March For Life Gives Cover for Charlatans

Published today to SignOfContradiction.Blogspot.ca

It’s been a signal week watching the intersection of religion and politics taking place. I’m referring specifically to the U.S. Supreme Court ruling on so-called “gay” so-called “marriage” as well as Pope Francis’ encyclical “Laudato Si.” These two landmark events have left many traditional minded Christians feeling hopeless and apprehensive about the future.

Whether we recognize it or not the actions or inactions of the Successors of Christ’s Apostles have a predominant effect on the direction of world affairs and the human attainment of abundant living.

Amen I say to you, whatsoever you shall bind upon earth, shall be bound also in heaven; and whatsoever you shall loose upon earth, shall be loosed also in heaven. Matthew 18:18

In May past I attended the March For Life in Ottawa. For me it bordered on surreal. On the one hand a crowd of 25,000 protestors is immensely impressive. I’m normally used to only one protestor when I go out with my signage, so it was quite overwhelming to be swallowed up by an ocean of like-minded pro-lifers. On the other hand it’s an event which takes place only once a year in a nation comprised of about 35 million souls. About 23 million of these are Christians, comprising about 13 million self-identified Catholics and the remainder Protestants.

Even if we leave the Protestants (as well as an equal number of non-Christians) altogether out of the equation, a shocking picture begins to emerge. Catholic teaching affirms abortion to be nothing less than the premeditated murder of the most vulnerable and innocent members of Canadian society and that makes it to be an altogether heinous crime, all the more inconceivable when we reflect on the scale of its everyday practice in Canada. It seems a very poor annual showing indeed for a group representing 13 million people who are convinced that defenceless human beings are slaughtered daily in cities across Canada with the sanction of government. If you’ve got only one day per year to let your voice be heard by government, this year’s March For Life represents a pitiful yelp rather than a roaring stampede, statistically at least.

What explains this depressing and altogether inadequate display of indifference? What must the little victims of this Canada wide holocaust think of this insufferable national response?

Unquestionably, the answer lies with the moral character of our national leaders and the spiritual formation of their flocks. I focus on the Catholic leadership, specifically the Bishops, because they are ordained the salt (according to Christ Himself) of their society to accomplish the works of God, the prime directive being the salvation of souls and adherence to the laws and commands of Christ.

"You are the salt of the earth; but if the salt has become tasteless, how can it be made salty again? It is no longer good for anything, except to be thrown out and trampled under foot by men. Matthew 5:13

During more than forty years of state sanctioned murder they have utterly failed to salt the consciences of their people with the commands of Christ and the teachings of His Church. They have thereby failed to salt society in righteousness and as a consequence failed also to protect the lives of the least of their brethren.

Then He will answer them, 'Truly I say to you, to the extent that you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to Me.' Matthew 25:45

And yet, prolife organizers and marchers celebrate the few Bishops who show up at the March each year, showering them with respect and admiration for their bold stand for life. Do they deserve such praise?

I say, emphatically, “No” if they have proved themselves to be charlatans. And charlatans they are, quite possibly down to the last man. These are the men who have overseen the rise of a false religion these last fifty years, replacing the one true Faith with a counterfeit and schismatic version, one based upon their “magical” version of the Eucharist, rather than upon the mystery of the Eucharist as defined by Mother Church.

Thanks to the negligence, or perhaps simply the spiritual darkness, of too many Canadian Bishops, regardless of the moral conduct or spiritual disposition of vast numbers of renegade "Catholics", attendance at Mass and mere reception of Holy Communion is assumed to magically confer absolution for even the gravest sins and satisfy all of God's significant imperatives for the Catholic. [Open Letter to the Catholic Bishops of Canada]

This is a shocking statement indeed, but let me be clear: In saying this I make no attack upon the Eucharist. It is the Bishops whose actions bring not only disgrace but violence as well to the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ. If indeed the Eucharist is the source and summit of the Christian life—which it is—then any perversion or corruption of it constitutes the most egregious and contemptible of offences.

Bishops have failed to warn or teach sinners to be circumspect in regard to their spiritual disposition before reception of Holy Communion. As a natural consequence, or at least simultaneously, the sacrament of Confession has “conveniently” fallen into disuse.

Along these same lines, the Catechism of the Catholic Church rightly stipulates that “anyone conscious of a grave sin must receive the sacrament of Reconciliation before coming to communion”. I therefore desire to reaffirm that in the Church there remains in force, now and in the future, the rule by which the Council of Trent gave concrete expression to the Apostle Paul's stern warning when it affirmed that, in order to receive the Eucharist in a worthy manner, “one must first confess one's sins, when one is aware of mortal sin”. ECCLESIA DE EUCHARISTIA

Yes, in Canada, with few exceptions, any and all may join the Communion line and receive the King of Kings regardless of the objective condition of their souls. No counsel is provided to protect those in grave sin from God’s judgment or our Lord Jesus Christ from sacrilege and profanation. Nor is any effort made by clergy to curb this outrage; no timely mention or definition of grave (mortal) sin is provided at the correct moment during the Mass, either by oral or written word. In too many cases no mention of grave sin occurs in any Church setting whatever. Conveniently, no conscience can be pricked by sin in a vacuum.

It seems an unbelievable failure but simple observation confirms the truth. In practice, being baptized and showing up at Mass appear to be the all-sufficient criteria for reception of the Eucharist. Clearly, the Bishops do not believe in warning the sinner of danger, perhaps because they themselves believe there is no danger. Whatever the reason, this is a dangerous denial of the truth of Sacred Scripture and Tradition. Because the Bishops make no distinction in sin it means no one has to judge what is serious sin and what is not. And since all moral judgments, and especially judgments respecting sin, are suspended, Bishops and Priests are freed entirely from having to deal with the messy subject of personal sins, contraception particularly.

What are some of the consequences for such thinking? If sin is ultimately not an obstacle to Holy Communion wouldn’t everybody get to go to heaven? If the right to Communion ultimately depends on my good intentions or my claim to be Catholic or my "clear" conscience then it does not depend on my obedience to Christ: “If ye love me keep my commandments.” Ultimately then it must not depend on any objective criteria (e.g. the Magisterium) outside of myself. Such dangerous thinking is a heresy and equivalent to the Protestant practice of “private judgment.” Imagine the consequences to a local community when a parish contributes a regular diet of such pseudo-catholic leaven.

On rare occasions when Bishops do highlight and provide guidelines for Confession, only a short form examination of conscience is provided and such guidelines conveniently ignore some of the most profound and pervasive sins of the day, most especially the practice of contraception, but also divorce, cohabitation, premarital sex, masturbation, adultery, sodomy, pornography, etc. Once again, Catholics are left to assume the best about the condition of their souls because their shepherds raise no red flags at all. This is spiritual formation by omission and neglect and it is downright evil.

These charlatans are content to remain silent while they watch Catholics rise from their seats in wave after wave, knowing full well that according to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, a great many of them who are living in an objective state of mortal sin due to regular participation in intrinsically evil behaviour and perversions are about to partake of the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ. It is impossible to consider these men anything but wolves and hirelings. It is impossible to believe that any priest in union with the Holy Trinity and witnessing such an imminent sacrilege could be anything other than horrified and compelled immediately to shout out a warning to all present, even if so doing put his life at risk. Yet Mass after Mass, day after day, year after year, Bishops and their Priests remain silent while “he who eats and drinks, eats and drinks judgment to himself…” A few wise words at the right moment could save the souls of countless Catholics yet traitorous tongues remain silent. The only explanation for such behaviour is that unbelief and the lies of demons have overtaken the hearts of these unworthy leaders.

Certainly Catholic Bishops have no right whatsoever, by design or default, to engineer such repeated abuse and desecration of the Eucharist. But they certainly do have a duty to protect the Eucharist at every opportunity. May we defend their actions with the argument for prudential judgment? Not unless we can also justify contempt for Jesus Christ and hatred towards fellow human beings. Such an argument would be an obfuscation and entirely disingenuous.  Indeed, God calls upon all men to practice prudence particularly in the weightier decisions they are called upon to make. I think most all Catholics are willing to, and in fact do, give their clergy the benefit of the doubt in this regard. However in the name of prudential judgment Bishops simply do not have the freedom to deny or distort Catholic teaching or Canon law.

Shockingly these pseudo-catholic leaders persist in an adversarial relationship with the Catechism of the Catholic Church (and with much of Catholic tradition) and it suits their pick-and-choose fashion to allow the covers of that priceless book to gather as much dust as possible. In the name of “conscience” and “kindness” they prefer to embrace “alternate views” and “more nuanced” teachings on many matters treated by the Catechism. This may explain why you’ve probably never heard the Catechism referenced in a homily by a priest or Bishop or never actually seen a copy of the Catechism lying about your Church building. If, perchance, any of our current hierarchy in Canada are innocent of the charges of heresy they will surely find hell to be only very slightly cooler than their slightly more evil brethren because not one of them to my knowledge has summoned the courage to break ranks and warn sinners accordingly or defend the Eucharist from regular desecration. On the other hand, when an orthodox voice is raised the Bishops act quickly to silence the truth when they have the power to do so.   

Strictly on the basis of such criminal activity as described, the Bishops of Canada are guilty of a gross perversion of the true Catholic faith and have corrupted their heavenly calling as Successors of the Apostles.

This grave misrepresentation of the Catholic faith not only dishonors faithful Catholics but scandalizes the entire Christian community in Canada, many of whom are forced to conclude that Catholicism is but another cultish enemy of the true Christian faith.

Faithful Catholics—and by that term I mean those Catholics whose aim is to live fully in the light of the Magisterium, i.e. the teachings of Christ—may not fully appreciate the scandalous effects that the lifestyles of renegade Catholics have upon other serious minded Christians. When I refer to “serious minded” I mean those that believe in a conversion experience with Christ and who treat sin as the very serious issue their tradition demands. Generally speaking these Christians would self describe as Evangelicals.

Why then would such Christians see the Catholic faith as a cultish enemy? Because they immediately recognize that the pseudo-catholic cult sustained by the Bishops is a misrepresentation of the Christian concepts of sin and grace. Sin has been turned on its head since the nature and consequences of sin are made to be of little significance. God’s judgment for sin was the death of His sinless Son yet Catholics may approach and commune with Christ regardless of sin’s mark upon the soul. Grace is cheapened and personal accountability washes away in this antinomian perversion. Instead of a Christian’s maturing hatred for sin there is an increased tolerance for sin. Ungodly, even devilish behaviour, is rewarded with the blessing of God through affirmation of the Bishops. The Christian’s call to constant conversion and to perfection is short circuited. The line between good and evil, heaven and hell is hopelessly blurred.

In fact, the Bishops have unleashed upon Canada a formidable army of pseudo-catholic renegades, missionaries of a parallel church, sending them into every corner and level of society, leavening Canada with a worldview antithetical to the Gospel and to the common good. Tragically these misguided and confused souls, including politicians, lawyers, professors, educators, etc. do tremendous damage to society while being confirmed in their actions by a lifetime of "faithfully" receiving the Holy Eucharist. In concert with the dissenting, heretical Bishops of our day, these renegade “catholics” have been on the front lines for decades foisting legal recognition of divorce, contraception, abortion, homosexuality and same sex “marriage” upon the rest of society.

Thus have the Bishops shown a callous disregard for the souls under their care and an entire nation has been led astray by the example of renegade Catholics who, though largely ignorant of the Moral Law of God, have advanced to prominent roles and led the charge to secularize Canadian society. The salt has become tasteless. “It is no longer good for anything, except to be thrown out and trampled under foot by men.” Our Bishops have entirely disqualified themselves from ministry and ought to resign immediately.

Granted the Bishops were hard hit by the priestly sex abuse scandals. No doubt many of them feel that they have lost their moral authority. But that is no reason or excuse whatever for abdication or compromising their role and responsibility as Successors of Christ. Leading their flocks to the abyss of hell is a far greater crime than even the sexual abuse of minors. Govern, teach, and sanctify as ordained by God or RESIGN and make way for worthy bishops.

This massive scandal exposes a grave flaw also in the thinking and strategies of the pro-life movement in Canada. The “pro-life” cause is, and always has been, an integral component of a Christian defense of the dignity and rights of all human beings and this movement is centred, not in the laity, but in the calling of the Apostles to teach and preach the whole counsel of God. The laity courageously picked it up when Bishops and their Priests laid it down yet it is a work which cannot be successful in any significant measure under the primary leadership of laity. I believe time has borne out this truth. It is past time for laity to channel their outrage not only at fellow Canadians on Parliament Hill once a year but every day in front of chanceries and cathedrals throughout our nation insisting:

EITHER…

that Bishops confess their sins, adhere in word and practice completely to the Oath of Fidelity, remain open to the judgment of laity in this regard, and undertake a drastic change of program in catechesis aimed at spiritual formation of the faithful in total conformity with the Church's teaching,

OR…

RESIGN.              

Bishops must (re)discover that the laity are qualified to speak in this area and that Bishops will be held responsible for their failures and infidelities (and not only by a blogger here and there on the Internet). Ideally, some body of laity must serve as a watchdog to the Bishops; a group that could muster significant credibility and one that has one or more Bishops on side. This is a crucial strategy for pro-lifers and Catholic laity in general and they must lock arms only with Bishops who prove themselves to be authentic Apostles of Christ. “Nice guy” Bishops who are willing once a year to accept accolades for showing up at a March for Life while constantly failing in their duties throughout the year must not be given a platform.  

_____________________________________________

Some related postings from Contra|Diction blog:

In Darkest Canada And The Way Out

Canada’s Bishops Fiddle While Justin’s Star Rises

More Fallout In Canada From Evils Of Contraception

Is Cardinal Collins Admitting That Humanae Vitae Is Being Ignored In Toronto?

Msgr. Foy To Catholic Bishops: Repudiate Contraception Or Lose Canada

New Uprising Of Faith For Archdiocese Of St. John’s?

What (Unworthy) Catholic Bishops Fear Most

What Catholic Bishop Is Watching Over Justin Trudeau’s Soul?

Ye Shall Judge Angels

Local Women Who Run Baby Killing Centre Received Eucharist At St. Teresa's Parish

The Political Calculus Of Too Many Catholic Bishops

"It isn't enough for a bishop, or priest for that matter, to be a privately orthodox prelate — not in the face of the evil threatening his sheep these days. He must say all that needs to be said. He needs to have the fortitude to stand in front of the sheep and say in no uncertain terms everything they don't want to hear." Michael Voris

 

Canada's Catholic Bishops have adopted this calculus almost universally and the result of their silence and omission has been the creation of a pseudo-catholic culture in our nation, you might even term it the rise of a "parallel" church.

FLASHBACK: It’s Not The Homosex, Stupid

Here’s an article I wrote in 2008, as commentary on a disturbing trend. It's still very much relevant, if not more so. You may like the way in which it accounts for the intersections of various crises in today’s culture wars. (Or you may not!)

----------------------------------------------

It’s Not The Homosex, Stupid

With all due respect to savvy Mark Steyn who quipped “It’s the Demography, Stupid,” I wish Steyn would have pushed back for us the curtain of Western society’s bedroom a little further in order to give us a glimpse of the smirking elephant in the closet. Heaven knows we desperately need a paradigm shift in our thinking about sexual “freedom” in the bedroom.

Is it my imagination or do you notice that a great many “conservative” culture warriors—individuals and organizations, Christians and otherwise—have taken to lobbing grenades at those promoting and engaging in homosex, making that the defining strategy, if not obsession, of their war? According to them, among the top threats to our civilization is the “homosexual” agenda.

So let me ask you. What would you think of drivers who ignored red lights but who regularly demonized speeding drivers as the real enemies on the road? Comical? Yes, but consider this. Heterosexuals who rail against homosex, which indeed is a particularly odious variation of sterile sex, are—with strikingly few exceptions—themselves egregiously addicted to their own pleasurable variety of sterile sex. Equally comical, of course, if you consider sterile sex per se to be in a league with dangerous behaviours such as running red lights.

But please don’t jump ship at this point. Hear me out. I know that our post modern society, parroting the relativism of its enlightened pulpiteers, considers this subject settled and entirely off limits. Any suggestion to re-open it is probably constituted an offense in itself—a possible relapse to a prudish repressive sexual ethic of Victorian times.

“But we believe in real marriage, the traditional kind, one man and one woman for life, and sex only in that context. That’s the correct standard because it’s God’s standard. A married man and woman can make their own decisions in good conscience about the kind of sex they engage in. It’s nobody else’s business.”

Indeed, that’s the claim, but tragically these days it rarely goes beyond a claim. For too many conservatives, yes, and Christians also, who normally relish opportunities to expose politically correct speech, the lack of reasoned debate and evasions of the truth, a remarkable about-turn takes place when the truth concerning sexual disorders gets a little too close to home.

Whoa there! Truth? Disorders? According to who?

Can it be a shock to the reader that throughout two millennia of Western civilization—as well as nearly two millennia of Jewish thought which preceded it—the moral consensus on sterile sex could be summed up like this: All sexual activity, both heterosexual and otherwise, practiced with a view to circumvent procreation constitutes a perversion of God’s order and an abomination.

Here we could take our pick of sources, from the Early Fathers through to Martin Luther, John Calvin, or any other reputable preacher, bible scholar or theologian, right up to the early and mid 1900’s. All—without exception—considered these acts as “a most unnatural wickedness, and a grievous wrong.”

Thus we had the American and Canadian laws which prohibited the sale and distribution of devices that aided in such perversity and which were not rescinded until the 1960’s. Thus we record the witness of some of Western society’s most public figures, such as U.S. President Theodore Roosevelt, who matter-of-factly labeled the practice of birth control as “the capital sin” against civilization.

But are such ideas peculiarly Western, or even Christian? A surprising number of non-Western cultures throughout history fully squared with Christian teaching on this point. Mahatma Ghandi, a world famous reformer and Hindu, condemned sterile heterosex as a corrupter of morals, a destroyer of marriage and a further degradation of women.

But regardless, truth—the old-fashioned objective kind—is no respecter of cultures and the fallout in our society from a denial of this particular truth has been debilitating. Take note of the Anglicans, the first Christian denomination to break rank with the faith of their fathers on this major doctrine. They formalized the opening of a Pandora’s Box in 1930 by allowing certain exceptions for sterile heterosex and are now being rent asunder by the practice of sterile homosex in the bedrooms of their Bishops. Coincidence?

The extreme break with Christian tradition represented by this acculturated disorder raises serious questions about just how much hostility towards God we have harbored this past generation or two. Some say our rejection of God—played out in this sexual arena—has so cursed our Western society as to account for not only our sex-crazed degeneracy but also family and marriage deformities and breakups, the abortion holocaust, dangerously higher quotas of immigration due to falling birthrates, the growing threat of Islam, the secularization phenomenon with its evil twin Christianophobia and a mounting civilizational self-loathing.

This is a hard pill for many to swallow. But can we admit this much at least: Steyn got it perfectly right when he prophesied the death of Western society due to reproductive sterility. Not for a moment did he suggest that even ten thousand new conferences and/or books on Islam, the tyranny of homosex, the battle for marriage and the family, secular humanism or Christophobia would save us. No, very clearly he stated that it was the question of birthrate which we have refused to address. That alone will cause our society to implode. Steyn put his finger on the precise nature of the problem. Likewise the solution, if it was any closer, might jump up and bite us.

The yearning of many contemporary Christians for a cultural fix through revivalist and “biblical” calls to repentance must also take the birthrate—and sterile heterosex—into account. Though some will contest the point, it must be admitted that any conversion wrought through the preaching of a Whitefield, Finney, et al will not only demand our hearts get right with God but will necessarily reinstitute cultural prohibitions and taboos supporting the age old and exegetically superior biblical interpretation of the sin of Onanism.

The very thought makes many shudder and some to say,

Surely, God, we can instead pay women to have babies, still hold on to our hard earned sexual “freedoms” and save our future. Otherwise, God, this is really going to hurt!

The suggestion that our future hinges on the abandonment of sterile heterosex is utterly disconcerting. It’s too much to grasp—let alone admit—that old fashioned traditional Western wisdom on sexuality was spot on.

But no, it was much more than that. It truly was a civilizational bulwark.

Preachers and pundits would do well then to cease from their various crusades against homosex, Islam, etc. in order to refocus their energies and resources to formulate a new strategy which targets the real enemy. By attacking the ideology and behaviour which is directly fuelling our demographic demise, our odds of making gains in this war are markedly improved.

Another point must be raised. The defense of current phony and lethal sexual “liberties” may be worthy of the label progressive but hardly worthy of the label conservative, and certainly unworthy of the name Christian, at least historically. Such perversions of true liberty were legitimized by the victories of yesteryear’s liberals yet they currently enslave us because they are defended by today’s “conservatives.” Conservatives must seriously examine their own complicity in the sterile sex agenda—which has aided in the destruction of society and has rightly identified them as co-conspirators—and be encouraged to instead stand in defense of established Western wisdom.

Conservatives must decide what it is that they are fighting to conserve. Indeed, what else deserves conservation, other than the collective wisdom and institutions central to Western thought and civilization? Isn’t this precisely why conservatives fight unhesitatingly against abortion, attacks on marriage, disintegration of family, pornography, lowering of morals, etc? Yet why have we not been fighting the one mortal enemy which Western wisdom has explicitly warned—in loudest fashion this past 100 years—would spawn precisely such an epidemic of evils? Sterile heterosex is a beguiling demon of tremendous significance and must be opposed with all our energies and by all possible means.

Instead, we have been trying to beef up our society in order to withstand the intense battering spawned by our own endorsement of sexual license: Educate about the radical homosexual agenda. Expose the dangers and tyranny of secular humanism. Equip Canadians to confront the threat of Islam. Bolster the family and marriage and fight those who attack it.

It’s like trying to engineer more impact resistant cars rather than require drivers to stop at red lights. At this stage, it seems we have even forgotten the red light is there, or perhaps by now we have removed it entirely from the intersection. Is it any wonder the “culture war” is being lost?

So yes, it is the behaviour and specifically it’s sterile sex—of all brands. With great courage, it needs to be identified as such, properly condemned and duly proscribed.

Which again brings us back to Steyn’s famous line and his sober closing:

It's the demography, stupid. And, if they can't muster the will to change course, then "What do you leave behind?" is the only question that matters.