Is Cardinal Sarah being silenced? | News | LifeSite

27854821810_040f50fdd8_o_810_500_55_s_c1.jpg
Fr. Lawrence Lew, O.P. / Flickr

By Jan Bentz

ROME, November 8, 2016 (LifeSiteNews) – Is Cardinal Robert Sarah slowly being silenced? An indication of such a development surfaced with the cardinal’s withdrawal from participating in a congress in Germany.

After the recent overhaul of the Vatican liturgy office, which Cardinal Sarah heads, he is now backing out of public appearances.

In a press release by the Kölner international Liturgische Tagung (International Liturgical Conference of Cologne), Father Guido Rodheudt, conference organizer, explained that Cardinal Sarah “regrettably had to cancel his participation in the 18thLiturgical conference” in 2017.

This news came as a surprise since the Cardinal had three times confirmed his participation, including in writing, since November 2015, said Rodheudt. Cardinal Sarah cancelled not only his participation in-person, but will also not submit his written paper to be read by a representative — a practice common for cardinals in cases of emergency absence.

In an interview with the German news agency kath.net, Fr. Rodheudt explained: “Cardinal Sarah has told us that for the coming year a number of obligations came up, which force him to cancel his participation even after repeated confirmation.”….

Readmore via Is Cardinal Sarah being silenced? | News | LifeSite

Religious freedom in medicine at stake in 2016, Catholic docs say

By Dennis Sadowski

November 5, 2016

WASHINGTON – A pair of Catholic physicians argue that changes in the way health care is paid for, and stronger relationships between doctors and their patients, will do more to improve people’s health and uphold the sanctity of life than bureaucratic government-run programs and expensive insurance policies.

Dr. Marguerite Duane, adjunct associate professor of family medicine at Georgetown University, and Dr. Lester Ruppersberger, president of the Catholic Medical Association, also maintain that control over health care must be in the hands of patients and their families rather than any bureaucracy.

Both physicians offered their views during an hour-long discussion Nov. 2 in Washington sponsored by Christ Medicus Foundation at the Catholic Information Center called “The Changing Face of Health Care and the 2016 Election.”
The program took place just days ahead of the Nov. 8 election. Each of the four participants said that the next presidential administration and the new Congress will influence how the U.S. health care system evolves.

The panelists expressed concern over the erosion of conscience protections for hospitals and health care workers and the rights of individuals to choose a doctor who aligns with their religious beliefs and to purchase insurance without paying for health services that they morally oppose.

“People have to realize that Americans of all stripes, regardless of their religious affiliation, that we are losing our religious freedom … at amazing speed,” said Louis Brown, foundation director.

 

 

Readmore via Religious freedom in medicine at stake in 2016, Catholic docs say

BISHOP JAMES D. CONLEY, STL-What Every Evangelist Needs to Know – Crisis Magazine

fe6984ff7fc0aa8cd50d66ad114f5149

“Unfortunately, we do not have the luxury of resting on the fruit of what good Catholics before us have built. We cannot be a Church of maintenance, as George Weigel reminds us in Evangelical Catholicism. We are a Church “permanently in mission.” God will judge each one of us on whether we have become his disciples, and whether we have made disciples of all nations, as Jesus commanded. We are each called to become the saints the world needs now.

Pope St. John Paul II taught that saints step forward, into a world needing the Gospel, when no one else will. That’s what Edward Creighton, along with his wife Mary and his brother John, did.

We are each called to step forward, as missionary disciples to the time and place in which we live…

The Culture We Are Living In Today
I have said before that today’s America is becoming defined by a kind of utilitarian, technocratic gnosticism.

That sounds complicated, but the idea is simple, and I’ll explain it:

The moral compass of our political and cultural leaders seems mostly governed by a set of false ideas: That we can define reality according to our preferences. That we can remake every human relationship according to the power of our wills. That we have the unconditional right to use technology or wealth to overcome the limitations of our humanity, or achieve whatever we think will make us happy.”

Readmore via What Every Evangelist Needs to Know – Crisis Magazine

Catholic Bishop: “Abortion is a Moral Evil Which Can Never be Accepted Under Any Circumstances” | LifeNews.com

509d8959ce7d8-image

“It is not one of those teachings a Catholic has to accept, like, for example, abortion. Abortion has clearly been defined by the church as a moral evil, which is never accepted under any circumstances or any justification.”

Readmore via Catholic Bishop: “Abortion is a Moral Evil Which Can Never be Accepted Under Any Circumstances” | LifeNews.com

Fr. Father Matthew Schneider-Three ways to vote on Tuesday with a clean conscience

By Father Matthew Schneider November 3rd, 2016

In a distressing 2016 race, Catholics can vote with a clean conscience in one of three ways — voting “against” someone rather than “for” anyone, supporting a third party candidate, or simply not voting for president at all and focusing down-ballot.

If I can’t vote for anyone, can I vote against someone?
The current U.S. election seems to be a race to the bottom. In the past, usually I could see a good argument to vote for one candidate based on character and issues, despite a few imperfections; in this election, the argument to vote against each one of the candidates seems stronger than the argument to vote for either.
Archbishop Charles Chaput of Philadelphia summarized the Catholic conundrum: “One candidate – in the view of a lot of people – is an eccentric businessman of defective ethics whose bombast and buffoonery make him inconceivable as president. And the other – in the view of a lot of people – should be under criminal indictment. The fact that she’s not – again, in the view of a lot of people – proves Orwell’s Animal Farm principle that ‘all animals are equal, but some are more equal than others.’”

Readmore via Three ways to vote on Tuesday with a clean conscience

About those unthinking, backward Catholics – Catholic Philly by Charles J. Chaput

archbishop-ordinarytime_810_500_55_s_c1

By Archbishop Charles Chaput, O.F.M. Cap. • Posted October 13, 2016

Back in 2008, in the weeks leading up to the Obama-McCain presidential election, two young men visited me in Denver. They were from Catholics United, a group describing itself as committed to social justice issues. They voiced great concern at the manipulative skill of Catholic agents for the Republican Party. And they hoped my brother bishops and I would resist identifying the Church with single-issue and partisan (read: abortion) politics.

It was an interesting experience. Both men were obvious flacks for the Obama campaign and the Democratic Party — creatures of a political machine, not men of the Church; less concerned with Catholic teaching than with its influence. And presumably (for them) bishops were dumb enough to be used as tools, or at least prevented from helping the other side.

Yet these two young men not only equaled but surpassed their Republican cousins in the talents of servile partisan hustling. Thanks to their work, and activists like them, American Catholics helped to elect an administration that has been the most stubbornly unfriendly to religious believers, institutions, concerns and liberty in generations.
I never saw either young man again. The cultural damage done by the current White House has — apparently — made courting America’s bishops unnecessary.

via About those unthinking, backward Catholics – Catholic Philly

Distributism: An Offered Economic Alternative

leon-xiii

I came across a comment thread on Citizen Tom’s comments on his blog: An Update For My Blogging Friends, asking for an alternative to the greed of Capitalism.

Here is a response, although, I do acknowledge not the response, but only one that is proposed as an alternative to our existing systems.

GK Chesterton once wrote, “The truth is that what we call Capitalism ought to be called Proletarianism. The point of it is not that some people have capital, but that most people only have wages because they do not have capital.”

If I could modernize Chesterton’s sentiments, I would certainly articulate the notion that what we call Capitalism today should be properly called “Corporatism.” However, instead of getting into what I disagree with Capitalism and Socialism, let me instead promote an alternative solution to those economic systems.

Distributism

Let us first explore Pope Leo XIII’s encyclical, Rerum Novarum, that created a foundation for such a system:

Paragraph 19-22:

19. The great mistake made in regard to the matter now under consideration is to take up with the notion that class is naturally hostile to class, and that the wealthy and the working men are intended by nature to live in mutual conflict. So irrational and so false is this view that the direct contrary is the truth. Just as the symmetry of the human frame is the result of the suitable arrangement of the different parts of the body, so in a State is it ordained by nature that these two classes should dwell in harmony and agreement, so as to maintain the balance of the body politic. Each needs the other: capital cannot do without labor, nor labor without capital. Mutual agreement results in the beauty of good order, while perpetual conflict necessarily produces confusion and savage barbarity. Now, in preventing such strife as this, and in uprooting it, the efficacy of Christian institutions is marvellous and manifold. First of all, there is no intermediary more powerful than religion (whereof the Church is the interpreter and guardian) in drawing the rich and the working class together, by reminding each of its duties to the other, and especially of the obligations of justice.

Note: Pope Leo XIII in the above paragraph is rejecting the idea of class warfare proposed by Marx, his contemporary, as well as others.

20. Of these duties, the following bind the proletarian and the worker: fully and faithfully to perform the work which has been freely and equitably agreed upon; never to injure the property, nor to outrage the person, of an employer; never to resort to violence in defending their own cause, nor to engage in riot or disorder; and to have nothing to do with men of evil principles, who work upon the people with artful promises of great results, and excite foolish hopes which usually end in useless regrets and grievous loss. The following duties bind the wealthy owner and the employer: not to look upon their work people as their bondsmen, but to respect in every man his dignity as a person ennobled by Christian character. They are reminded that, according to natural reason and Christian philosophy, working for gain is creditable, not shameful, to a man, since it enables him to earn an honorable livelihood; but to misuse men as though they were things in the pursuit of gain, or to value them solely for their physical powers – that is truly shameful and inhuman. Again justice demands that, in dealing with the working man, religion and the good of his soul must be kept in mind. Hence, the employer is bound to see that the worker has time for his religious duties; that he be not exposed to corrupting influences and dangerous occasions; and that he be not led away to neglect his home and family, or to squander his earnings. Furthermore, the employer must never tax his work people beyond their strength, or employ them in work unsuited to their sex and age. His great and principal duty is to give every one what is just. Doubtless, before deciding whether wages axe fair, many things have to be considered; but wealthy owners and all masters of labor should be mindful of this – that to exercise pressure upon the indigent and the destitute for the sake of gain, and to gather one’s profit out of the need of another, is condemned by all laws, human and divine. To defraud any one of wages that are his due is a great crime which cries to the avenging anger of Heaven. “Behold, the hire of the laborers… which by fraud has been kept back by you, crieth; and the cry of them hath entered into the ears of the Lord of Sabaoth.”(6) Lastly, the rich must religiously refrain from cutting down the workmen’s earnings, whether by force, by fraud, or by usurious dealing; and with all the greater reason because the laboring man is, as a rule, weak and unprotected, and because his slender means should in proportion to their scantiness be accounted sacred. Were these precepts carefully obeyed and followed out, would they not be sufficient of themselves to keep under all strife and all its causes?…

22. Therefore, those whom fortune favors are warned that riches do not bring freedom from sorrow and are of no avail for eternal happiness, but rather are obstacles;(9) that the rich should tremble at the threatenings of Jesus Christ – threatenings so unwonted in the mouth of our Lord(10)

Of course, having this discussion recently with my Libertarian brother, I must note quickly that distributists have always recognized the importance of private property. Private property in the system of distributism is considered very good. This mentioned fact is what marks a clear distinction and separation from socialism; therefore, to merely generalize a system because it opposes the greed in Capitalism is simply intellectually dishonest. Owners of small businesses in the local community are more likely to engage with the social and civic life of their community due to capital being owned at this local level. Of course, Folks would need to be compelled to shop locally to grow and sustain wealth on a local level. I would surmise a change in cultural values to compel folks to do so. For example, in my local community, the city has decided to rebuild the town square into a beautiful square with a park in the middle. As a result, many local businesses have moved to the area and are thriving.

However, It is true that distributism shares a connection that workers should control the means of production, so to answer any question on how property would be handled, it would be in a guild system instead in be hands of a corporate board or stock holders. The Distributist isn’t concerned with redistribution of property already owned, this is a lie often proposed by those who support Capitalism, as this is a system that is not dictated by coercion like Capitalism and Socialism of the state, but instead of families in a local community.

I will agree that there are valid critiques of the system, for example on specialized products like iphones, appliances, cars etc.; therefore, corporations will always have a place. However, a development of a system that can promote in our current communities a support system of greater  emphasis small businesses locally. Capitialism–especially the modern type of Corporatism–only seeks to serve the greed of humanity, which it’s true that greed is a natural motivating factor within humanity, it is also creating a positive for a normally sinful nature.

We must acknowledge that in a capitalistic economy it isn’t logical to shop at the local bookstore when it may be more expensive or one may have to have the product ordered for them, which may take 1 to 2 weeks. However, It would be to our benefit to learn to live a slower lifestyle, it would benefit us to aid to the workers of our communities rather than donate money to an informal benefits service.

Perhaps, the Catholic social teaching  of subsidiarity would promote such a change in culture. The idea rests, simply, on the need for the governed to be governed by the most local entity of government. Distributism, in a way, needs to work in unison with a government of subsidiarity like two lungs. A local government, one that is more focused than state governments, is a better way to serve our communites and to protect our religious freedoms.

I wrote this post as a conversation with Citizen Tom, a discussion on how rather than heated debate which seems to have taken place in his threads. I only wish for him to consider how this Catholic system, which Stephen may or may not be proposing, is different from socialism. 

The History of God and the Resurrection: A Conversation of Struggle

1475GiovanniBelliniTheResurrection.jpg

 

Below is taken from emails and pieced together from a conversation with a family member, note that many of the ideas can be fleshed out in far greater detail: 

The problem with pain is not a unique attack on God, but rather a clever one that acknowledges an existence but attacks His character as if His character could be assessed in the same manner as any human. The problem with this common assertion is often the focus on God; for example, why do we blame God for evil rather than humanity? There are many who have supplied refutations to this objection such as C.S Lewis, Fulton Sheen, Joseph Ratzinger, etc.

There are two things to understand. The world because of humanity’s original sin is – profane and not holy-and not the end. Therefore, God’s greatest concern is for the sanctity of our souls. If God allows pain by allowing free will to exist and by allowing natural disasters, we can be comfortable to answer that He does so to allow us to use these opportunities to ease the suffering on earth for the healing of our souls. Suffering is allowed to exist so that a greater good can occur for those in the City of Man to become sanctified.

Many will object to this answer, but I ask them, “What if it’s the truth, what would be your reaction if you knew it to be true?”

So, recently, I’ve been asked How can I know? Where does my faith come from? If I am to answer myself, especially when looking at our current world, I would say that my faith flows from the spring of Truth. When I look at the world, I see a finely tuned creation. A creation that has objective moral truths, natural rights, and natural laws, so from this foundation, I call it God. My observations of the world have allowed me to conclude that relativism is false, and if there are objective truths, what is the source? However, as I have arrived at this conclusion, I ask, is there anything I can know about God? Historically, because I’ve come to the conclusion that God exists, I look to the Apostles and the Gospels. Many modern Atheists will reject the Gospels as evidence, but this is simply not an action of the scholarly. For example, the Gospels quite easily fall in the genre of Ancient Biography, and prior to my degree in history, I was a Classics major and read my fair share of Ancient Biographies to know that just because an Ancient account has miracles doesn’t dismiss its historical content. For example, as I studied Alexander the Great in my youth with a great zeal, I know that modern scholars do not dismiss historical accounts of Alexander by Plutarch, Arrian, and Diodorus even though they have unexplainable events within the texts such as prophecies from oracles and fathers who are deities.

So let’s recap, I have concluded by observing the natural world with philosophy that God exists, and I am searching if there is anything I can know about this God? Now, just like I would as Classic student, examining the ancient accounts without consideration of miracles, what do the accounts tell me? One of the things that it tells me is that the Apostles were all scared and fled for their lives when their leader—Christ–was arrested and executed. After some time, something changed, and those men were not afraid. In fact, all became so courageous that only John was not a martyr. Not one cried out to escape their fates, “I am fraud.”

Now, it’s true, in our modern age of skepticism, there are those who doubt that Jesus of Nazareth was even a historical figure. I cannot stress this enough that this is a position of anti-intellectualism on their part. The historical record, aside from the Gospels, supports the existence of the man. Here is an account from a pagan Roman Historian by the name of Tacitus (55-115 A.D.):

Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilate, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea, and the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular. (Annals XV:44)

 Of course, there is other evidence from Josephus, Suetonius, and others, but many modern skeptics attempt to force Christians into a pigeonhole reading of these accounts in a minimalist perspective rather than maximalist– a viewpoint one is accorded with other Ancient Biographies—mainly because there is so much more at stake with the Gospels.

From this evidence, I have concluded that there is a God, I have concluded from the Gospels that Christ claimed to be God, and I have concluded that he died and his Apostles were inspired by something that occurred after his death to meet their own deaths. Ultimately, I have concluded that Christ rose from the dead. If Christ did indeed die and rose again to conquer sin, I gather that God does care about us and is benevolent rather than malevolent because He chose to become a lowly man, and suffered a lowly scandalous death.

Furthermore, with the revelation of this truth, God can’t be a narcissist, as militant modern atheists now claim, for obligating worship in the respect that narcissism is a human disorder for it is not possible that a human can be perfect. A perfect being who is truly great cannot, by definition, be a narcissist. The being of God is one that is truly perfect who requires worship not necessarily for His glory–because what could our worship aid in the divine?–but rather for the benefit of our eternal soul and sanctification because this is the ultimate plan of God for his creation.

So remember, when we see pain in the world, The most powerful action is turning to God for assistance because ultimately the pain was brought into the world by humanity because of our betrayal of God. We can do this by prayer and compassionate action to our fellow human. Let us, tell God here on earth that we choose to serve him rather than ourselves.

A Messenger’s Prayer

 

A prayer that I have composed by saying variations of it every morning before I start my day.

saint-gabriel-filip-mihail

I pray to you, O Lord, to give me the strength, perseverance, and understanding throughout the trials of my day. I ask that you keep me safe, and allow me in the image of your angel, St. Gabriel, to bring messages of goodness and joy with great speed, and messages of sadness and despair are brought with Your eternal mercy and compassion.

Amen.