According to Fr. Frank Pavone, National Director of Priests for Life, Amoris Laetitia is an “encouraging roadmap for families.”
The “conservative” celebrity cleric went on to fawn in an article for Catholic Online:
The document is a beautifully written pro-life affirmation of the Church’s wisdom … In clear language, Pope Francis speaks of the great value of the embryo and his worth, starting at conception and regardless of the circumstances in which he or she was conceived.
Pope Francis also happens to have spoken rather clearly when he said that persistence in adultery and fornication no longer necessarily constitute mortal sin and the loss of sanctifying grace; thus consigning countless millions of souls to Hell. (see AL 301)
Yea, but the pope pointed to the great value of the embryo! What more could we want?
The problem here isn’t all that difficult to figure out:
For some Catholic “pro-lifers,” Fr. Pavone apparently among them, the human embryo – not the Kingdom of Heaven – is the “pearl of great price” for which they are pleased to sell everything, including whatever commitment they may have had to the mission that Christ actually gave to His Church.
It is perhaps for this reason that Fr. Pavone has no problem praising Francis’ Love Letter to Lucifer, saying:
Amoris Laetitia is a timely and loving exhortation for families towards genuine charity that begins within the nuclear family. It can be described as a new road-map for a culture that has taken a sad and tragic detour.
Speaking of sad and tragic detours; here we have the Director of an organization that claims to be “for Life” – and a priest, no less – praising an exhortation that blasphemes the Life by accusing the Lord of burdening men with impossible demands via the Divine Law, and even goes so far as to state that God sometimes wills that people should persist in the grave sins of adultery and fornication! (cf AL 296, 303)
Doesn’t Fr. Pavone realize that fornication is the gateway to abortion?
In any case, there can be no doubt that guilt-free sex outside of marriage is remarkably good for business – not just for abortion providers, but for pro-life organizations as well – and let’s not be naïve:
Priests for Life isn’t in the business of Catholicism; rather, it’s firmly committed to the business of Pro-Lifeism.
What do I mean by Pro-Lifeism?
In spite of any good intentions on the part of its Catholic followers, Pro-Lifeism is a false religion wherein ecumenism is so prominently featured that religious syncretism and religious indifferentism are all but endemic.
Though it frequently employs the language of Christianity, ultimately Pro-Lifeism worships not so much Jesus Christ, but rather a Golden Calf known as the human embryo.
As for its mission, Pro-Lifeism is singularly ordered toward securing temporal life for the embryo until such time as either birth or natural death occurs.
Sure, providing material aid (e.g., food, clothing, and shelter) to pregnant women, unwed mothers and impoverished families is also part of the movement, but these are earthbound services that any decent government agency can provide.
Don’t get me wrong; Catholicism goes hand in hand with such activities as defending the unborn and offering charitable assistance to those in need. Being a Catholic necessarily means being “pro-life;” however, and this is important – in that order.
Pro-Lifeism, by contrast, entails the setting aside of one’s Catholic identity, and worse, placing the mission that Christ gave to His Church on a shelf.
So, does this describe the modus operandi of Priests for Life, or is Fr. Pavone’s unqualified praise for Amoris Laetitia just an unfortunate mistake on his part?
Writing on the Priests for Life website about ecumenical concerns, Fr. Pavone answers this question in no uncertain terms:
[In public anti-abortion demonstrations comprised of those from diverse Christian denominations] flexibility should be exercised by all … This may mean that the usual way in which one segment of the participants customarily pray is changed on that occasion. Catholics, for example, do not always have to pray the rosary when at the abortion mill. The Psalms are just as Catholic as the rosary is, and Catholics should be perfectly comfortable praying them, along with their Protestant brothers and sisters.
Here we have a priest encouraging Catholics to keep their rosaries in their pockets at certain “pro-life” demonstrations, even though there is no more powerful intercessor in the fight against abortion than the Blessed Virgin Mary, Mother of the Life!
Has it never occurred to Fr. Pavone that the witness of those praying the rosary at such a gathering might just compel one of these “Protestant brothers and sisters” to rethink their offenses against Our Blessed Lady, and even more importantly, perhaps even reconsider their rejection of the solitary Ark of Salvation established by her Son whom they claim to love, the Holy Catholic Church?
Of those heretics who may be so offended by Marian devotion as to withdraw from such an event, at least we can say that they are steadfast in their convictions, misguided or not.
As for rosary-hiding Catholics and the priests who encourage them? Not so much.
The reason Fr. Pavone feels so comfortable urging Catholics to placate, and ultimately confirm, heretics in their errors – the exact opposite of teaching them everything whatsoever that Jesus commanded – is simple:
The mission of Priests for Life, in spite of its Catholic-sounding name, isn’t being approached as that which is part and parcel of the mission of the Church; carried out in love for her Founder and Head, Jesus Christ. Rather, its mission flows directly from the tenets of a false religion, Pro-Lifeism, and the worship of its false god; the human embryo.
I am certain that many a committed “Pro-Life Catholic” (the label itself being a clear indication of disordered priorities) would object to such a characterization.
And yet, Fr. Pavone, in his treatment of ecumenical concerns, goes on to confirm just how completely Pro-Lifeism threatens to supplant Catholicism, saying:
At the same time, there can be, at an event of diverse denominations, periods of prayer that express the particular customs of one or another group … The unity on which the entire group stands at such a gathering is the affirmation of the right to life. The gathering should not be a time when one group tries to persuade another that its way of praying should be adopted. Instead, it should be a time of shared encouragement, respectful acknowledgment of differences, and clear recognition that a common enemy (abortion) provides a clear opportunity for unity.
For those with eyes to see, this represents a manifesto for a false religion that stands in stark contrast to the one true faith. Consider:
– What is the common enemy of those who practice Pro-Lifeism?
Abortion, which seeks to deny temporal life to the embryo.
– What is the true common enemy of all humankind?
Satan, who seeks to deprive souls of everlasting life as made possible only by salvation in Christ; through, with, and in His Church.
– What is the unity on which Pro-Lifeism stands?
Affirmation of the right to life for the human embryo.
– What is the unity on which Christians stand?
Membership in the Holy Catholic Church. According to Pope Pius XI writing in Mortalium Animos, “That unity can only arise from one teaching authority, one law of belief and one faith of Christians.”
Pope Pius XI went on to speak of ecumenical federations and the inherent tension between Catholics “who believe it to be good and useful to invoke by prayer the Saints reigning with Christ, especially Mary the Mother of God, and to venerate their images, and those who urge that such a veneration is not to be made use of, for it is contrary to the honor due to Jesus Christ,” saying of such arrangements:
We do know that from this it is an easy step to the neglect of religion or indifferentism and to modernism, as they call it. (ibid.)
As Fr. Pavone’s glowing assessment of Amoris Laetitia makes clear, it’s also an easy step to outright neglect for the mission of the Church; the salvation of souls.
I’ve said it before and it bears repeating:
If there is such thing as a “silver lining” to this disastrous pontificate, it is the degree to which it is forcing pseudo-Catholics and their organizations into the full light of day.
In the present case, we can be thankful that faithful Catholics who have been supporting Priests for Life, which receives annual contributions of nearly $10 million, now have every good reason to redirect their resources elsewhere.
Totally agree. Well said. This needs to be understood.
Wow this is spot-on! I’ve always felt what you’ve said is true, but could never put it into words the way you have. I have a feeling you may get a lot of flak for this though. Some misguided soul will probably misunderstand what you’re saying.
It seems that Fr. Pavone learned a lesson …..http://www.catholicculture.org/news/headlines/index.cfm?storyid=11734&repos=4&subrepos=2&searchid=784667
I fail to see how protecting innocent vulnerable babies- in- the -womb, is the same as worshiping them…?
Father Pavone has done many wonderful things for the Pro-Life Movement. However, it has become very clear over the years that he is very careful not to offend or go against “the establishment” in any way, shape or form for fear of being shut down. Many of you will remember Father Pavone’s courageous fight to save the life of Terri Schiavo who was slowly being murdered by being denied food and water. While I admired him greatly at that time, I also felt that he should have PUBLICLY demanded that the local diocese take a greater part in the defense of Terri. Was he instructed not to implicate Bishop Lynch who chose to “mind his own business” and left instructions for his priests to do the same? Here was a Catholic girl slowly being murdered in a most horrible way under very suspicious circumstances, whose only crime was that she needed care which was willingly offered by her loving family. Try doing this to a dog and the animal rights people would be holding vigils and demonstrations. Where was the Catholic Church when one of Her daughters is being denied the Sacraments? Again, I must say that Father Pavone deserves to be admired and recognized for the comfort he gave to Terri’s family during this disgraceful time in our nation’s history. However, this was also a disgrace to Catholic Church who obviously felt that Father Pavone’s presence was “good enough”. Obviously, this was not so. Father Pavone was courageously pro-life during this time, but it may have had a different ending if he PUBLICLY insisted that the entire Catholic Church (including EVERY Bishop!!) stand up for one of Her own. It appears that Fr. Pavone did what he could in the confines of what he was allowed to do. He is still a hero for at least doing what he was permitted to do, while the “catholic” church at large was a total failure.
Ever mindful : I may be wrong but I see Louies comments as : “can’t see the forest for the trees” !!! An expression used of someone who is too involved in the details of a problem to look at the situation as a whole ? Correct me if I’m wrong Louie ???
Abortion is a horrible crime because souls go to Hell because of it. There’s more to the story than just murder. Murder is a capital crime because the victim could end up in Hell, whereas they may have been given another chance by God otherwise.
The prolife movement has the tendency to remain silent on God’s laws on conception through the natural marital act and God’s laws against contraception. This is how they come to worship the embryo.The proof is when many prolifers support the transfer of frozen embryos into a surrogate in order to save this embryos life. And these are Catholics who are blinded by this. The Church clearly teaches that one cannot do an evil such as this even in order to save a life. Many of them would disagree. For these particular prolifers life itself trumps God’s laws for them. This is how they make the embryo their worship. This might seem not obvious to some in our sexually perverted world that has no qualms with separating sex from procreation and procreation from sex which sadly many prolifers embrace but it is against God’s moral laws for marriage.
It always comes back to EENS.
At the end of the day, the exhortation simply applies to moral issues the same “meaningless formula” they’ve already applied to the thrice infallibly defined dogma of EENS (outside the Church there is no salvation). Let me explain…
When you really boil it all down. the typical Novus Ordo-land apologist explains EENS to apply only those who are convinced the Catholic Church is the One True Church. The non-catholics might “know” the Catholic Church teaches that outside of her there is no salvation, but if they don’t believe it, or are not really convinced me it, then it doesn’t apply to them. Now if they do accept it and refuse to enter Her, then they’re in trouble. Here’s where it gets turned into a meaningless formula warned about by Pius XII, because anyone who does believe the Catholic Church is the One True Church outside of which there is no salvation will of course note to enter her.
This is much less offensive in our masonic pluralistic society. It’s makes us feel better about our protestant friends and neighbors. They aren’t “convinced” the Catholic Church really is the One True Church so they’re just ignorant, right? That’s how the angle goes anyway and that’s how it’s treated, if treated at all, in Novus Ordo-land.
Apply this same watering down subjectivist approach to morality. You’ve got it right there in black and white from none other than Francis in number 301 of the exhortation:
“More is involved here than mere ignorance of the rule. A subject may know full well the rule, yet have great difficulty in understanding “its inherent values””
Yep. This is in the section on “mitigating factors.” You see, there’s knowing, and then there is KNOWING. If the folks reject a Church teaching, they don’t really reject it, they just aren’t convinced. And how could the be held culpable for that after all. They’re conscience is Supreme dontchaknow. Which is awful darn close to saying the individual is Supreme.
What do ya know, we’re back to the Church of Man. And the lie in the garden.
Auto spell typos above. My apologies.
I agree, Louie. When I am at my local abortion mill I pray the rosary, period. Sometimes some good protestant people will show up (many of them former Catholics) but I won’t pray with them. I’m Catholic and will pray only as a Catholic.
If you can’t get the first commandment right than how do you expect to get the 5th right or any for that matter? God put them in an order from 1-10 for a good reason.
In the days of the passing of Miss Terri and JP2, I was a fallen away Catholic, a Novus Ordo one at that.
I have fuzzy memories of the Vatican speaking out against the horrific treatment of Miss Terri, and I thought even JP2 had addressed it himself, but considering he was in his own death throes, I’m not sure now it was the pope. But I do remember the Vatican speaking out, so if that news made it to even a fallen-away Catholic, maybe others did hear of some sort of objection, too, though sadly not with the same authority and weight of our great popes such as Pius X.
You are so right. EVERY bishop worldwide should have spoken out loudly. But why act Catholic when it’s easier to look the other way?
Prob read it here:
http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/03/22/schiavo.vatican/index.html?iref=newssearch
So the laity should follow Pope Francis’s lead and hide the Crucifix and the Rosary ,when in ” mixed company “,it may surprise him to know that Protestants also have prayer beads ,they recite the Our Father on them ,and there are many non Catholics who say the Rosary ,it has been very effective at abortion clinics.St Padre Pio said “the Rosary is the Weapon ” especially against Heresy.
Surprised Pavone didn’t praise Anglican for Life Henry VIII, Martin Luther, & the primacy of individual conscience too! From his Novena to Reverse HHS Mandate:
Day 1: “We pray for the conversion of those in civil authority who fail to appreciate the demands of conscience.”
Day 2: “We pray that your people… may always raise their voices on behalf of HUMAN rights.”
Day 3: “Give us the grace to speak up on behalf of conscience, GIVE TO EACH PERSON [ME], and to our public officials the GRACE to RESPECT EACH PERSON’S [Nancy Pelosi’s & Cecil Richar’ds] FREEDOM OF CONSCIENCE and RELIGION.” [all religions are equal and worthy of “respect”—including Satanists].
Day 5: “Open the eyes and minds of ALL (new evangelization alert: read “my”) To the threats that currently exist To our religious freedom, To the health and well-being of women, And to the good of our nation.”
Day 6: “You unite the human family… Strengthen the unity of your Church… Give us the wisdom to know That no group has a monopoly on the defense of life and freedom. May we work in an ecumenical and inter-religious spirit And welcome the efforts of all people of good will Who believe in freedom of religion and conscience.”
Day 7 “Enable us to defend our freedom…. We pray through Christ our Lord. Amen.” Day 8: “Restore our nation To the principles of freedom and justice Upon which it was founded.” [freedom (lawless) & justice (law based)
Day 9: “As we rejoice that we are citizens of your Kingdom, So make us always faithful citizens on earth.”
http://www.priestsforlife.org/novenas/novena.aspx?id=8
N.O. is full of perversion/disorientation. Traditional Pentecost Novena prays for the Gifts of the Holy Ghost [Fear of God, Piety, Knowledge, Fortitude, Counsel, Understanding and Wisdom]. One I have states on the 9th day: “The Gifts of the Holy Ghost perfect the supernatural virtues allowing us to practice them with greater docility to divine inspiration. As we grow in the Knowledge and Love of God under the direction of the Holy Ghost, our service (know, love and serve God) becomes more sincere and generous, the PRACTICE of VIRTUE more perfect. Such ACTS of VIRTUE leave the heart filled with joy and consolation and are known as the Fruits of the Holy Ghost. These Fruits in turn render the practice of virtue more attractive and become a powerful incentive for still greater efforts in the service of God.”
But this N.O. parish is praying a novena for the “fruits” without any practice of Virtue: prolly don’t even know what the virtues are. Practice of Virtue is Godly; the fruits on the other hand play right into the “new” evangelization: be kind and tolerant of vicious vice/sin: sodomite pedophile perverts and man-women baby killers.
This heresy is repeated every day: “Christ was raised from the dead to save us all.”
Day 1: “Increase in me, the VIRTUE of charity that I may love as God loves with the selflessness of the Saints.”
Day 2: “Give us the Joy that surpasses all understanding that we may live as a witness to Your love and fidelity!” [! stands for ‘the EMOTION/feeling’]
Day 3: “give us Peace that lasts through all trials!” [!”]
Day 4: “Please give us the patience of the Saints”
Day 5: “Jesus approached sinners with immense kindness. Holy Paraclete, please treat us humble sinners with the same kindness and give us the ability to treat all others with that kindness as well.”
Day 6: “please give us the GRACE to be faithful to You as you are to us!” [feeling!]
Day 7: “give us your POWER to treat all in our lives with the Gentleness of the Saints.”
Day 8: “Give us THIS self-control to have command over our emotions and desires that we may serve You more fully.”
Day 9: “Renew us by your power with your Goodness that we may bring the Good News to the world.” [Christ was raised from the dead to save us all!]
http://www.sthughofgrenoble.org/node/823
Fr. Pavone probably learned at his mother’s knee, “If you can’t say anything nice, don’t say anything at all.” If he had heard Rosanne Barr sing the National Anthem, he’d probably praise her for the wonderful words she expressed. (For those under forty, google it.) Louie, it was encouraging to follow the link to the actual article and read the comments to Fr. Pavone. The vast majority were instructive on how to respond to such worthless praise of A.L. (Tony Cooper’s comment is priceless.) 😉
prisca ann–thank you for the link. I believe at the time I did hear that there was a statement from the Vatican which addressed this issue while Pope JP2 was so ill. However, I know you agree that demonstrations and protests from Catholic clergy (esp. Bishops) and laity closer to home would have made a more effective impact. I know we can’t turn the clock back, but I hope this dismal failure on the part of the Church in America would serve as a testament that this must never be allowed again. May God have mercy on the soul of Terri Schiavo whose death should not be in vain. May God have mercy on those who stood by and let this happen. It is a scourge on the history of our nation.
I have wondered exactly how the Catholic prolife movement can reconcile a parent’s responsibility to raise their offspring in the Faith for the sake of the child’s ultimate salvation, with the decision to quickly urge women in unplanned pregnancies to give their children up for adoption. So if a woman aborts her innocent child, the child is not eternally damned, and the mother likely commits a mortal sin, which absent repentance, will leave her eternally damned. But, she has a chance to repent and seek forgiveness and make it to heaven one day. On the other hand, if a woman puts a child up for adoption, she leaves the child in a position where he or she may be raised in a false religion, or raised in no religion. The child’s salvation may be in peril because the mother abdicated her responsibility, I don’t think you can delegate the responsibility to raise your child in the faith. I looked but could find no theological answer when the situation is a voluntary abdication. So then, failing, arguably willfully neglecting that responsibility, how serious is that sin? Seems pretty serious to me! A mother could spend her whole life praying and petitioning the Lord to protect her child’s soul after realizing her mistake to give away her child, but that likely won’t happen. The prolife movement tells you that adoption is the responsible thing to do if you don’t have the resources to “keep” your child. This again neglects the fact that we should Trust in the Lord to provide… So all around, this strategy of pushing adoptions, to me, seems theologically unsound, and spiritually perilous, and chiefly concerned for temporal not the eternal fate of the child and mother. You cannot counsel someone to commit a sin to prevent a different sin. Thoughts?
Miss Terri crosses my mind often, still. To think what our Catholic sister endured is unbelievable, and the ache her family still feels. You are right again: maybe the lesson was learned by mostly remaining silent evil will prevail.
Miss Terri has many people praying for her and there is hope in that. Let’s never forget her or her family.
Has this question been settled? I thought theologians were still trying to figure it out.
The intention is to save the life of the frozen human embryo, not to thwart God’s will. Sort of like how ectopic pregnancies are “treated” – the intention is to save a life (mom’s) when otherwise two (mom’s and baby’s) would be lost.
I’m not so sure this question is quite so simple.
What is the answer? Keep them frozen until the end of time? Thaw em out and let them die, presumably unbaptized? Honest questions here that I thought were still unanswered by the magistarium.
The removal and freezing of the human embryo is the crime. That’s a given. But now what?
Dear Louie,
Are you brilliant ……….. or just uniquely graced by God and Our Lady for this time we are now living in?
As Andrew said, “I’ve always felt what you’ve said is true, but could never put it into words the way you have.” I feel the same.
I have noticed in the last few years at the Pro-Life March in Washington, D.C., that there has been an “ecumenical spirit” to the whole thing, disturbing my Catholic sensibilities.
Your words say what I, too, could not articulate.
“Pro-Lifeism.” A new religion. That explains it. What a relief!
I love this post!
Thank you for your ever-so-clear explanation and your graced insight, once again.
I had never thought of those complications that arise from adoption. Good points you make here.
In days past, when there were actually Catholic nuns/sisters, there were more opportunities for a child who was to be adopted to be placed in a Catholic “orphanage,” and then into a Catholic home.
But, there is no guarantee today that a child would go into a Catholic home, as you point out.
This is a question I quite honestly had not considered. In my own family, there is a couple where the husband is Catholic and the wife is not. They were married in the Catholic Church, after obtaining the dispensation from the local ordinary, in a petition the husband signed that reaffirmed his faith in Jesus Christ and his promise to do all in his power to bring up the offspring of the marriage in the Catholic Church. Some years past before the first child was born, then another about four years later. The children were brought up in the wife’s religion. The husband is still a Mass-going Catholic, active in his parish. But his children have never been Catholic. While they are ignorant of EENS, they are nonetheless at risk of missing out on eternal salvation. I won’t mention the name of the religion the now-adult children still practice, but they are not even baptized. So to bring it back to your scenarios, I would say that the only moral choices for an unwed Catholic mother is to give birth to child and 1) bring the child up in the Catholic faith, seeking whatever faithful assistance is necessary or 2) give the child up for adoption to a couple known for their practice of the One True Faith.
Destroy marriage, destroy the family. Destroy the family, destroy the baby.
EM — It is summed up by Cortez below. It is a disorder of the ten commandments. An inversion, once again, where man comes before God.
The 10 commandments are as follows:
1. I am the Lord your God: you shall not have strange gods before me. You shall not make for yourself a graven image.
2. You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain.
3. Remember to keep holy the Lord’s Day.
4. Honor your father and mother.
5. You shall not kill.
6. You shall not commit adultery.
7. You shall not steal
8. You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.
9. You shall not covet your neighbor’s wife.
10. You shall not covet your neighbor’s goods.
–
Those (like Fr. Frank Pavone) who are showing indifferentism toward Catholicism are breaking the 1st commandment.
Those who are having abortions (a heinous crime and sin) are breaking the 5th commandment.
Indifferentism and taking part in non-Catholic worship are sins against the 1st commandment and are worse sins in God’s eyes than killing —– even if the killing is of a defenseless baby in his mother’s womb. God hates sins against the First Commandment more than He hates abortion (a sin against the 5th). We are so “disordered” in our Catholic understanding that we do not even realize how sinful this act of Fr. Pavone’s actually is.
We do not know our Catholic faith —— which is another sin against the 1st commandment — that of apostasy.
Read questions # 205 & 206.
http://www.catholicity.com/baltimore-catechism/lesson16.html
The Attorney in that Battle to save Terri Schindler Schiavo, was Catholic Attorney & Catholic Apologist Christopher A. Ferrara.
Protestants, since the Lambeth Conference of The Anglican House of Bishops in 1931 in London, have since endorsed Artificial Birth Control. This means that ONLY One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church, teaches against Birth Control(Despite any In Flight Press Conferences by Papa Bergoglio).
I used to intern for Priests for Life when I was in college at NYU and I worked for Fr. Pavane directly and would meet with him each morning. In my experience, he is a very pragmatic and efficient focused person, full of ideas and very motivated. I did notice that the spiritual guidance I received was from another of the Priests who has since moved to a different organization. I think this is in part because Father Pavone never stopped working. I believe the structure of the organization and Fr. Pavone’s position plays to his spiritual weaknesses and make maintaining a rich interior life likely a challenge. Also, working in the pro-life field quickly distorts your reality because you are exposed to such evil and horrors and everything else seems like it can’t be as important as stopping this evil. Loosing souls to hell for not converting them to Catholicism is abstract and it seems less urgent or serious when you are dealing the babies dying every day. The devil is clever, abortion pulls on your heart and can quickly consume your thoughts – it MUST be the worst injustice, and by being such a horrific injustice to these children, it must be the most important thing to fight. But, our job is not to fight injustice on earth, it is to love God and do His will.
I will say that while I was at Priests for Life I learned my faith in a way it was never taught to me in my protestantized parish in the Bible Belt growing up, it was integral in my faith journey and protecting me while I was in the spiritual perilous waters of NYC in the acting industry (I thereafter changed fields and became an attorney). God used Priests for Life to guide me and protect me and I will always be grateful for all they did to help me. However, I agree with Louie’s assessment and I think it is spot on. It was so disheartening to read what Fr. Pavane wrote recently. I believe his ministry at Priests for Life has been detrimental to his personal spiritual life and his soul, though I believe he has done a lot of good and helped many people. Ultimately the question is not how many people did you help, it’s whether you did God’s Will. Fr. Pavone will one day face judgement as we all will, I pray that he realizes the correct priorities soon. We should be sure to include him in our prayers.
Well, here are some…the souls of aborted babies are indeed lost. They have original sin and are not entitled to enter heaven. They don’t go to the hell of the damned with the pain of sense and the remorse of conscience, but they are deprived of the Beatific Vision, which is the pain of loss. The Limbo of the Infants is a part of hell. The state of the infants, we are told by St. Thomas I believe, is not incompatible with a degree of natural happiness, but they have lost supernatural happiness.
If the children live, they may be saved. There is of course a risk that they might not, but that risk applies to everyone that is born.
Grace builds on nature, but does not destroy it. No grace can be gained after death. The children are deprived of God and God is offended by a usurpation of His power over life and death. Wilful murder is one of the sins that cries out to heaven for vengeance.
In the case of a Catholic parent giving his child to a non-Catholic, that does seem wrong, but certainly not preferable to killing the child. One can’t do evil that good may come of it; even if there were some way of baptizing the child, one can’t commit murder to preserve someone from sin. That has never been the mind of the Church, and it seems that in itself that would be a denial of Providence.
@Ever mindful
Your comment earlier above, seemed to suggest that Mr. V. equated saving babies with worshipping them. (Maybe try re-reading his post?)
His criticism was not aimed at pro life work itself; but at the harmful situation of Father Pavone’s making that noble cause so much of a singular concern in his life, (a kind of idol) that it led to his giving unqualified high public praise to Amoris Laetitia -even going so far as to call it a “new road map” for our culture- despite it’s containing so many grave evils and dangers to souls in its other sections, which no knowledgeable, faithful priest should ever be willing or able to ignore.
These dangerous errors make Amoris more of a road-map to hell, and Father Pavone, currently complicit in making it appear as nothing but beneficial.
It’s an unpopular but necessary act of Catholic Charity to call him back to order, while we pray for him. God bless those with the Faith and insight to tackle this job, responsibly.
This might not be welcome here, but here goes. Talking the truth about the Catholic Faith is not the same thing as living it. By this I mean that many traditionalists are zealous for preaching the faith but not zealous for actually living the faith. There’s a certain mean-spiritedness because of the zeal for the faith. But the tragic thing is that knowing and believing the faith is only first step to salvation, not the end goal. It’s one thing to proclaim the Social Kingship of Christ and another thing to live by His teachings.
For example, do Catholics know that the popes have supported the idea of a living wage, and it’s a Catholic idea that the state’s goal is the temporal happiness of its subjects? Why then do so many people confuse welfare with socialism? Why is the gospel according to Ayn Rand so popular? After the rise of Donald Trump I’m ashamed of so many Christians. Here is a man whose life,words and actions contradicts the gospel, whose words show that he doesn’t understand the gospel. And yet Christians want him in office, who endorse him despite his antichristian spirit. I am starting to think that despite what many say they opposed Obama because he wasn’t white.
If someone did live by the sermon on the mount I have a feeling that many Christians would denounce him as a pinko dirty liberal hippy. It is mean spirited to call a prolifer a embryo worshipper. Consider now the religion of anti liberalism that right wing Christians follow. They always try to excuse their mean spiritedness, ethnic hatred or warmongering by appealing to the cleansing at the temple or the Crusades. They ignore hospitality, mercy and social justice–because it’s “liberal”–even though God himself commands these things, both in the NT and OT. He even makes our salvation dependant on these things.
It’s not the man who believes who is saved, but the man who does the will of th Father.
Great article, Louie. And I wonder if his idea of “Rachel’s Vineyard” is sound. My understanding is in the Papal States the penalty for abortion was death by hanging. Can anyone comment on it? It is one thing to repent and save one’s soul, but the just punishment should still carry out.
Hey this is the first time I see you not quoting something, sounds good. Ok, please do not split hair, what Louie meant was one should always put God above creature, even the they are innocent lives like unborn babies. So Father should not deny the Catholic religion for the sake of getting others to be against abortion.
I’m learning so much about the Faith on this thread. Thanks Louis for the post and thanks to the many learned commenters.
Sounding a bit like Pope Francis complaining that Catholics talk to much about abortion…..
I don’t see the benefit of criticizing the commitment to saving lives. More of us should probably be active in this. Providing a comment on how this is done is something separate that can be addressed without damning the ardent. If you have a strong commitment to another compelling issue then that is your choice Otherwise you come across as Pope Francis did when he said that Catholics talk too much about topics like abortion. If you believe it is murder, then you cannot say or do enough.
Louie is not criticizing those committed to saving babies’ lives.
He is criticizing the inversion of the priorities —– and the neglect of the main priority —- that of getting ourselves and those around us to HEAVEN.
We cannot get to heaven if we are disobeying the 1st (and most important)commandment —– I am the Lord your God: you shall not have strange gods before me. (In this case, the strange “god” is the unborn baby.)
How do we know this? By Fr. Pavone’s OWN words from the Priests for Life website, as Louie links and writes above.
–
Also –
On the Priests For Life website (which Louie links above), Fr. Pavone also writes:
“Organizers should therefore plan for prayers and devotions in which all who are present on a given occasion can participate with a clear conscience.”
Catholics are FORBIDDEN by the first commandment to take part in non-Catholic worship. We cannot “with a clear conscience,” therefore, “plan for prayers and devotions in which all who are present on a given occasion can participate.” ————– Not allowed. Period.
We should protect the unborn, but not at the expense of losing our own souls.
–
The fact that we, as Catholics, do not understand Louie’s article, in itself, proves the point.
We do not know our Catholic faith. We are sinning against the first commandment by apostasy.
See # 205 & 206 from this link:
http://www.catholicity.com/baltimore-catechism/lesson16.html
The man who does the will of the Father is the man who obeys the FIRST commandment, first.
And the next 9 commandments —– in their proper order.
What better charity is there?
–
It is mean-spirited to draw Catholics into denial of their precious Catholic faith, as Fr. Pavone does on his website.
It is charity to point out the error of our thinking, as Louie does. It is charity, on Louie’s part, to attempt to correct our beliefs (or thinking), if we believe as Fr. Pavone does. Fr. Pavone’s beliefs (as stated on his own website) are NOT Catholic and will lead us on the path to hell.
–
I am grateful to have been corrected by Louie’s words. Thanks be to God for your charity, Louie.
This question has been settled. Does anyone care to acknowledge this? Of course not because people’s minds have been so warped over the last 70 years with Humanae Vitae, Theology of the Body’ with Christopher West and company, and the separation of procreation from sex and now with technologies embracing the vice versa of separation of sex from procreation. If one embraces the separation of sex from procreation whether from the chemical means or from NFP when it plans exclusively to have conjugal realtions during the infertile period in order to avoid having children this will inevitably lead to a weakened mind on the morality of frozen embryo transfer.
It is clearly stated in the document ‘Dignitas Personae’ that “there is in fact no solution to this problem.” We have to realise that before this document was published John Paul II during his pontificate lead some to beleive that there could be doubt whether this was unethical when, in his weakness, he said that, “There APPEARS to be no solution to this dilema.” rather than “there is in FACT NO SOLUTION to this problem.” Prior to Benedict’s document ” Dignitas Personae” there were many confused people and still are, with yourself included unfortunately, who took it that there just might be a solution and that we were just not sure which solution could be taken. HOWEVER, seeing the need for clarity because of the abuses of people who believed we could decide ourselves or were confused, Rome, under Benedict XVI, came out with this document, Personae Humane, to say that indeed there is NO solution to this problem. One cannot do an evil so that good can from it. This act bastardizes humans and the sex act and lowers it to a utilitarian act.
This document, Personae Humanae, could have been more bold in my opinion, but it was the best these broken down people could do considering the crisis we are experiencing with the crisis of marriage and its meaning and laws governing it.
Look, this document may not convince you but use your common sense. The higher value is the sacrament of marriage and its God given laws and orders governing it. One can NEVER! NEVER! NEVER! NEVER! separate procreation from sex whether that is coming from the angle of sex from procreation or procreation from sex. Anyway you slice it both these types of separations go against God and HIS, HIS! HIS! HIS !HIS HIS! HIS! order and way for bringing souls into being which cannot be tampered with. To bastardized marriage and reproduction further from the utilitarian proceedure that would scandalize and harm those cooperating in this act is immoral and a mortal sin would further add another abuse and sin to the already act of the frozen embryo procedure. The Frozen embryo does not have a right to life at the cost of further again scandalizing God’s laws on marriage and its sanctity. The procreation and education of children for God’s glory can only be done through the souls of a married couple from the natural sex act instituted by God. This may not have an obvious meaning or value to many because of our warped confusion on the full meaning of marriage in all its glory but all I can say is WAKE UP!
Here is an actual fact that I know of. A high school teacher who was living with her female friend, wanted to become a mother through this perverted method. She of course asked permission of her Bishop and he said to pray on it and to continue to seek counsel. Of course it was his responsibility to tell her no just as the previous Bishop at the time told others who asked this same question and permission. Well unfortunately this lost sheep went her merry way and came to the conclusion,from her liberal studies from modern theologians, that the Church, in all her wisdom, really doesn’t ‘t know or have an answer to this. She therefor decided to go ahead and impregnate herself with a frozen embryo and was given permission by the Principal to submit, through a massive high school email to all the families of this high school in order to instruct them on her studies and how she came to the conclusion that because the Church really doesn’t have a definitive answer she is going to proceed with this frozen embryo proceedure. She did and of course 90 percent of the lost so called Catholics thought she was an absolute hero. Those that did not, which were very very few, immediately pulled their children from this “school of Man” parading as a Catholic School. And ,oh yes, she was permitted to parade around the school during her glorified Pro-life pregnancy and continue teaching until she gave birth and after she could handed over this child to daycare or perhaps her older girlfriend that she was living with she continued teaching at the school. The Bishop by the way was warned of his error to allow this, especially in a full out Catholic school setting where many, many souls will be seriously harmed. Of course nothing came of that for I have heard that she has done it again and she has baby number two and is still parading around this school.
Just recounting this story is making me sick to my stomach. Look, these frozen embryos can at least be sprinkled with holy water in an effort to baptize them and if they die before this procedure they will at the very least go to limbo. We can’t save them and these bastardized procedure of IVF and embryo transfer will have serious repercussions as we are seeing from just this one misguided tragic pathetic bastardized scenario.
Where I said ‘Personae Humanae’ I meant to say ‘Dignitas Personae’.
Dear Louie,
Not long ago, I saw a bumper sticker and it said “Pro Life – John 6:54”. I must say I was astounded, thinking that this is the best ‘pro-life’ quote I ever saw.
As a human being Fr. Pavone has done many great works of mercy, like with Terri Schiavo……but as a very ecumenical Catholic priest, who ought to desire with all his heart to save souls, because he believes with his whole heart in the True Presence in the Most Blessed Sacrament…….? This praise of the last ‘exhortation’ from Pope Francis is a great proof for me that, he is just a good man.
Jesu Maria Joseph I love you, save souls!
May God Bless All Soldiers of Christ!
An Ecumenist can not be a Catholic. The 5th commandment is observed by Muslims, Jews, Protestants and even pagans like Buddhist too.
I put a link for you and GPU on “Voris.”
“Pro-Lifer’s” live in adultery, produce bastards and act like they’re doing God a favor…
Sorry,
RbM
Nice piece. I’ll bet you find it sad to have to write such things, yet you do it any way, because it’s the right thing.
–
A certain extremely popular and truly excellent (in many respects) pro-life news org, run by Catholics with a Traditionalist bent even tolerates no dissent from their ecumenical orientation in their comboxes or elsewhere. It is not the whole truth that is paramount.
–
Robert Siscoe had a really excellent article about this topic in (I think) a Seattle Catholic blog or paper some years ago that can still be found on the web. He made this point: It is GOD, not man, that will cause this war (the pro-life war) to be won, when it is, and thus we should endeavor to please God, by supplicating Him most perfectly, instead of endeavoring to win more mere hapless men to the cause by hiding our offensive lamps.
where is the link?
http://www.traditioninaction.org/Questions/B873_Voris.html
But the question now is not separating procreation from the marital act because that sin has ALREADY been committed by the creation of new life in the petri dish. The guilty parties will have to answer for that sooner or later one way or another.
But the lives already exist. The only question now is, what is our responsibility to these unbaptized lives according to the Moral Law? It’s not about “creating life” apart from procreation, again, because, unfortunately, that’s already been done.
Are we required to keep them frozen until Our Lord returns? Are we allowed to thaw them out, killing them? Are we required or allowed, somehow, to attempt to baptize them? And finally, are we allowed to attempt to save their lives by trying to bring them to full gestation?
Look, me wife and I were unable to conceive and we stood our ground against IVF for years (while being scorned for that stand by certain family members and numerous doctors). So I fully understand and submit to the Church on this. As regards to the tragic question of already existing thousands of lives in petri dishes throughout the world, I’m just not sure it’s quite as simple as you are saying.
Like I said Craig in my previous post. The Church absolutely says that one cannot commit another mortal sin so that good may come out of it. These frozen embryos must be thawed because the only way they can continue their life is to commit the mortal sin of further using them and further allowing the people who cooperate in this to commit a mortal sin through means that are against God’s will. God would never will that they be incubated by anyone, be that a person or an animal or some fake artificial uterus period. I sometimes feel people who think like you in regards to life once conceived and that it at all cost must trump God’s laws on procreation, and there are many I beleive who think as you do, do so because they, in essence, do not fully grasp the gravity of tampering with the procreative process outside of God’s order. Either you get the gravity of this or you don’t. To say that your wife and you rejected IVF is understandable and commendable but you must further strive to fully understand all of the many implications and reasons why God ordered the whole spectrum of procreation from conception and onward the way he did. Conception exclusively on its own and outside the marital act is NOT His plan or command. It is not our duty to save their lives at the expense of committing a sacrilege. To reincubate these frozen embryos would be another act of separating procreation from the sex act. To reincubate them so they can continue the path for procreation is separating procreation from sex. The conception of the embryo is dependent on the procreative path in order to be born. So your logic is skewed I beleive because you separate the process of procreation from the conception that exists in this reincubate on procedure. As though the God ordered procreative path again doesn’t matter as much as life itself once conceived. To deliberately sin against God and His laws on marriage is the graver sin. If this above scenario with the school teacher doesn’t make your skin crawl I don’t know what will. How can anyone will this on an embryo?
You’re response is too emotional. I’ll look around for a good Thomist to lay it all out a little better.
Lose the vitreol and the emotion and you’ll make a better case. I’m not interested in jacked up emotional responses. I’m interested in the God given Moral Law applied to the paradoxical situation in question.
I think it could be argued that your emotions for the embryo at all costs to God’s laws on marriage and the marital act are not only too much but your emotions are misplaced and wrongly prioritized. Emotions are not a bad thing when fighting for the truth and justice. I beleive you should put your emotions in right the place, i.e. For God’s laws and His ways on marriage and procreation. I beleive that one can never have too much emotion when it comes to defending God’s laws.
I need to point out that I gave you my research from the beginning of this discussion and if you will be honest in this, it is not based all on my emotion alone. Dignitas Personae supports my logic. Albeit not as boldly and as clearly as I put it but their conclusion nonetheless is the following, “In fact there is no solution to this problem”. Therefor to reincubate these embryos is clearly and certainly not an option. Please read the document if you don’t beleive me and if, as you say, you wish to seek a so called ” unemotional response” rather than one from me whom you consider far too ’emotional. Is there really is such a thing as a completely unemotional response? I tend to think not.
The idolatry of the embryo is not of the present Pope’s making. He has shown a (surely commendable) refusal to be “obsessed” by this issue. Deplorable as the development of this issue into an idolatry is, it seems to have taken hold in the USA more or less spontaneously, because Catholics have not listened to the Popes carefully enough. The Popes have had much to teach about other than the wrongness of abortion.
A start in resisting idolatry of the embryo could be made by dropping talk of the “sanctity of life”. Life is not holy, and embryos are not holy. If they are holy when in the womb, what need have they of Baptism ? All the unbaptised, unborn or not, need Baptism. Life is a gift of God – that does not make it holy. Talk of the “sanctity of life” implies that we are holy simply in virtue of being human creatures – but if that is so, what need have we of Christ ?
Protecting them is not wrong. What is wrong, and seriously so, is for the issue of opposition to abortion to swamp everything else in Catholicism, and to be treated, in practice even if not in principle, as more important than serving the True God alone. For Catholics to hide or dilute their Catholicism in order to have ecumenical anti-abortion protests. is wrong – to do that, is to subordinate our duty to God, to our duty to our neighbour. Which is self-defeating.
Truth Seeker:
I think if Our Lord taught in the US today what He teaches in the Gospels, He would be denounced very savagely – especially by some of the Churches. C. S. Lewis said something to the effect that the New Testament is too Conservative for some people, and too Socialist for others. All attempts to make Our Lord the guarantor of a particular political doctrine fail, for the simple reason that “My Kingdom/Reign/Kingship is not of this world”. If it were, it would be one of the kingdoms under the power of the devil that Our Lord was tempted with. Our Lord was not a Socialist, Democrat, Republican, libertarian, Objectivist – different parties may reflect some of His Teaching, but none of them reflects it all.
This pathetic, useless, and unkind hit piece on Father Frank Pavone is nasty. I’m a Trad Catholic who is consecrated to Our Lady via the Mission Immaculatae. I suggest Mr. Verecchio do the same. She will soften your approach to hot topics. That is what she has done for me.
This nasty hit piece accomplishes the following:
-Puts a bad light on Trad Catholics.
-Curses pro-life activists.
-Condemns Fr. Frank Pavone.
-Highlights Mr. Verecchio’s temptations toward Gnosticism.
There is no such thing as “embryo worship.” In fact, I was accused of “fetal worship” by a vehemently pro-abortion member of NARAL at a protest.
Human offspring aka embryos are in great danger. They are being Cannibalized By Humanity. Write about that why don’t you.
Fr. Pavone has done a yeoman’s work to raise awareness among bishops, priests and the laity about the demonic abortion racket. He deserves your praise not condemnation. So what if he rattles your sensitivities? Who the hell are you to complain?
I’ve posted this comment on my blog so if you delete it my subscribers can still read it. http://westcoastprolife.wordpress.com
Mr. Verrecchio has also done the consecration to Our Lady using the St. Louie de Montfort formula. He has said this at one of the conferences he spoke at.
Many of us have also used this formula for consecration to Our Most Blessed Mother.
–
Dear Nina DM Rhea, you have missed the point of Mr. V’s post.
It is a matter of priorities —-that is, getting them in their PROPER ORDER.
Of course, Louie is pro-life. That you have missed the point of this post is proof of its truth. We have lost the TRUE FAITH.
The commandments are in the order they are in because God put them in that order. We are not to turn them up-side down. Therein lies the problem, and that you do not see that is proof thereof.
http://www.catholicity.com/baltimore-catechism/lesson16.html
This catechism may help you. Read questions 205 & 206 for greater clarity.
It is important to know for our own salvation.
–
Things will be getting worse, we must know the fundamentals to save our souls.
I am not completely without intelligence. I do not care whether I missed the point. In fact, maybe I have. But this is an exercise in negativity. It’s unworthy of anyone to put Fr. Pavone in a category – “pro-lifeism” – just to Make A Point.
May I remind everyone that Fr. Pavone almost lost his ministry. His superior order Fr. Pavone to get out of the public eye for a year or more. Fr. Pavone obeyed the order. The fine line that he walks is well noted. And now we have this putrid article that stinks Just To Make A Point.
Fr. Pavone is in my highest esteem. I do not worry and fret over which side of the aisle he’s on.
Thanks for the link. I replied on the well written article on Voris. I learn a lot too from the article.
But do you agree that Fr. Pavone is a heretic or Apostate if he supports Francis’ AL? So he got the 5th commandment right but he rejects the 1st commandment. Can he be a Catholic?
“Fr. Pavone is in my highest esteem” That is your subjective feeling. But objectively is he a Heretic or Apostate if he not only does not condemn AL but praise it? You don’t think his action is demonic?
If you honestly dont fret over what side of the aisle he (or ANY person for that matter) is on then what is your point? You’re more worried about defending a man you admire than you are in defending Catholicism? Thats not a very prudent way to go through life.