RSS Feed

More on Using Precise Terminology to Counter the Secular World

Posted on

Originally posted on Omnia Vincit Veritas:

My recent post on Some Good that Could Come Out of Legalizing “Homosexual Marriage” drew quite a few responses, most of which were quite favorable to the idea of using and emphasizing the more complete and more meaningful Sacramental Marriage to describe what true marriage is, especially in the public arena.

Nevertheless, some commentators do not accept my contention that the use of Sacramental Marriage is not caving into the secular world, and they express the view that we should continue to fight to use marriage as the shorthand for true or Sacramental Marriage.  This motivation is understandable, but the notion that using a more complete and accurate term is a concession to the secular world is simply wrong, and it reflects a misunderstanding of history and current reality regarding the better use of terminology. It also fails to appreciate the opportunity for renewed catechesis on the true meaning…

View original 453 more words

Saving and Promoting True Marriage

Posted on

Originally posted on Omnia Vincit Veritas:

(Below is a slightly revised copy of an article I first published in May, 2012, and a few times over the past year or so. The inevitability of the secular trend set forth below should be more apparent than ever, so I am posting the article once again to provide some alternative considerations on how to counter secular advances with an ever greater emphasis on spiritual realities.)

It seems inevitable that so-called gay (Always keep in mind that the term GAY is also an acronym – G.A.Y. – promoted by homosexuals to stand for Good As You in the sense that homosexual morality is just as good as heterosexual morality.), or same-sex marriage will become legally recognized by more and more regions throughout the world as secular forces continue to promote and make gains in this area. While the entire concept of same-sex marriage is absurd and offensive…

View original 583 more words

On Second Thought, He Does Criticize Papal Statements in Public

Posted on

A Second Reflection on Michael Voris and Criticizing Papal Statements in Public

If a Cardinal, Bishop, or Priest imitates by word and context what Pope Francis says about this or that, and Michael Voris lambastes the Cardinal, Bishop, or Priest in public as he is wont to do, then by extension he is also criticizing the Pope’s statements in public even if he does not name the Holy Father in the process.

So unfortunately for Michael, it’s disingenuous for him to claim a high ground because he directly and publicly criticizes other leaders in the Church by name, but refuses to directly and publicly criticize the Pope by name when the other leaders and the Pope say essentially the same things.

Breaking this down, it looks like this:

Pope F says XYZ about moral issue SSSS.

Cardinal D imitates Pope F and says the same XYZ (in both word and context) about moral issue SSSS that Pope F says.

MV lambastes Cardinal D in public for saying XYZ about moral issue SSSS.

Since MV publicly criticized the XYZ statement, then anybody, including the Pope, who makes the same statement comes under the same public criticism of MV whether or not they are directly named by MV.

If the above seems a tad esoteric, then just think of it this way:

Assume Pope F calls MV on the phone, and he says the following:

“MV, please stop criticizing Cardinal D, Bishop Q, and Father B, because they are saying the same things that I say regarding moral issue SSSS. In criticizing them, you are also criticizing me. Remember: ‘Whatsoever you do to the least of my brethren, that you do unto me.’”
___________

O what tangled webs we weave when we fall into a vortex of our own making.

DB

Only God is Beyond Public Criticism; Not the Holy Father

Posted on

“Who is like God?”
—–St. Michael the Archangel

As a supporter of much of the good work done by Michael Voris, his recent manifesto with the following proclamation did not really come as a big surprise to me as it has to others:

“ChurchMilitant.TV Will Not Engage in Public Criticism of
the Pope”

Over the years, many good people have literally begged the recent Holy Fathers to clean the Lord’s House via stronger disciplinary actions, removals from offices, and so on,…but I don’t believe Voris ever made similar calls directed at the occupant of Peter’s chair. As such, his proclamation is simply a statement of a position he has maintained as a commentator on the Catholic Church.

Nevertheless, this unnecessary and very weak position is somewhat similar to the approach adopted by many left wing commentators regarding President Obama. Like Voris opines regarding the Pope and ‘possible harm to the Church and potential converts’ from any kind of criticism of Pope Francis, left wing commentators claim that criticizing Obama in any way will cause greater harm to black people and left wing causes. Truth does not matter as much as the leader and the cause du jour.

Voris’ position is that he will continue to criticize the ‘cabinet’ (Members of the Curia), the ‘joint chiefs of staff’ (Members of Bishops’ Conferences, etc.), and ‘generals on the ground’ (Bishops and Cardinals in general), but the ‘commander-in-chief’ (Pope) is untouchable,…even though Voris makes it clear that that any pope can and does make mistakes.

Voris simply does not understand the call to also imitate Christ regarding appropriate criticism of the pope, and the secondary call to also imitate the example of the Saints in this regard. If Our Lord could and did criticize the first pope, and if St. Paul could and did criticize the first pope (and such criticisms are memorialized in the Scriptures, thereby making the criticisms Public and Present at all times), then others can imitate them and criticize the Holy Father in an appropriate manner prescribed by Church teachings. Our Lord and St. Paul did not back away from so criticizing Pope Peter because of concerns that ‘such criticisms could possibly harm the Church and potential converts.’

So as Our Lord, St. Paul, and others clearly demonstrate, it is the Truth above all else that must be defended, even if this entails criticizing the Holy Father in his decisions that are not protected by the Holy Spirit. Moreover, if criticizing the Holy Father in an appropriate way can better serve the Truth, to not do so can actually cause more harm to the Church.

DB

Saving and Promoting True Marriage

Posted on

(Below is a slightly revised copy of an article I first published in May, 2012, and a few times over the past year or so. The inevitability of the secular trend set forth below should be more apparent than ever, so I am posting the article once again to provide some alternative considerations on how to counter secular advances with an ever greater emphasis on spiritual realities.)

It seems inevitable that so-called gay (Always keep in mind that the term GAY is also an acronym – G.A.Y. – promoted by homosexuals to stand for Good As You in the sense that homosexual morality is just as good as heterosexual morality.), or same-sex marriage will become legally recognized by more and more regions throughout the world as secular forces continue to promote and make gains in this area. While the entire concept of same-sex marriage is absurd and offensive on its face, and a desire to prevent greater recognition of the perversion from occurring is most admirable and rightly motivated, some good can still come out of a revised secular definition of marriage if it carries the day as seems likely.

For starters, the Catholic Church and other Christian Churches can emphasize and publicize that the lone word marriage will no longer be adequate from a church perspective, and so it will necessarily be referred to as Sacramental Marriage, with the idea that Sacramental is to be emphasized and always included when speaking about marriage from X date forward. This will help to maintain the appropriate distinction between marriage proper as a sacred union of a man and a woman and any secular or perverse definition/understanding of marriage the secular world can come up with. For other marriages recognized by the Church as legitimate but not sacramental, these can be referred to as Recognized Natural Marriages (or some other appropriate term).

Let the homosexuals and their fellow travelers cry and whine about being treated “unfairly” once again by the renewed emphasis on Sacramental or Recognized Natural Marriage being essentially different than their twisted understanding of marriage. If they and their fellow travelers are hell-bent on changing terms to suit their perverse behavior, and too much of the world accepts such satanic lunacy, then people of faith and good will can certainly emphasize appropriate terms to reflect their faith, and maintain important distinctions that honor the Lord, His Divine Law, and the Natural Law.

Next, the Catholic Church could use the new emphasis to re-educate the faithful on what marriage is truly all about, focusing on the procreative, unitive, and parenting aspects of marriage at all times. By doing this, it will expose the weakness and stupidity of the secular world’s recognition of “same-sex marriage.” As an added bonus, many people who continue to see marriage as nothing more than a simple partnership will be compelled to understand the distinction between any kind of secular marriage and Sacramental Marriage, and why Sacramental Marriages and Recognized Natural Marriages are holy institutions while the secular perversion is anything but.

Now, for anyone who thinks that churches adopting such a change in descriptive emphasis is a form of caving in to the secular and homosexual world, nothing could be further from the truth. Instead of arguing about the proper meaning of an appropriated term, people of faith go on the offensive for a change by emphasizing what true marriage is all about, and that can only be a Sacramental or Recognized Natural Marriage.

Is such a renewed emphasis on True Marriage likely to take place in the churches? Probably not, at least not in the foreseeable future, but even without church leadership implementing such an approach, people of faith can adopt and emphasize the more precise and powerful terminology in all conversations, writings, and so on to fight against the secular darkness that seeks to appropriate many terms in order to distort reality.

As the wise Monsignor William Smith once taught, “all social engineering is preceded by verbal engineering.” Alas, the term “marriage” appears to already be a casualty in our ongoing war against the principalities and powers of this world, but we can resurrect it and make it stronger than ever by adding the words Sacramental or Recognized Natural to it, and by so doing, we will engage in the kind of social engineering that is badly needed at this time.

DB

Perspectives on Killing and Moral Outrage

Posted on

Some Food For Thought:

Isn’t it interesting how Obama and others are morally outraged by the use of chemicals to destroy the lives of innocent Syrians, including children,…but there is no moral outrage in using chemicals to destroy the lives of the most innocent children in the womb?

Does the US really have moral credibility in claiming that “post birth chemical abortions” used on Syrians requires intervention by the US to help bring their “morally outrageous actions” to an end?

Perhaps Gomorrah could have expressed outrage against and attacked Sodom because Sodom’s perversions were greater than Gomorrah’s?

DB

If Only…A Few “Thoughts” on the Oklahoma Tornado Tragedies

Posted on

Heartfelt prayers and other forms of assistance go out to the many people devastated by the tornadoes in Oklahoma over the past few days. Nevertheless, I’m sure that the intensity of these tornadoes will soon be attributed to man-made global warming, and in this benighted spirit, I offer a few thoughts for consideration:

If only we had a national registration of all tornadoes, the ones that struck Oklahoma might not have occurred. With registration, rogue tornadoes will hardly ever appear.

Why does Oklahoma need to have tornadoes that size anyway? Can’t smaller ones do enough damage? Why can’t people just settle on thunderstorms?

They don’t have tornadoes in many other parts of the world. Only the United States has them in abundance. Why are we into so much violence in this country?

If humans didn’t harm the environment as much as we do, then tornadoes would be much less damaging. Obviously, the people of Oklahoma and surrounding states must do much more harm to the environment than anywhere else in the world. The devastation that these people experience from tornadoes is clearly their own fault.
_______________

While you might dismiss the comments above as simple sarcasm, just wait until you see some of these comments or close variations featured in the mainstream media, and on cable networks like MSNBC and CNN.

DB

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.