Fortnight for Freedom

ST. LOUIS, MO, June 19, 2015 (LifeSiteNews) -- If the US Supreme Court decides to redefine marriage in the next couple weeks it will not stop the nation’s bishops from proclaiming the truth, says the archbishop serving as point man on the issue.

“Regardless of what happens at the end of this month, nothing the court says can change what marriage truly is and we will continue to promote and defend it,” said San Francisco Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone, chairman for the USCCB Subcommittee for the Promotion and Defense of Marriage.

The archbishop quoted Russian novelist Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn to illustrate the point for his fellow bishops at their Spring Assembly earlier this month in St. Louis.

“Let the lie come into the world, let it even triumph. But not through me,” said Archbishop Cordileone. “The simple step of a courageous individual is not to take part in the lie.”

“We may have to suffer this lie about marriage in the law,” he continued, “but we must not participate in it or keep silent about it.”

He suggested to his fellow bishops that the faithful can offer up small hardships in this regard for the Christians in the Middle East and elsewhere who are being killed and exiled for the faith.

“Let the lie come into the world, let it even triumph. But not through me. The simple step of a courageous individual is not to take part in the lie.”

The archbishop knows something about taking heat for the Catholic faith, with the attacks on him over the last several months for working to strengthen the Church’s identity in San Francisco Catholic high schools. His fellow bishops applauded him fervently at the end of his presentation after USCCB President Louisville Archbishop Joseph Kurtz thanked him for his courageous leadership for the Church.

Marriage has been effectively redefined in 37 states and the District of Columbia as consequence of judicial action, Cordileone told the bishops, and a “yes” answer to either question before the high court – whether there is a constitutional right to same-sex “marriage,” and whether states have to recognize same-sex “marriages” performed in other states - will have the practical effect of redefining marriage nationwide.

Archbishop Cordileone warned of more persecution coming for those who believe in God’s plan for natural marriage should the Supreme Court decide to redefine marriage in the law.

“Those who continue to advocate for the true definition of marriage will be increasingly marginalized in law and society,” he said, “and depending on the rationale, could be erroneously viewed as proponents of discrimination and will themselves be targeted for discrimination.”

His department had already been providing material for the bishops and dioceses to educate on the issue, and also filed an amicus brief in the cases before the Supreme Court. More resources will be available on the implications of the court ruling once it is handed down.

“In this atmosphere we continue our efforts to protect the freedom of those who believe and act on the truth that marriage is the union of one man and one woman,” said Archbishop Cordileone.

Various recent legislative efforts were supported by the US bishops in defense of marriage, including reintroduction in both Houses of Congress of the State Marriage Defense Act and the Child Welfare Provider Inclusion Act, the latter which protects adoption and foster care providers against discrimination by the federal and state governments for placing children in homes with a mother and father.

The Marriage and Religious Freedom Act will be introduced again soon in the House and the Senate, he said, especially important with it providing protection in the areas of federal employment, contracts, grants, and tax-exempt status.

“The act is particularly relevant,” Archbishop Cordileone stated, “given that when the Solicitor General of the United States was recently asked by a justice of the Supreme Court at oral argument in the marriage cases whether a religious school could lose its tax exempt status for opposing same-sex ‘marriage,’ the Solicitor General did not take the opportunity to deny it, and thereby quell fear about it, but instead said that, ‘It’s certainly going to be an issue.’”

More is expected as well in terms of federal classification of sexual orientation or gender identity. “These categories have come to acquire meanings in law that both reflect an incorrect understand of the human person and protect immoral behavior,” said Archbishop Cordileone, calling out the Obama administration for promoting them.

“Regarding the federal executive branch,” he said, “we have continued to witness efforts to advance what Pope Francis has referred to critically as ‘gender theory’ or ‘gender ideology.’”

The recent OSHA-released dictates compelling employers to allow self-identified transgendered individuals to use the bathroom according to their “gender identity” and not their biological sex, were a perfect example of the Holy Father’s insight on the subject.

“There is the mistake of the human mind – gender theory – creating so much confusion,” the archbishop said, quoting Pope Francis, “and it seeks to cancel out sexual difference.”

“The importance of responding to this challenge with truth and compassion remains paramount,” he said, and shared that the Holy Father has been offering excellent catechesis on marriage in his series on the family during his Wednesday general audiences.

“An essential part of our teaching is and has to be that the difference between man and woman in a positive difference,” said the archbishop. “It’s the difference that makes new life possible, rather than a negative one to be ignored or actively opposed.”

He, along with a few other bishops had signed the Defense of Marriage and the Right of Religious declaration in April along with more than 30 other faith leaders, showing that the Catholic Church is not alone in its witness to marriage.

Taken from:
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/archbishop-us-may-suffer-the-lie-of-gay-marriage-but-we-wont-take-part-in-i

God Bless
Nathan

Fortnight 4 Freedom

The U.S. Bishops have called for a Fortnight for Freedom from June 21 to July 4, 2014. Please visit www.fortnight4freedom.org for more information on this important time of prayer, education, and action in support of religious freedom!

 

What do we mean by religious liberty?

 

In Catholic teaching, the Second Vatican Council explained in Dignitatis Humanae that the foundation of the principle of religious freedom is rooted in the dignity of the human person, who is endowed with reason and free will, and therefore able to take responsibility for his or her actions. Religious liberty is protected in the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and in federal and state laws. Religious liberty includes more than our ability to go to Mass on Sunday or pray the Rosary at home; it also encompasses our ability to contribute freely to the common good of all Americans.

"We are Catholics. We are Americans. We are proud to be both, grateful for the gift of faith which is ours as Christian disciples, and grateful for the gift of liberty which is ours as American citizens. To be Catholic and American should mean not having to choose one over the other. Our allegiances are distinct, but they need not be contradictory, and should instead be complementary. That is the teaching of our Catholic faith, which obliges us to work together with fellow citizens for the common good of all who live in this land. That is the vision of our founding and our Constitution, which guarantees citizens of all religious faiths the right to contribute to our common life together. "

Religious Liberty Is More Than Freedom of Worship

 

Religious liberty is not only about our ability to go to Mass on Sunday or pray the Rosary at home. It is about whether we can make our contribution to the common good of all Americans. Can we do the good works our faith calls us to do, without having to compromise that very same faith? Without religious liberty properly understood, all Americans suffer, deprived of the essential contribution in education, health care, feeding the hungry, civil rights, and social services that religious Americans make every day, both here at home and overseas.

 

What is at stake is whether America will continue to have a free, creative, and robust civil society—or whether the state alone will determine who gets to contribute to the common good, and how they get to do it. Religious believers are part of American civil society, which includes neighbors helping each other, community associations, fraternal service clubs, sports leagues, and youth groups. All these Americans make their contribution to our common life, and they do not need the permission of the government to do so. Restrictions on religious liberty are an attack on civil society and the American genius for voluntary associations.

 

The Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America issued a statement about the administration's contraception and sterilization mandate that captured exactly the danger that we face:

Most troubling, is the Administration's underlying rationale for its decision, which appears to be a view that if a religious entity is not insular, but engaged with broader society, it loses its "religious" character and liberties. Many faiths firmly believe in being open to and engaged with broader society and fellow citizens of other faiths. The Administration's ruling makes the price of such an outward approach the violation of an organization's religious principles. This is deeply disappointing.

This is not a Catholic issue. This is not a Jewish issue. This is not an Orthodox, Mormon, or Muslim issue. It is an American issue.

 

 

"All the Energies the Catholic Community Can Muster"

 

What we ask is nothing more than that our God-given right to religious liberty be respected. We ask nothing less than that the Constitution and laws of the United States, which recognize that right, be respected.

 

In insisting that our liberties as Americans be respected, we know as bishops that what our Holy Father said is true. This work belongs to "an engaged, articulate and well-formed Catholic laity endowed with a strong critical sense vis-à-vis the dominant culture."

As bishops we seek to bring the light of the Gospel to our public life, but the work of politics is properly that of committed and courageous lay Catholics. We exhort them to be both engaged and articulate in insisting that as Catholics and as Americans we do not have to choose between the two. There is an urgent need for the lay faithful, in cooperation with Christians, Jews, and others, to impress upon our elected representatives the importance of continued protection of religious liberty in a free society.

 

We address a particular word to those holding public office. It is your noble task to govern for the common good. It does not serve the common good to treat the good works of religious believers as a threat to our common life; to the contrary, they are essential to its proper functioning. It is also your task to protect and defend those fundamental liberties guaranteed by the Bill of Rights. This ought not to be a partisan issue. The Constitution is not for Democrats or Republicans or Independents. It is for all of us, and a great nonpartisan effort should be led by our elected representatives to ensure that it remains so.

 

Text taken from, and for more information, please go to:
http://www.usccb.org/issues-and-action/religious-liberty/

 

God Bless
Nathan

Freedom of Conscience

Two recent court cases illustrate the incoherence and remarkable intolerance of “liberal” views regarding conscience.

One involves the bottomless pockets of the atheist Michael Newdow, who most recently joined several plaintiffs in a lawsuit against the U.S. Treasury Department demanding the words “In God We Trust” be scrubbed from U.S. currency. Newdow advocates what Richard John Neuhaus called the “naked public square,” a public life stripped of all references to God or to the duties we owe to Him. The “Constitution” is invoked, that document granting jurists ultimate authority over the local customs of citizens a thousand miles away. The courts have been as wary of religion approaching the minds of impressionable children as an epidemiologist is wary of meningitis. A child in a public school must never have to endure even the vicinity of any common, publicly acknowledged prayer, lest it wound him in his feelings, and lest it undermine a parent’s conscientious objection to giving homage to the Guarantor of conscience.

That supersensitive concern must puzzle a young Christian couple in New Mexico, the Hugenins. They run a small photography business, and they were sued, not for doing anything, but for begging to decline from doing something. They cannot in good conscience take pictures for a celebration of sodomitical relations. They are not saying, like Melville’s Bartleby, that they should prefer not to. They are saying that they must not. They have no choice in the matter—unless they wish to betray all that they hold most dearly. And, with stunning insouciance and callousness, the New Mexico Supreme Court has ruled that such betrayal is the price you must pay to live in a civil society.

Nothing could be further from the truth. It’s like saying that one must cease to be fully human in order to attain to the human flourishing which civil society is for. That is a contradiction in terms. That the court does not see it as such suggests that it has not considered the nature of religious faith, the claims that the worship of God makes, and the centrality of conscience to the human person.

Think of the violence the state wishes to wreak upon that young couple. Their involvement in the celebration would not be incidental. Unlike people attending a graduation ceremony, they would not be merely present while others did something ordinary, something that even the atheist would not call indecent. If you’re going to take successful photos of the groom and groom, you have to enter into the spirit of the occasion. You have to ask them to kiss one another. You have to photograph their embraces. You have to be a participant.

Alter the terms of the situation. Suppose the Hugenins were asked to shoot photographs at a party thrown to celebrate a friend’s divorce. Would they be required by law to participate in that? Suppose it was a celebration of a porn magazine’s jubilee. Must they assist in that, if the editor comes a-calling? Why should they be compelled to stifle their consciences and be less than human, just to run a business? Aren’t business and politics meant to serve the flourishing of human persons, and not the other way around? Why should running a business expose you to what Jefferson called tyranny upon the mind of man?

Conscience-forcers will argue that the Hugenins are like a racist restaurateur who turns away a black customer. I wonder whether Americans have lost the capacity for rational thought, so feeble are their powers of analogy. First, the restaurateur is in the position of Bartleby, not in the position of Daniel, who refused to do homage to the statue of the emperor. He would prefer not to serve the black customer; but his objections are not moral. It is not his conscience speaking, but his self-will. He does not say that it is wrong for a person to eat. If he believed that, he’d not have gone into the business in the first place. He’d be six feet underground. He simply does not want to serve the man his dinner. But that won’t do, not for someone whose business is to serve the bodily needs we all share in common. It is wrong not to feed the hungry, and people do not digest food through the skin! But the Hugenins most certainly believe that two men or two women celebrating a mimic-marriage are engaging in behavior that is gravely wrong. It’s the behavior and not the persons that they cannot in conscience serve. If one of them were to ask them to photograph her brother’s graduation, there would be no problem.

Second, the restaurateur is not being asked to cooperate in a deed. What the man at the lunch counter does when he leaves the diner is not his business. A bad man may show up at your stationery shop to buy paper. What he does with that paper is not your business. But it’s another matter entirely if the chef or the stationer is asked to take action to support something he believes to be evil. Suppose a Kleagle from the Ku Klux Klan shows up at your bakery and wishes to order a cake with a flagrantly racist decoration—are you required to make that cake? Why? Keep the law out of it for the moment. Consider only the demands of conscience. What would we call the chef who gives in, who knows that what the Kleagle is ordering is wrong, and whose conscience tells him that to comply is evil? We call him a coward, that’s what.

The real question is not whether the Hugenins have a duty to obey their consciences, but why any lover not merely of freedom but of humanity would want to compel them to disobey. Here it’s not just that a Hugh Hefner claims a supposed right to produce pornography. He is claiming the right to make you look at it, to be a part of it, knowing full well that you believe it is evil. He wants you to be either a coward or a hypocrite. What is going on? What kinds of people want to leave the souls of their fellow human beings a twisted mess, by forcing them to violate their consciences? Who would want to make Quakers shoot to kill, not because they need the Quakers to do that, but just because they revile their pacifism and want to rub it out?

One way to blunt your own consciousness of wrongdoing is to bully as many people as possible into it, to compromise them, to wear down their defenses, to entice them if possible, to badger or threaten them if necessary. The homosexuals in question cannot tolerate dissent. If even one person is allowed to decline to manifest a tacit approval of sodomy, that is a punishable offense. You must be suborned or silenced. A child may not be made to endure the proximity of prayer, but he may be required, in some of our schools, to say “I am gay,” or to imagine it, regardless of his conscience or his parents’ moral directives; and if he doesn’t, he will be castigated for his intolerance.

What we see here is the imposition of a religion—the religion of the sexual revolution, as bizarre and incoherent and dehumanizing as it proves to be. The state has become the church, and hearkens to no commandments but those of its own devising.

Article from Crisis Magazine located at:
http://www.crisismagazine.com/2013/conscience-freedoms-denied-by-liberal-courts

God Bless
Nathan

Fortnight for Freedom

HHS Mandate Not the Only Threat to Religious Freedom

By Molly Loesel

While the Health and Human Services (HHS) contraception/sterilization/abortifacient mandate is often the focus of those concerned with current threats to religious freedom in the U.S., there have been several recent court cases involving the Catholic Church which also look to undermine our First Amendment rights.

Three female teachers – a computer teacher in the Archdiocese of Cincinnati, Ohio, a first-grade teacher in the same Archdiocese and a physical education teacher from the Diocese of Fort Wayne – South Bend, Indiana – sued their respective dioceses after losing their jobs for publicly violating moral teachings of the Church. Two cases involved the Church’s moral objection to in vitro fertilization, and the first-grade teacher in Ohio was fired after becoming pregnant out of wedlock. Christa Dias, the former computer teacher in the Ohio case, is also an openly practicing lesbian. The Archdiocese of Cincinnati and the Diocese of Fort Wayne—South Bend both contend that the women violated employment contracts where they promised to abide by the moral teachings of the Catholic Church.

At the beginning of June, a civil jury ruled against the Archdiocese of Cincinnati in the case of the lesbian woman who used IVF to become pregnant, and awarded her over $170,000 to be paid by the Archdiocese ($50,000 in back pay, $21,000 in compensatory damages, and $100,000 in punitive damages). The jury found the Archdiocese to be in violation of federal pregnancy anti-discrimination laws for terminating Dias after she became pregnant. The Archdiocese is considering an appeal. The other two lawsuits are still pending.

The Dias ruling is a serious blow to religious freedom in America. To put it in perspective: the court just fined the Catholic Church for firing a Catholic school employee who violated a promise to live in accordance with Catholic teaching.

In response to the many threats to religious freedom in the “Land of the Free,” the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops is once again sponsoring a national Fortnight for Freedom from June 21 to July 4. This period of prayer, fasting and action is meant to unite the faithful in defending our religious freedom.

June 21 is the eve of the feast of St. Thomas More and St. John Fisher, both of whom were martyred because of their refusal to support the King of England’s break with the Catholic Church. What better patrons could we have for our stand for religious freedom than these faithful men who died rather than act against their consciences?

Parishes, dioceses and lay organizations have planned a number of special events around the country in solidarity with the bishops on this effort. Human Life International is supporting the Fortnight by asking for pledges to pray the Rosary during the Fortnight and ask our Blessed Mother to intercede for the protection of religious freedom in the U.S. and around the world.

It is not only in the USA that Christians are being bullied. Indeed, Head of the Observatory on Religious Liberty Dr. Massimo Introvigne has argued that Christians are the most persecuted group in the world. At the annual meeting of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), he cited laws in 15 European countries that threaten the religious liberty of Christians, and at last year’s meeting he mentioned 169 court rulings in Europe that were dangerous for the liberties of Christians. In concluding his report to the OSCE, Introvigne warned, “Where discrimination becomes normal, the transition to violence is never far away.” A look throughout history confirms the truth of his prediction.

One of the many reasons we are proud to be Americans is because we are blessed with many freedoms that other people throughout the world do not share. Unfortunately, we have learned over the years that these cherished freedoms are not safe from the nation’s lawmakers. If we are to retain these freedoms, we must be willing to stand up for them, starting now with our foundational right to freely practice our faith. This upcoming Fortnight for Freedom is a time to unite and stand up to lawmakers, judges and all those threatening our constitutional right to religious freedom. Let’s not waste the opportunity.

Copied from:
http://www.hliworldwatch.org/?p=2662

Pick up your Cross

In today’s readings we find James asking the rhetorical question that if someone has faith but does not have works can that faith save him?  Of course the implied answer is no it can’t.  So what kind of works are we talking about here?  It’s those kinds of works that are using the talents given to us to help others.  This way we can increase the richness of the Kingdom of God here on Earth.

Indeed Jesus described the kingdom of heaven, in the parable of the bags of gold, as a man going on a journey and entrusted his wealth to his servants.  Each were given an amount according to their ability (Matt 25:14-30).  The Lord entrusts His servants with tasks according to their abilities which means we will never be asked to do something that we aren’t able to do with His Help.  If we purposely avoid using these abilities in such a way as to simply keep the status quo, that is, not easing the suffering of others or bringing them to Christ and so on, then when the master returns (that is at our judgment) we will be judged worthless (Matt 25:30).  But if we do those things that He has prepared in advance for us to do (Eph 2:10) then we have reason to hope that at our judgment we will hear the Lord say: “Well done my good and faithful servant” (Mat 25:23).

In fact, Jesus never said that it was going to be easy once we have faith, He said that we are to pick up our cross daily and follow Him (Luke 9:23).  He even told us through James that if we do not do the works that we are tasked to do then our faith is a dead faith (James 2:20).  We still have faith but it’s dead.  A living faith is what is needed to be judged righteous before God.  This living faith is simply defined as a faith which has works.

Now, in the Gospel reading of today we find Jesus  letting the Apostles know that He is indeed the Christ and then summons a crowd and tells them “whoever wishes to follow me must deny himself, take up his cross, and follow me.” (Mark 8:34)  Jesus is now in Heaven and so if we wish to follow Him there, we must do as He did.  We must pick up our cross and follow him.  If we do this then we not only believe in His Word but also DO as He did.  He gave everything of Himself for others; we are to do the same.  His Church is to do the same.

Do you see now how important good works are for our own good and that of the Church?  These works are only possible because God gives us the abilities to do what He asks of us but we still need to DO them.  It’s true that “…it is by grace [we]  have been saved, through faith—and this is not from [ourselves], it is the gift of God— not by works, so that no one can boast.” (Eph 2:8-9) Yes, this is true but the very next verse is also true, that “…we are God’s handiwork, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do.”(v.10)

So God has prepared in advance for us to do good works, it is His Will that we do them.  Jesus said that those who believe but do not do His Will won’t enter heaven.  He says “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven.” (Mat 7:21)  Let us do good works, making disciples of all nations by baptizing evangelizing the world! (Mat 28:19)

Missed past week’s leaflets?  Questions?  Comments?  Come visit our Blog at www.parishofthepreciousblood.blogspot.com

Prepared by a St.Denis parishioner

Freedom of Religion

Last week we learned that destroying a growing and living human being is truly against the Will of God.  Therefore all followers of God are obliged NOT to do those things.  Our Catechism of the Catholic Church quotes St. Augustine when defining ‘sin’.  Augustine says: “Sin is an offense against reason, truth, and right conscience; it is failure in genuine love for God and neighbor cause by a perverse attachment to certain goods.  It wounds the nature of man and injures human solidarity.  It has been defined as “an utterance, a deed, or a desire contrary to the eternal law.” (CCC 1849)

The Catechism also defines sin thusly:  “Sin is an offense against God.  It is a revolt against God through the will to become ‘like gods,’ knowing and determining good and evil.  Sin is therefore “love of oneself even to contempt of God.”” (CCC 1850)

We know there are two levels of gravity of sin, venial and mortal, Scripture is very clear on that point (1 john 5:16).  A venial sin is an act that does not completely cut himself off from the love of God that is in Jesus Christ.  A mortal sin does indeed cut him off from God.  The Catechism defines these terms this way: “Mortal sin destroys charity in the heart of man by a great violation of God’s law; it turns man away from God”… “Venial sin allows charity to subsist, even though it offends and wounds it.” (CCC 1855)

For a sin to be mortal, three conditions must together be met: “Mortal sin is sin whose object is grave matter and which is also committed with full knowledge and deliberate consent.” (CCC 1857)  Therefore since we know that contraception  and abortion are of a grave matter (very serious subject) then for one to deliberately (freely) and knowingly perform these or help others in performing these acts is morally evil (ie mortal sin).

It has been a tenant of our Catholic faith since the very beginning that abortion and the use of contraception is always and everywhere gravely wrong.  Whether anyone else believes this to be right or wrong is irrelevant for our purposes today.   If our conscience dictates that it is a great moral evil to use contraception or abortafacient drugs then by virtue of loving our fellow man we are also obliged not to directly help them acquire such products and services.  For example, if it is morally wrong for me to intentionally kill an innocent bystander then it is also morally wrong for me to knowingly supply the gun so that someone else can kill him.  Since 1973, ever since abortion has been legalized, federal law does not protect all of its citizens.  It currently discriminates against a class of persons not yet born and with the Healthcare services being proposed by Obama (ie, Obamacare) the government will force its citizens to pay for these deadly services whether we have religious objections to them or not.  We must make our voices heard.  The voice of reason needs to overcome or our great country will no longer be a country where freedom or religion prevails.  We must prevent our government from trampling on our right to freely exercise our religion in the public square.

Even though “unintentional ignorance can diminish or even remove the imputability of a grave offense” as well as “the promptings of feelings and passions can also diminish the voluntary and free character of the offense, as can external pressures or pathological disorders…” we as a society are obliged to defend our constitutional right to freedom of religion.  PLEASE, let us rise up and be heard.

Prepared by a St Denis parishoner