'Shadow council' speaker pushes Church acceptance of contraception, gay sex

[whipp711]

That’s interesting. Heresy does not often thrive when it is out in the open, but it survives hidden in the shadows in our Church. It survives through dishonesty, hinting, suggestions, innuendos, never quite coming out with what is really meant, using the cover of good virtues such as charity to shield it, even twisting things to try to make people who oppose it feel unkind.

I think you are spot on with that observation. Additionally, heresy is not exposed when the Church is soft on itself. By that I mean homilies that don’t confront or teach. I have trouble with the shrillness of the Michael Voris types, but I find him to be occasionally on target.

Too many times I’ve listen intently to the homilie only to wonder what was the point.

 

[Brendan_64]

Heresy within the Church is usually not directly put. It often involves hints and suggestions without actually coming straight out with it. It sews the seeds of doubt in the minds of some of the faithful, without actually pinning its colours to the mast for fear of being called out definitively. It’s slippery.

I’d far rather those who hold heretical views within our Church would show some integrity and come clean. I’d rather they said what they believed and stood by it, rather than hide being a fog of deception. I have more respect for Martin Luther than I do for clandestine heretics.

 

[Midwest88]

Upon reflection, I think the suggestions from the ‘shadow council’ can be a good thing.

I mean contraception doesn’t actually hurt anyone. There would be less unwanted babies, and the babies that are born are born because they’re wanted. The earth is already populated as it is, so why not? Sex is not just about procreation.

Also, the Church’s stance on homosexual acts is just so bigoted. Why do you hate them? They just want to express their love - the heart wants what it wants. Love is love. Their love won’t negatively effect your own relationship. The Church’s stance has led these non-straights to believe something is wrong with them which causes them psychological damage, which may lead to depression and even suicide. Self-loathing is not good. Christianity has done much harm to the LGBT.

I think that if these suggestions are taken seriously in October, and to be understood to better the Church - to make it less dogmatic and oppressive, but instead forward-thinking and modern, the Church wouldn’t be so hated. People are sick of the Church’s arrogance. It’s about time, given the current social tide of same-sex marriage, the spread of equality, in both Ireland and America, for the Church to listen to the people for once instead of an old ancient book and a sexist hierarchical chain-of-command. Stop dictating the lives of others; their choices will shape who they are and we cannot judge them. The time is now to finally change for the good, to evolve.

Modernists had it right all along.

 

[Brendan_64]

Upon reflection, I think the suggestions from the ‘shadow council’ can be a good thing.

I mean contraception doesn’t actually hurt anyone.

Yes it does. The acceptance of contraception has created a contraceptive mentality which separates sex from procreation. This contraceptive mentality views pregnancy as an unwanted potential ‘side-effect’ of having sex. It creates a mentality that views the creation of new life as something inconvenient as getting in the way of sexual fun. This is an abortive mentality and leads to the acceptance of abortion as a means of removing an unwanted ‘side-effect’ of the sexual act which wasn’t caught earlier in contraception.

Also, the Church’s stance on homosexual acts is just so bigoted. Why do you hate them? They just want to express their love - the heart wants what it wants. Love is love.

So you are equating sex (of any sort) with love. This is not surprising since you previously argued to remove the intrinsic link between sex and procreation. You also seem that to hold that homosexual acts as sinful is to hate homosexuals. You are very wrong on that. Firstly a person is not defined by his ‘sexuality’, a person’s sexuality is not the sum total of that person. We are called to love all people, but we are not called to accept whatever that person wishes to do as being OK. The Church’s teaching on homosexuality is very clear, we ARE called to love persons with homosexual inclinations. But that does not mean accepting that homosexual acts are OK., they are not. You seem to define a person by what he does with his genitals and that whatever a person decides to do with his (or her) genitals should be accepted as good.

I think that if these suggestions are taken seriously in October, and to be understood to better the Church - to make it less dogmatic and oppressive, but instead forward-thinking and modern, the Church wouldn’t be so hated. People are sick of the Church’s arrogance.

Arrogance? The Church was created by God Himself when He was on Earth. He gave the Church the power to bind and loose and set up a hierarchy. If Christ came today and said what he said about marriage in Matthew 19 then He too would probably be called arrogant be society today.

Like it our not the Church has the authority of God to teach. So where does the authority to teach God’s Truth come from? From the Church or from the society we live in?

It’s about time, given the current social tide of same-sex marriage, the spread of equality, in both Ireland and America, for the Church to listen to the people for once instead of an old ancient book and a sexist hierarchical chain-of-command. Stop dictating the lives of others; their choices will shape who they are and we cannot judge them. The time is now to finally change for the good, to evolve.

Again, God’s Truths are not dictated by what society thinks they ought to be. And yes the Church is hierarchical, Christ created it it as such. And as for Church teachings changing, they will not, they cannot. What was true yesterday cannot be false today and vice-versa.

Modernists had it right all along.

Modernism is actually defined as a heresy, and rightly so.

 

[shockerfan]

Upon reflection, I think the suggestions from the ‘shadow council’ can be a good thing.

I mean contraception doesn’t actually hurt anyone. There would be less unwanted babies, and the babies that are born are born because they’re wanted. The earth is already populated as it is, so why not? Sex is not just about procreation.

Also, the Church’s stance on homosexual acts is just so bigoted. Why do you hate them? They just want to express their love - the heart wants what it wants. Love is love. Their love won’t negatively effect your own relationship. The Church’s stance has led these non-straights to believe something is wrong with them which causes them psychological damage, which may lead to depression and even suicide. Self-loathing is not good. Christianity has done much harm to the LGBT.

I think that if these suggestions are taken seriously in October, and to be understood to better the Church - to make it less dogmatic and oppressive, but instead forward-thinking and modern, the Church wouldn’t be so hated. People are sick of the Church’s arrogance. It’s about time, given the current social tide of same-sex marriage, the spread of equality, in both Ireland and America, for the Church to listen to the people for once instead of an old ancient book and a sexist hierarchical chain-of-command. Stop dictating the lives of others; their choices will shape who they are and we cannot judge them. The time is now to finally change for the good, to evolve.

Modernists had it right all along.

What other truths are you willing to cast aside? The Real Presence? Because…If you cast aside truths you don’t like (i.e. contraception is sinful, or homosexual acts are sinful), then what stops you from casting aside other truths?

Fact is many people have cast aside teachings always held to be true (we call the Protestants).

Interesting fact: Up until 1930 ALL Protestants believed contraception to be sinful (read what Luther said about it!). It was only in 1930 that the Anglican Church changed their teachings on the subject, which led the way to other denominations doing the same.

I would suggest looking at the Catechism and work on understanding why the Church teaches what it teaches

It does not matter if the Church is hated…Christ was hated…He also blesses those who are persecuted for His sake: * “Blessed are you when they insult you and persecute you and utter every kind of evil against you (falsely) because of me. Rejoice and be glad, for your reward will be great in heaven. Thus they persecuted the prophets who were before you.” * (Matthew 5:11-12)

 

[SWolf]

Upon reflection, I think the suggestions from the ‘shadow council’ can be a good thing.

I mean contraception doesn’t actually hurt anyone. There would be less unwanted babies, and the babies that are born are born because they’re wanted. The earth is already populated as it is, so why not? Sex is not just about procreation.

Also, the Church’s stance on homosexual acts is just so bigoted. Why do you hate them? They just want to express their love - the heart wants what it wants. Love is love. Their love won’t negatively effect your own relationship. The Church’s stance has led these non-straights to believe something is wrong with them which causes them psychological damage, which may lead to depression and even suicide. Self-loathing is not good. Christianity has done much harm to the LGBT.

I think that if these suggestions are taken seriously in October, and to be understood to better the Church - to make it less dogmatic and oppressive, but instead forward-thinking and modern, the Church wouldn’t be so hated. People are sick of the Church’s arrogance. It’s about time, given the current social tide of same-sex marriage, the spread of equality, in both Ireland and America, for the Church to listen to the people for once instead of an old ancient book and a sexist hierarchical chain-of-command. Stop dictating the lives of others; their choices will shape who they are and we cannot judge them. The time is now to finally change for the good, to evolve.

Modernists had it right all along.

Your post broke my sarcasmotron.

 

[Caldera599]

Have faith. God is in control. Heretics may make inroads by they will never win. There will be times of trial, and this may be one of them, but God always wins, truth always wins over error.

Remember Christ’s promise to always be with His Church, and pray fervently.

 

[zz912]

I suppose in a way it is good that they have come out so blatantly like this. The majority of Catholic cardinals and bishops at the synod will surely have no truck with this.

I hope you are right, but I’m doubtful.

A majority of the bishops and cardinals voted in favor of the heretical paragraphs at last year’s Synod. It didn’t pass because it never reached 2/3 majority, but a simple majority of bishops DID support the paragraphs.

I wonder how it will shape up this year, since the Pope has changed/added new members to the Synod? How will the Holy Spirit protect the Church from these errors?

 

[zz912]

Your post broke my sarcasmotron.

Although he should have added a little note that it was VERY heavy sarcasm so some don’t get upset.

 

[Brendan_64]

Although he should have added a little note that it was VERY heavy sarcasm so some don’t get upset.

Oh well, I thought he was serious. The sad fact is that are a lot of Catholics who hold such views. That’s me suckered then.

 

[NextElement]

I hope you are right, but I’m doubtful.

A majority of the bishops and cardinals voted in favor of the heretical paragraphs at last year’s Synod. It didn’t pass because it never reached 2/3 majority, but a simple majority of bishops DID support the paragraphs.

I wonder how it will shape up this year, since the Pope has changed/added new members to the Synod? How will the Holy Spirit protect the Church from these errors?

This is very scary to me, as someone who has had doubts about the Church creep into my mind after subtle seeming support of SSM (The Jesuit Post and Fr. James Martin: see thejesuitpost.org/2015/06/lovewins/ ), Pope Francis’ views on economics and constant media mistakes, etc…

I’m simply worried about the Church. If such things are approved, there’d be a huge schism like never seen before… But surely they won’t be.

 

[Louie1983]

This is very scary to me, as someone who has had doubts about the Church creep into my mind after subtle seeming support of SSM (The Jesuit Post and Fr. James Martin: see thejesuitpost.org/2015/06/lovewins/ ), Pope Francis’ views on economics and constant media mistakes, etc…

I’m simply worried about the Church. If such things are approved, there’d be a huge schism like never seen before… But surely they won’t be.

Have faith and be comforted by Jesus promise to remain with his church.

There have been many bishops who are attending and have defended church doctrine.

Nothing will change after this synod, not doctrinally anyway. I think the only change you will see is the approach the church takes, not the message or it’s doctrine.

Yes, there are some Bishops who have come out and called for change but there are also those who are loyal to church teaching.

One e.g :catholicculture.org/news/headlines/index.cfm?storyid=25788

Also, although I can’t find the link one of the German Bishops has come out and publicly challenged Bishops from his homeland as to why they are attempting to change something they know they can’t.

Many of the Polish Bishops have come out in response to this “shadow” council and have reaffirmed the Catholic position.

All is not lost, don’t let the media fool you.

 

[sarah_j]

This evening, I came across this frightening article on Alan Keyes’ website
which addresses the ‘Shadow council’ and related issues. Keyes is a Catholic
and a Knight of Columbus

Lately, for the first time in my life, I’ve begun to worry about the state of the Church.
Even during the years of the child-abuse scandals, I never worried that the** Church**
itself was in error, but only some of its sinful members.

I am praying the October synod doesn’t change any Church doctrines regarding
marriage.
But, for the sake of argument, let’s say the synod embraces as Church
teaching what the Shadow council endorses…then what?
How are we to know what to do if there should be a schism in the Church?

renewamerica.com/columns/kralis/150810

 

[NextElement]

Still wondering what you all think of this article: thejesuitpost.org/2015/06/lovewins/

Keep in mind this is written by someone who is about to be ordained a priest in the Society of Jesus… It’s alarming to me that these voices are becoming prominent and accepted in our Church.

 

[sarah_j]

Still wondering what you all think of this article: thejesuitpost.org/2015/06/lovewins/

Keep in mind this is written by someone who is about to be ordained a priest in the Society of Jesus… It’s alarming to me that these voices are becoming prominent and accepted in our Church.

It’s alarming to me, as well.

Look at the title of the article: " Love Wins".
It’s more of the same propaganda, seeking to normalize same-sex unions.

The fact that these voices are IN the Church…some of them at the highest
levels…is extremely worrisome.

 

[CrossofChrist]

This is very scary to me, as someone who has had doubts about the Church creep into my mind after subtle seeming support of SSM (The Jesuit Post and Fr. James Martin: see thejesuitpost.org/2015/06/lovewins/ ), Pope Francis’ views on economics and constant media mistakes, etc…

I’m simply worried about the Church. If such things are approved, there’d be a huge schism like never seen before… But surely they won’t be.

Don’t doubt the Church. Trust in Jesus.

The article wasn’t written by Fr. James Martin, SJ. Not a good article though.

 

[NextElement]

Don’t doubt the Church. Trust in Jesus.

The article wasn’t written by Fr. James Martin, SJ. Not a good article though.

The article wasn’t written by him, but he shared it on his Facebook page. He also commented in support of it on the comments (not sure if they’re there anymore, may have been taken off…censorship by TJP perhaps?)

 

[KSU]

After VC II, I suspected that the Church would experience a major schism; not just a big dispute, but a schism: catholicculture.org/culture/library/dictionary/index.cfm?id=36320

No, I am not a capital T Traditionalst or a member of the SSPX , etc.

It appears now that schism will occur because homosexualism, Socialism and Modernism have infested Christ’s Body on Earth to the extent that, if a formal schism is not declared by Rome, the Church eventually will be wounded too deeply to survive–something which even grade school Catholics know will not be allowed by God.

I know this will sound counterintuitive, but neither JP II nor B XVI had the physical strength to make it happen, but Pope Francis is just the man to make it happen. He is, after all, and despite everything else, a fearless Jesuit.

 

[Midwest88]

Your post broke my sarcasmotron.

Although he should have added a little note that it was VERY heavy sarcasm so some don’t get upset.

Oh well, I thought he was serious. The sad fact is that are a lot of Catholics who hold such views. That’s me suckered then.

I was putting my “modern/‘progressive’ cap on.” I was tempted to put a /sarcasm at the bottom but I thought against it. I partially wanted to see what the responses would be since I know that what I typed would be the “progressive” layman’s argument against the traditional Church teachings. (How can one not know what the responses would be given the traffic of many who have professed similar ‘progressive’ thoughts to attempt to show the faithful that what they believe is wrong.)

In saying that, I will try to play the devil’s advocate in the responses given to my original post.

 

[Midwest88]

Yes it does. The acceptance of contraception has created a contraceptive mentality which separates sex from procreation. This contraceptive mentality views pregnancy as an unwanted potential ‘side-effect’ of having sex. It creates a mentality that views the creation of new life as something inconvenient as getting in the way of sexual fun. This is an abortive mentality and leads to the acceptance of abortion as a means of removing an unwanted ‘side-effect’ of the sexual act which wasn’t caught earlier in contraception.

Oh don’t be silly. Contraception when used responsibly and correctly have given many a couple the protection and liberation they seek when having sex. Couples who have used contraception are no more miserable than those who do not. In fact, they are more mobile and can concentrate on their personal development - get to travel, get to have more sex, aren’t tired by hauling around two, three, four kids around. They have more money in their bank accounts. They’re better dressed than burnt out parents. What I’m trying to say is that couples, married or not, who use contraception are doing just fine.

Women are more than baby makers. They can have a career and be absolutely happy with their choice. This isn’t the 1950s anymore. Women are strong and independent - they have choices, and the more choices the better. As long as they don’t hurt anyone I do not see the point of arguing against their CHOICE of contraception. Not all women want to get married and if they choose to have a career instead then so be it. You and your church are irrelevant to such a decision. If the woman chooses to adopt, raising the child in a single parent household, then I see no serious problem. As long as there is love and the woman can financially and emotionally provide for the child it’ll be okay. A household of two parents of the opposite-sex is no better than a single parent household. I mean, I know tons of families that do not come from “traditional” households who are upstanding citizens and wonderful.

And, as I said, sex isn’t all about reproduction. Having sex strictly for pleasure doesn’t hurt ones psych as the prudes say it does. Ever heard of open relationships? If ones an adult one can have sex for pleasure and be fine the next day, the next year and for a lifetime. I’m not really talking about one-night stands, but relationships with a significant other while using contraception. Complete bodily sovereignty should be today’s goal as a to be a progressive society. I mean, sex usually isn’t a “big deal” unless you make it to be; many don’t make it to be.