HomeBlog PostThe presence of the past The presence of the past Louie May 14, 2014 34 Comments For more on Cardinal Kasper’s presentation at the Consistory of Cardinals in Rome in February 2014 see: Rumblings in Rome Follow us on: Tweet Related Posts Time to move on… The face of disorientation The future world: More Godly or more godless? Latest Comments susan May 14, 2014 out. of. the. ballpark.!!!!!! Clear, concise TEACHING!…OUTSTANDING!!!!! I’ll be using this often….THANKS Louie! Log in to Reply GreatPretender51 May 14, 2014 Shouldn’t we be calling this October-fest a SIN-od? Log in to Reply Anastasia May 14, 2014 Dear Louie, My husband and I look forward to viewing Harvesting the Fruit daily but I really need to try to help you see that Humanae Vitae was the worst thing ever for the Church. It flung the doors wide open to contraception. I agree that the setting up of this commission to review the teachings on contraception was terrible but Paul VI was anything but heroic by saying that one can have recourse to the infertile period to space children. He didn’t even include for grave reasons as PiusXII erroneously did as he did for the first time publicly in his private letter to the midwives. One can never separate or subordinate the primary purpose of procreation and education of children for God’s glory to the secondary purpose of unity. Casti Conubii clearly teaches this. I don’t know one traditional. catholic who hasn’t been sucked into this NFP mentality even if they espouse for so called grave reasons only. Having recourse to the infertile period in order to avoid conception for whatever noble reason one wishes to put forth is a sin and is contraception. I agree with the Canadian bishops when they said that Humanae Vitae is not infallible. My reasons of course are different because Humanae Vitae contradicts PiusXI Casti Conubii. The Church has always taught and natural and moral law has always taught that it is sinful and goes against nature and God’s order to try to separate the primary purpose of procreation from the purpose of unity. These two purpose aren’t even at the same level. Unity is there to serve the grand and holy mission of procreation and education of children for God’s glory. When oh when are people going to get this. We have been so brained washed by the hippie movement, the feminist movement, the whore movement and the pornographic movement that the majority no longer truly understands sexual purity. Log in to Reply Indignus famulus September 8, 2014 Dear Anastasia (and any who agree with her), After much study, we currently disagree with your views on this, but since you haven’t started a forum to discuss them off the main blog and we wish the truth to be known, we’ve continued searching for definitive statements from trustworthy authorites. ___ We recently found these, from Cardinal Burke- head of the Roman Rota (the highest Vatican court) refuting the popular “Who am I to judge” mentality, and speaking on unitive love and procreation: Sept 4, 2014: http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/we-have-to-judge-acts-vaticans-cardinal-burke-dismantles-who-am-i-to-judge ___ “We have to get away from a tendency that developed in recent years of pitting the unitive nature of marriage against the procreative nature of marriage instead of seeing that the two are essentially related to one another.”…. ___ “To stress the inseparable goods of marriage, the unity between husband and wife but at the same time the procreativity of their union. That the union of husband and wife the conjugal union is by its very nature procreative. And this is with the great insight of Pope Paul VI, it’s been the foundation of the Church’s teaching on contracepton since the beginning, and that therefore you cannot–the minute you permit an understanding of the conjugal union which sets aside the procreative–the essentially procreative nature of the act and says, “well these acts are good, even though we’re using chemicals or we’re using some kind of a device to prevent procreation because of our unitive”, but it cannot be truly a conjugal union if it’s not at the same time open to the gift of new life.” Log in to Reply Anastasia May 14, 2014 I pressed send by accident in the above comment and I need to conclude by saying that you should be very careful in saying that you think the Holy Spirit saved the day with Humanae Vitae. It put it’s stamp loud and clear on contraception. just look at the fruits Louie. I really wish there were more traditionalists who weren’t so brainwashed when it comes to NFP. The only ones that I have found who get it are, I am sad to say,are some sedevacantists. I believe that many are going to use this precise thinking that the Holy Spirit saved the day and actually didn’t allow the dogmas on marriage to be changed while at the same actually changing them in this upcoming Octoberfest of the SIN-nod. Log in to Reply Michael Leon May 14, 2014 Hello Louie. Thank you for a very sober and very sobering account of where we are and where we are headed. Sandro Magister expresses a similar sentiment here: http://chiesa.espresso.repubblica.it/articolo/1350783?eng=y Magister in his own way offers the “Pope” a way out of the corner that he has painted himself into in. (Very deliberately I might add.) He proposes a replay of the Humanae Vitae scenario as you have described. Magister’s message is also a warning of the consequences of taking this papal game of brinkmanship a bit too far. Sooner or later the piper must be paid. And the piper in this case is the devil himself. I for one believe that Bergoglio has every intention of carrying through on this “October revolution”. He repeats often how we must listen to the “Holy Spirit” and follow its revolutionary call. This spirit that he asks us to follow is a masonic spirit of false “liberty” and false “progress”. This upcoming Synod is the next step in converting the Holy Catholic Church into a shadow of the Anglican Church with its “Lambert Conferences” where “dogma” can be redefined with a simple “democratic” vote. As a better historical analogy I would propose the 1930 Lambert Conference which “approved the use of birth control in limited circumstances”. This was a first for the Christian denominations. This opened the door a crack and “the smoke of satan” had no difficulty pouring through…. One must also consider the dire consequences of changing the Church’s teaching on marriage — especially at a time like this when the very concept of marriage is being challenged. No sooner does the Catholic Church change “one iota” of the teachings of Christ Himself on marriage then the challenges will come through the secular media and even through the courts demanding that the same sort of “exceptions” granted for divorced and “remarried” be applied to “homosexuals”, etc. The stakes are very high. Not just political stakes but more importantly in the realm of the spiritual. This is a battle between the prince of darkness and Our Lady. I believe the proper Catholic response to this upcoming “synod of the family” is to hold a “Council of Restoration” that will elect a true successor of Peter — a true Pope. I have written a brief open letter to Bishop Fellay for this purpose: http://publicvigil.blogspot.com/2014/05/we-beseech-bishop-fellay-to-call.html I don’t see any alternative at this time and “now is the time” to put a stop to this auto-destruction of the Church before it is too late. Log in to Reply salvemur May 15, 2014 Excellent initiative: I would hazard to guess there would be ‘novus ordo’ bishops who have reached the point of enough is enough and would support Bishop Fellay: – “The past should, in this, be our guidance. Faced with an unprecedented threat, St. Athanasius – and, if memory serves, St. Eusebius too – began to autonomously appoint bishops. That, my friends, is a tad more extreme than calling a clown a clown. But Athanasius knew the situation was too grave to waste time wondering whether he would be accused of “schism”. Christ here. Liberius there. This is all Athanasius needed to know. ” – http://mundabor.wordpress.com/2014/05/14/the-bloggers-the-orks-and-the-uruk-hai/ Log in to Reply treefrog May 14, 2014 Anastasia, this sentence makes no sense: ”He didn’t even include for grave reasons as PiusXII erroneously did as he did for the first time publicly in his private letter to the midwives.” A public private letter? Plus you accuse Pius XII of error? Michael Leon, as I understand it, the only people who have power to depose Pope Francis would be a majority of the world’s Catholic bishops. Bishop Fellay and his other SSPX bishops do not possess this authority. Log in to Reply Anastasia May 15, 2014 Tree Frog, Thank you so much for taking the time to point out my very poorly constructed sentence. I should have taken the time to fix this on my second comment. It should have read something like this. Humanae Vitae never even bothered to say that one can only,for grave reasons,have recourse exclusively to the infertile period in order to avoid having children. PiusXII’s private letter to the midwives has now become public knowledge for those who search out to defend having recourse exclusively to the infertile period in order to avoid having children. PiusXII opened wide the doors to contraception and to redefining marriage. Although his letter to the midwives reiterates the primary purpose of marriage being the procreation and education of children and that one can never separate the primary purpose of procreation from the secondary purpose of unity he totally contradicts this teaching with his blessing on having recourse exclusively to the infertile period in order to avoid conception. As I said before PiusXII erred when he contradicted his own statements and those teachings of PiusXI in Casti Conubii. Yes, I do believe a pope can err err. Haven’t we had enough examples of Popes who have been erring on a grand scale for over many years. God bless you and thank you once again for taking the time to help me to correct my poor writing skills. I hope I have helped others in my comments. Log in to Reply Mary Regina May 15, 2014 Thank you Anastasia for all your posts. I agree. You know what, I think you and I are the only two traditional Catholics left on earth who see the contraceptive attitudes buried in the NFP mentality. As if it’s okay to contracept as long as natural methods are used, regardless of the me-first thought process. My Catholic friends argue in favor of it. I tell them if they have grave reason, they can simply abstain without any need for charts and temps. I used to be in that camp. I had reproductive illness. At various times, I was using NFP to conceive and also to avoid pregnancy. It took me 30 years to realize that I finally conceived only after I threw away all the charts and temps, and relied on God’s providence. He wanted to decide when I would have a child, not me. Now that I’m over the hill, I find myself having to rely on God’s providence for my security in old age. But at least I learned my lesson. I haven’t had any luck convincing others to change their minds though. Log in to Reply cagnew May 15, 2014 You can count me as another anti-NFP Catholic! I know two others, so we aren’t totally alone. However, most Catholics- even “good” ones- get very, very nasty when you start questioning their “Catholic birth control” (as my protestant mother-in-law calls it). I’m only in my thirties, but once upon a time, I was a HUGE NFP supporter. I took the classes and considered becoming an instructor. My husband and I had planned on using NFP to avoid having children in the beginning of our marriage. Three months before the wedding I was told I was not able to have children naturally and would have to use in vitro or some other ART. I was devastated because there was no way would do that since it was against Church teaching. We resigned ourselves and got married anyway, and never gave another thought to NFP. Then three months later, I got a very unexpected positive pregnancy test Thank God!!!! Had I not been told that I couldn’t have children, we would have used NFP and we never would have had our beautiful daughter. We now have 4 children and hope and pray for more! How I came to my anti-NFP position is another story though, and it’s too long for a comment box Like some of the above posters, I do not think HV was all that great. In fact, when you read it, the one spot where it talks about NFP (not by name, of course) sounds completely out of place. I often wonder how it ended up in there. I believe it was a complete compromise. Just my opinion, of course. Log in to Reply Indignus famulus September 8, 2014 , After much study, we currently disagree with your views on this, but since you haven’t started a forum to discuss them off the main blog and we wish the truth to be known, we’ve continued searching for definitive statements from trustworthy authorites. ___ We recently found these, from Cardinal Burke- head of the Roman Rota (the highest Vatican court) refuting the popular “Who am I to judge” mentality, and speaking on unitive love and procreation: Sept 4, 2014: http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/we-have-to-judge-acts-vaticans-cardinal-burke-dismantles-who-am-i-to-judge ___ “We have to get away from a tendency that developed in recent years of pitting the unitive nature of marriage against the procreative nature of marriage instead of seeing that the two are essentially related to one another.”…. ___ “To stress the inseparable goods of marriage, the unity between husband and wife but at the same time the procreativity of their union. That the union of husband and wife the conjugal union is by its very nature procreative. And this is with the great insight of Pope Paul VI, it’s been the foundation of the Church’s teaching on contracepton since the beginning, and that therefore you cannot–the minute you permit an understanding of the conjugal union which sets aside the procreative–the essentially procreative nature of the act and says, “well these acts are good, even though we’re using chemicals or we’re using some kind of a device to prevent procreation because of our unitive”, but it cannot be truly a conjugal union if it’s not at the same time open to the gift of new life.” Log in to Reply Michael Leon May 15, 2014 Dear treefog. If you were living in the time just after Pentecost, would you like St. Paul follow the Jewish High Priest and persecute the Church of Jesus Christ? Or if like St. Paul you saw the light, would you abandon the Jewish heirarchy and follow Christ? Yes, I’m comparing Bergoglio and the Cardinals to the Jewish High Priest and his Council that failed to recognize the Messiah. And in addition in my opinion Bergoglio has already ex-communicated himself when he “infallibly” “canonized” Vatican II. But there must be a Pope. There must be a priestly hierarchy and there must be discipline and obedience. The current Bishops and Cardinals are hardly up to the job of electing a true Pope. Therefore there must be an ecumenical council of all those who truly profess the faith of the Catholic Church. NOT the false Conciliar religion. As I said, I see no other option. The task of the restoration of the Catholic faith will only become more difficult with the passage of time. Yes, it is a divisive and difficult path. But at least now there is a growing chorus of Catholic voices that recognize the danger to the Church of following down the path of Conciliarism. It is time to call for unity and the unifying force is the Pope. But he must be a Catholic Pope. Bergoglio is not Catholic. Log in to Reply AnnaMarie May 15, 2014 Louis, Maybe it would be better not to have comments on your blog after all, if they’re not going to be moderated a bit more. Please consider it. Log in to Reply salvemur May 15, 2014 i think a moderator on Frankie would probably save more souls. Log in to Reply de Maria numquam satis May 15, 2014 Bravo !–my dear Saluto Log in to Reply de Maria numquam satis May 15, 2014 oops, please forgive. It was automatic. Log in to Reply salvemur May 15, 2014 hey, de Maria. I think vii catholics who have little knowledge of their Church have a deep superstition about prelates and popes. as mundabor reminded people the other day, catholics used to have rotten cabbages at the ready to hurl at bad shepherds. the ‘docility’ which Frankie keeps harping on when it comes to the ‘sheep’ would be all too convenient for a peter who is hell-bent on being a secular-simon. I wonder how frankie-simon would look dressed in rotten cabbage? or kasper or maradiaga? it might wake them up from their drunken sleep of modernism – the smell might anyway. de Maria numquam satis May 15, 2014 Anastasia, I agree with you. It is clear to many that the practice of NFP as a way of life is one of the most, if not the most, Luciferian deceptions within the last decades. To your point, at least partially,, if I may offer: http://www.christianorder.com/features/features_2013/features_may13.html Log in to Reply Anastasia May 15, 2014 de Maria numquam satis, Thank you for your support. I did go to your link but sadly enough it doesn’t fully reject the error that says one can have recourse exclusively to the infertile period in order to avoid having children,when it says in its report …”NFP, if used properly, is undoubtedly a licit dispensation according to Holy Mother Church..” The article does however see the utter failure and evil that NFP has brought to our Most Holy Mother Church and to the sacrament of marriage. For this I give it some credit. Forge on my friend and let us not be afraid of declaring Truth in it’s entirety from the snares of the devil, Jesus deliver us Log in to Reply de Maria numquam satis May 15, 2014 dear Anastasia, of course you are right and this is why I stated-partially. I find it heart wrenching –heartbreaking, to witness close to home, if you will, the destruction to Catholic family life and Holy Matrimony of NFP “practice” of “traditionalist” young marrieds –including the disastrous affect to the children. Press on and if I may— I beg you to continue speaking boldly on this matter. Peace be to you. Log in to Reply Edu May 15, 2014 Michael Leon, – I agree wholeheartedly that unless we have a catholic pope sitting on the throne of Peter, the crisis in the Church will only continue to worsen, and thus I understand your position about the need to call for a “Council of Restoration”. However, calling such a council by traditionalists worldwide for the election of a true catholic pope would be fraught with serious dangers. Firstly, it is easy to imagine that not all traditionalists worldwide would agree with the validity of such an election (I can easily imagine a dispute between the SSPX and the FSSP/indult factions here). The whole thing could trigger a schism not unlike the great western schism of the late 14th century. Secondly, truly conservative novus ordites, who despite only having access to the new mass and new sacraments, are still true catholics (I used to be one such catholic myself before I learned that the TLM even existed), would not consider such an election valid (supposing they even got to “learn” that such an election had indeed taken place!). – Perhaps a better way to go forward would be for all the traditional priests and bishops of the world to be gathered together for a eucharistic congress in the city of Trent, Italy, to defend Catholic doctrine and morality and unite all the forces of Catholicism into one single locus. – This is essentialy the idea of Fr Antonio Iglesias (SSPX-Williamson faction): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dxc4xuAs1xc&list=PLYdQ2eEX74-FNByA2zQirsBElq5kgkYjS – This could take place during the heretical and impious “SIN-NOD” to take place in October, becoming a voice of Catholic truth crying out in the wilderness of apostasy, giving people a chance to contrast true Catholic teaching with the false teaching of the conciliar Church. If this unity could be achieved, then traditional Catholicism would be a force that would have to be reckoned with by the Conciliar Church. Unless such unity is achieved, I see no way forward. – “In the end, my Immaculate Heart will triumph…” – ~ Our Lady of Fatima, July 13, 1917 Log in to Reply Michael Leon May 15, 2014 Hello Edu, I agree that there is a huge danger of proclaiming a true Catholic Pope and then have Catholics splinter into many groups…. just like the protestants. I just cannot think of an alternative that will put a stop to the loss of souls. I’m afraid that most Novo Ordo Catholics are well on their way to losing their souls — and this was true even before Bergoglio assumed the Chair of Peter. Conciliarism preaches a gospel which is barely distinguishable from that of secular humanism — you know human rights, etc. Very masonic. Louie, if you are reading this, I listened to an interesting talk on St. Athanasius the other day by Cristopher Check of the Institute of Catholic Culture: http://www.instituteofcatholicculture.org/hammer-of-the-heretics-st-athanasius-the-council-of-nicaea/ I would love to get your response. What can we learn about St. Athanasius and his battles against the Arian heresy? How can we apply those lessons to our current situation in the Church? Interestingly the description of Arius reminded me of BHO — our humanist President. Please. One good thing we can take from this crisis is that it is a call from the Holy Spirit to learn about our Catholic history, traditions and authentic teachings. Yours in Christ, Michael Log in to Reply Michael Leon May 15, 2014 Dear Edu I just watched the video you recommended of Padre Iglesias. Thank you very much for sharing this with me. It’s wonderful to hear a true Catholic priest. Yes, I think his idea of Eucharistic Congress is truly inspired by the Holy Spirit. It is amazing that this video is from December 2013. Does he have more recent ones? Ideally such a Congress would be held around the time of Bergoglio’s “October Revolution” so that the Catholic world would be able to contrast a true Catholic Congress with a Conciliar Catholic Congress. I think we should all take up a collection so that we can send Louie as our representative — and I’m being very serious. What do you think? Log in to Reply Edu May 16, 2014 Dear Michael, – If the idea of holding a “Eucharistic Congress” around the time of (as you have so aptly described) Bergoglio’s “October Revolution” does indeed pick up steam, sending Mr Verrechio as our “representative” would be a wonderful idea! Hopefully a lot of readers from this site would support such an idea. I see so many divisions within traditionalism though (SSPX – even WITHIN the SSPX – vs FSSP/indult etc), that right now realistically speaking holding such a congress (even though I wholeheartedly believe it would a magnificent idea) seems more like a dream than anything else. – But if the idea would gain acceptance, who knows what wonderful fruits it could bring to the Church? – Here you can find more sermons from Padre Antonio Iglesias: – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mXv90E9A5DQ&list=PLPCOQXpbKqUrZsmc1WRJ0rSj3TO8egh7Y – God Bless. Log in to Reply Anastasia May 15, 2014 dear de Maria, I read your first reply that you sent to me far too quickly and you are right. I am sorry for having missed your word “partially” but I am very happy to see that I have met another one like me suffering in agony over the destruction of marriage. Thanks for the boost and I will continue on no matter what suffering is required to defend the sacrament of marriage. Your sister in Christ, Anastasia Log in to Reply Ontarienne69 May 15, 2014 Thanks for the excellent link. It resolved a logical disconnect I incurred yesterday while reading an excerpt from a Catholic pamphlet extolling the wonders of NFP as opposed to artificial contraception. From no angle I tried could I understand the difference. Pax Tecum Log in to Reply de Maria numquam satis May 15, 2014 apologize, off topic dear brethren, hilarity non-specific– “to laugh or to cry?” http://culbreath.wordpress.com/2014/05/14/pope-francis-rails-against-the-intellectual-aristocracy/ Log in to Reply Denise May 15, 2014 It’s been awhile since I’ve read the relevant passages from HV, but from what I recall, artificial contraception was condemned. I have to agree with Louie, in that there’s cause to believe that the Holy Ghost will not allow the changing of Church teaching in regards to the civilly divorced Catholics receiving Holy Communion, but that it may be pastorally allowed by some bishops. We’ll have to wait and see. And God bless Cardinal Burke for speaking out. I think that there will be more bishops speaking out as well. Log in to Reply Anastasia May 15, 2014 Denise, Humanae Vitae did change the teachings on contraception. HV contradicts Pius XI’s Casti Connubii teachings when it says that one can separate the primary purpose of marriage of procreation and education of children for God’s glory from it’s secondary purpose of unity of the couple by teaching that one can have recourse exclusively to the infertile period in order to avoid having children. Just because HV singles out artificial birth control as against Church teaching doesn’t mean it has safeguarded it’s definition. One has to be blind not to see this or one has to not understand the Traditional teachings and Truth on the hierarchies of marriage. Reversing of this hierarchical order reverses the meaning of marriage and completely redefines it. This Synod on the family in October will proceed along the same lines as HV by trying to make us believe that the doctrines on marriage have not been changed because “We just said that we still teach that divorce and remarriage is a mortal sin but all we are saying that it doesn’t always necessarily stop you from receiving communion. See we didn’t change the teachings on divorce we just changed the teachings on the criteria for receiving communion.” And really, are we all suppose to breath a big sigh of relief because after all we can say, “See the Holy Spirit saved the day once again by safeguarding the teachings on marriage as our Church heads full steam ahead on the path of destruction just as it did with the diabolical acceptance of NFP. Log in to Reply Denise May 15, 2014 Anastasia, I don’t think that anyone is breathing, as you say, a sigh if relief. But since we are Catholics, we must remember that it is a sin to not have hope. The actions by mere men (especially men of the Catholic hierarchy) can be mitigated by the Holy Ghost. Otherwise, the Catholic Faith would cease to be supernatural; rather, the Church would be simply a human endeavor. Which it is not. Log in to Reply salvemur May 16, 2014 ‘the presence of the past’. here’s the presence of perversion: – http://www.novusordowatch.org/wire/index.htm#.U3WdTyhtU-I – the above took place at the Catholic cathedral of Santiago de Compostela [one of the greatest Catholic pilgrimage site and pilgrimages left in this banal, on the spot new church world], Spain, on May 13, 2014, the day of the 97th anniversary of the first appearance of Our Lady of Fatima in Portugal. satan does all he can to mock God, and churchmen are doing all they can to help him. Log in to Reply Jimmy May 16, 2014 “The past should, in this, be our guidance. Faced with an unprecedented threat, St. Athanasius – and, if memory serves, St. Eusebius too – began to autonomously appoint bishops.” ## But do that today, when the need is arguably even greater – and be excommunicated That is what happens when the Pope is allowed to become Emperor of the Church, and to be almost entirely immune to criticism or punishment IMO the Church pays far too much attention to the Popes. Let’s keep the dogmas – that goes w/o saying – but not let the Popes hog so much of the limelight. The present mess would not have been possible, if the place of the Pope in the Church had not been grotesquely over-developed, with the rest of the Church barely getting a look-in. The Pope is not supposed to be the almost omnipotent Emperor of the Church, but its chief pastor on Earth under Christ. Popes need to be much less prominent, but still active; the episcopate needs to be given much more attention instead, with the Papacy as a court of final appeal, and only when all other solutions for problems have failed. Then the Popes would have a lot less to do, and might find a lot more time to be bishops of their own diocese. One good thing at least seems to be coming out of this mess – the realisation that in fact the bishops, the Pope most definitely included, are as liable to behave like rogues, fools and ignoramuses as any of the laity. The Middle Ages had that realistic understanding of the clergy – we lost it for 400 years, but now we seem to be recovering it. The idea that one must never criticise a priest is a recipe for disaster – even though Saints have advocated it. The Papacy can’t be abolished (alas) – that does not mean that the Popes have to be the centre of attention in the way they have become. Popes ought to be like sewers or drains – essential to the health of a community, but not something that needs to be mentioned all the time. Log in to Reply Indignus famulus October 9, 2014 Dear Anastasia, No offense meant to you personally, but we’ve researched these topics more, recently, because you so often express these opinions which accuse sincere Catholics who follow official Church teachings on these matters- of committing grave sin; while your views are clearly contradicted by well respected orthodox Churchmen such as Cardinal Raymond Burke, former head of the Highest Church Court -the Roman Rota. -Father Habiger: “NFP can be misused, abused, if there are no compelling reasons for delaying the next pregnancy. But the fault there lies, not with NFP, but with the wrong intentions of the couple.” “NFP is not an evil, or sinful. It is God’s gift..for parents who need a morally good means to help them plan their family responsibly.” http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/resources/life-and-family/natural-family-planning-nfp/is-nfp-sinful/ ___ -Cardinal Burke: “We have to get away from a tendency that developed in recent years of pitting the unitive nature of marriage against the procreative nature of marriage instead of seeing that the two are essentially related to one another.”….“To stress the inseparable goods of marriage, the unity between husband and wife but at the same time the procreativity of their union. That the union of husband and wife the conjugal union is by its very nature procreative. And this is with the great insight of Pope Paul VI, it’s been the foundation of the Church’s teaching on contracepton since the beginning, and that therefore you cannot–the minute you permit an understanding of the conjugal union which sets aside the procreative–the essentially procreative nature of the act and says, “well these acts are good, even though we’re using chemicals or we’re using some kind of a device to prevent procreation because of our unitive”, but it cannot be truly a conjugal union if it’s not at the same time open to the gift of new life.” http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/we-have-to-judge-acts-vaticans-cardinal-burke-dismantles-who-am-i-to-judge ___ and ON Contraception: :”Contraception is the beginning of the anti-life movement,” “It certainly will favor an abortion culture. It takes the nature of the sexual union and violates it in a very significant way by removing the pro-creative aspect which is inherent to the union of man and a woman, the sexual union, the conjugal union.” … “By removing that it is fundamentally an anti-life act.” The contention is that this act still retains all of its goodness because it is a unitive act. It’s not because the act itself has been so disrupted and violated. They’re sexually united but they’re not giving themselves completely and totally to one another which is the whole meaning of sexual union. Because either one or both are eliminating the natural procreativity of the act.”(interview with the US Bishops’ news service) ____ and ON the Anullment process: “Mercy never ignores Truth: Jesus says that a man who divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery. Marriage validity matters gravely, and it’s the height of pride and foolishnes to think the annulment process be disregarded nor “streamlined”, after enturies of development. “the Church has to have an apt process to arrive at the truth.. whether or not a marriage has been null.” “The marriage nullity process is the fruit of centuries of development, and by various expert canonists, one of the great ones being Pope Benedict XIV,” the cardinal said. “For us now simply to say we don’t need that anymore is the height of pride and therefore foolishness.” .catholicworldreport.com/NewsBriefs/Default.aspx?rssGuid=cardinal-burke-media-hijacking-synod-on-the-family-79760/ add http prefix Log in to Reply Leave a Reply Cancel reply You must be logged in to post a comment.