Recent Posts

Sunday, 15 July 2012

Beating the old drum of rebellion


The Catholic Herald is the best in English Catholic newspapers, but far from perfect. A headline in this week's is "English priest who says Humanae Vitae is infallible is named bishop."

Of course, I hate to tell the person who wrote the headline, but many of us have known that HV is infallible ever since the encyclical was published from the Chair of Peter.


I marvel at the ignorance and rebellion of so many Catholics here. And, remember, the Tablet led the rebellious troops with its instant rejection of HV when it was published.

Now, the article seems positive, but why the toddler-tantrum headline?

The CH needs to get rid of Fr. Ronald Rolheiser's column for another thing.

One of my smart sem friends states that the Church only needs to ask three things of a young man who wants to be a priest. He is in a seminary in the States. His List: 1) Do you believe in the Church's stand on lgtbs? 2) Do you love the Blessed Virgin? 3) Do you agree with and uphold Humanae Vitae? Asking those questions would sort things out a bit...

20 comments:

Louis said...

This kind of headline is both imprudent and unnecessarily provocative.

The fact that a bishop thinks that HV is infallible shouldn't be headline news. It's when one says the opposite that he deserves to be named and shamed for departing from the faith of the Church.

New Sister said...

Asking if a person considers Humanae Vitae infallible or not is a good litmus test. I posed this question to a deacon whom I was confronting about his misleading/borderline heretical statements. His reply, "I think it's a good document..." Since the pastor learned of this, we've not seen the deacon.

Supertradmum said...

Louis, well said...

New Sister, you reminded me of a friend of mine's list, which I have now added to the article..

Richard Collins said...

Oh, the CH certainly needs to get rid of Fr Rolheiser.
And one of the main issues with the hierarchy today is that they just ignore what they deem to be contrary to "their" beliefs.

Just another mad Catholic said...

I think calling HV infallible is going a little do far; it is an excellent document which made an astoundenly accurate prediction of how society has gone down the tubes, perhaps it would be better to say that it is a document which contains the infallible teachings of the Church with regard to sexual morals, just as Ordinatio Sacerdotalis contains infallible truths regarding the sacrament of Holy Orders?

Supertradmum said...

Just mad,

It doesn't matter what you think but the teaching of the Church on infallibility covers Humanae Vitae as an encyclical, from the Pope issued for the entire Church, from the Chair of Peter.

I left RCIA because of lame arguments against HV.

JonathanCatholic said...

The teachings of Humanae Vitae on contraception, abortion, and all other categories relating to the dignity of human life are certainly infallible by virtue of reiterating that which has been the universal teaching of the Church for its entire history :) If a modernist 'catholic' comes along and proposes to a real Roman Catholic that the teachings on the dignity of human life in Humanae Vitae are not infallible, they are quite simply scrambling to gain a toehold on the side of a cliff. The Church has never debated this subject nor taught differently.

Supertradmum said...

JonathanCatholic,

You are so right. I am amazed that the Church has been so lax here on this subject. I mean The Tablet is in the back of most Catholic Churches for sale here and in all the retreat houses I have been to, etc.

HV was rejected by the vast majority of Catholics here immediately. I had one woman tell me that her generation felt betrayed by the Church because of HV. One of the great evils here, which I have mentioned on Fr. Z is the tolerance of mixed marriages, which means that many women marry non-Catholics, mostly Anglicans, and end up contracepting. It is a tedious argument I have been fighting with adult Catholics for over 30 years.

Catechist Kevin said...

Late to the discussion here, SuperT.

Virtually nobody has heard of the document "Vademecum for Confessors" released by the Pontifical Council for the Family in February of 1997.

It says this in section 2, paragraph 4:

4. The Church has always taught the intrinsic evil of contraception, that is, of every marital act intentionally rendered unfruitful. This teaching is to be held as definitive and irreformable. Contraception is gravely opposed to marital chastity; it is contrary to the good of the transmission of life (the procreative aspect of matrimony), and to the reciprocal self-giving of the spouses (the unitive aspect of matrimony); it harms true love and denies the sovereign role of God in the transmission of human life.33

Note this sentence from above:

"This teaching is to be held as definitive and irreformable."

According to Abp. Michael Sheehan (+RIP) in his book "Apologetics and Catholic Doctrine" (1st edition 1918) - the word "definitive" and "irreformable" connotes infallibility:

"Equivalent to 'infallible' are such terms as: irreformable, irreversible, definitive, irrevocable." (ACD, p 207)

The footnote (33) from VADEMECUM quotes HV:

The Encyclical Humanae Vitae declares as illicit "every action which, either in anticipation of the conjugal act, or in its accomplishment, or in the development of its natural consequences, proposes, whether as an end or as a means, to render procreation impossible". And it adds: "To justify conjugal acts made intentionally infecund, one cannot invoke as valid reasons the lesser evil, or the fact that such acts would constitute a whole together with the fecund acts already performed or to follow later, and hence would share in one and the same moral goodness. In truth, if it is sometimes licit to tolerate a lesser evil in order to avoid a greater evil or to promote a greater good, it is not licit, even for the gravest reasons, to do evil so that good may follow therefrom, that is, to make into the object of a positive act of the will something which is intrinsically disorder, and hence unworthy of the human person, even when the intention is to safeguard or promote individual, family or social well-being. Consequently it is an error to think that a conjugal act which is deliberately made infecund and so is intrinsically dishonest could be made honest and right by the ensemble of a fecund conjugal life" (Paul VI, Enc. Humanae Vitae, July 25, 1968, n. 14).

Hope this helps, SupterT.

Catechist Kevin

Supertradmum said...

Catechist Kevin, Excellent comment. Tell this to the millions of contracepting Catholics living in sin. It is so hard here to get the truth across to hard-headed and closed people.

Catechist Kevin said...

SuperT,

I have a whole chapter on this moral teaching for a (God willing) book on dissent in the Church on certain doctrinal issues.

I have been collaborating with well known Catholic author on it.

Would you like to read it?

Is there a way to send it to you privately? (without putting your email on the www)

Catechist Kevin

Supertradmum said...

There is an email link on M I think.

Catechist Kevin said...

Color me techno-stupid, SuperT,

I don't see the link. :(

Kevin

Supertradmum said...

well, let me think about this...get back to you soon
I can see my email on the blog when I push the M button but maybe that is just from my point of view.

Catechist Kevin said...

Hey - I just "subscribed" to your site by email request.

We can do it that way, yes?

Kev

Supertradmum said...

Ah, Kevin, the smart ones get all the prizes.

Supertradmum said...

Just, sorry if I seemed snappy. I want to assure you that the document was not private nor a theologian's position paper, but an encyclical for the entire Church. When a document is an encyclical, it is of the primary teaching magisterium level of the Church, as is a dogma or doctrine, if it deals with faith and morals. That is part of the teaching on infallibility. Faith and Morals.

Therefore, the encyclicals on Modernism are infallible as are many others with deal with Faith and Morals. I hope this helps. If you read it online at the Vatican website, you will notice clues as well--written to the entire Church, not merely theologians' written from St. Peter's that is the Chair of Peter, the seat of Peter; and containing Doctrinal Principles. Does this help?

Supertradmum said...

Just, I do not know where you comment went to..I am having serious problems with my computer. I intended it to be posted.

ColdStanding said...

If you want to see a bad "catholic" newspaper...

http://www.prairiemessenger.ca/

Supertradmum said...

ColdStanding, I have seen it. I lived in Alberta and Saskatoon. It was horrid then and I take your word that it is horrid still.