist position.

Moreover, we also have to recognize that the anti-choice argument is fundamentally religious and supernatural. One chooses either God and renunciation of self-will or else the world and its choices. These are the two paths at the fork in the road. NFP is a sort of compromise to allow us the illusion of taking both roads at once.

But ultimately only one path leads to eternal happiness.