Exclusivity is a hallmark of the Gospel

All the talk today in the Church is about inclusivity.  Everyone is welcome. No questions asked.  It’s kind of like the U.S. Army’s policy of “Don’t ask. Don’t Tell” before Obama repealed it and made everyone know that Gay is OK.

Today everyone is welcome and no one is challenged to repent. Repentance is too negative and too judgemental, you see.  It’s not OK to judge…even though Jesus did quite a bit of it.  Before we heard about “who am I to judge?”, Jesus was commanding his disciples to do just that:  “Stop judging by mere appearances, but instead judge correctly.” (John 7:24)  It’s only a mindless age that doesn’t judge.  It truly is.

Nevertheless, if you were to simply understand the Gospel through the lens of the Vatican Press Office, you would think that inclusivity was a new dogma of the Catholic Church and it would be a mortal sin to exclude anyone.  But the reality is that while the Gospel is about invitation to eternal life, there is, sadly, a catch. And that catch is the consequence of exclusion.  Jesus spoke more about hell than most topics he engaged in.  And what is hell?  It’s about exclusion…eternal exclusion.  The Lord was deadly serious about warning us of this exclusion to the point of shedding his blood on the Cross to help us avoid it.  And thank God for that!  But there is a difference between wanting no one to be excluded and creating a facade that no one can be or should be excluded.  Big difference.

The Gospel message is a WARNING:

“But when the king came in to see the guests, he noticed a man there who was not wearing wedding clothes. He asked, ‘How did you get in here without wedding clothes, friend?’ The man was speechless.“Then the king told the attendants, ‘Tie him hand and foot, and throw him outside, into the darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.’ (Matthew 22:11-13) – NIV

Notice the very violent nature of Jesus’s response?  The King did not politely ask the fraudulent guest to leave, did He?.  He was actually quite violent and exclusionary about it.  And yet, is this the message coming out of the Vatican Press Office?  Uh no. It’s not.

And St. Paul gave us some examples of the people who would indeed be excluded.  Check it out:

The very fact that you have lawsuits among you means you have been completely defeated already. Why not rather be wronged? Why not rather be cheated? Instead, you yourselves cheat and do wrong, and you do this to your brothers and sisters. Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God. (1 Cor 6:7-11) – NIV

St. Paul makes it very clear that not everyone is welcome into heaven; that indeed the Gospel message is not a mindless inclusivity that is being bandied about at the Vatican’s Press Office, as if it were Church teaching.  On the contrary, for unrepented sin like “men having sex with men”, the consequences are all about eternal exclusivity.  Now who is truly the villain here for not pointing out this truth?  Do you hate me, as St. Paul says, because I tell you the truth?

Any bishop or priest who denies that there are eternal consequences to unrepented mortal sin, like men having sex with men, is a liar and knave. There is no “walking with” those who walk in darkness. There is, on the contrary, an urgency to warning them of what their conduct will mean if they do not repent — immediately.

For these priests and bishops who have bent to the world, we should have nothing to do with them and resist them to their faces.

I find it instructive and revealing that the passage from Corinthians above starts with lawsuits….which helps us all identify the wolves in sheep’s clothing.

More Language Porn — this time from Cardinal Dew

“When we have documents, which talk about intrinsically disordered, or being evil, that’s not going to help people. We’ve got to try to find ways to express what the teaching actually says, but not putting it in ways that people feel that they are being branded, or that they are bad or they are evil” (1:36-1:54)

Let’s get something straight. The Catechism says that the ACT is intrinsically disordered, not the PERSON.  The Cardinal is obfuscating on this point and mixing up key distinctions, perhaps even deliberately.

Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex. It has taken a great variety of forms through the centuries and in different cultures. Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained. Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity, tradition has always declared that homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered. They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved. (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2357)

The Cardinal is saying that using the phrase “intrinsically disordered” to describe the homosexual act is “not helpful” — that the Catechism is “not helpful”.  What a disgrace.

The sad reality is that Jesus’ death on the Cross cannot be emptied of its significance. People go to hell.  And they go to hell when they die in unrepentant mortal sin.  And therefore, the language porn which refuses to call evil “evil” is the real problem.

If you are “walking with an unrepentant sinner” and not challenging them to turn away from their sin, but merely just walking with them for the sake of walking with them and being “nice” or “respectful”, guess what?  That’s not helping them or you.  Because you i.e. Cardinal Dew risk landing in the same place as them….and the walk that they will be walking when it’s too late is not a pleasant one at all.

Voris is right. These guys don’t believe in hell, and if they do, it’s only reserved for a select few.  You simply cannot be pushing the theology which allows sexual perversity and believe in the traditional teaching on hell. It simply does not work.

Fr. Rosica exaggerates gay issue

The disturbance in the Force continues at Rome. You gotta watch the 20-minute report from EWTN at the bottom of this post. It’s dense with many important developments, including Fr. Rosica’s startling call for more language porn on gays.

Skip forward to about 12:40 and listen to Fr. Rosica:

There must be an end to exclusionary language and a strong emphasis on embracing reality as it is, and we should not be afraid of new and complex situations… The Jubilee of Mercy requires a language of mercy. In particular, in speaking about homosexuals or gay persons, we do not ‘pity’ gay persons, but we recognize them for who they are. They are our sons and daughters and brothers and sisters and neighbours and colleagues.

Yikes.

Fr. Rosica is one of the so-called “language reporters” or spokesmen for the Synod. In this capacity, his job is to accurately report what happens during English-language discussions each day among Synod Fathers.

The subsequent commentary by the EWTN analysts is tactful but scathing. They basically say that Fr. Rosica’s demands come out of nowhere because virtually none of the prelates has raised this matter as a key concern. So why give it such prominence in his summary at the press conference?

Robert Royal on EWTN explains that there appear to be certain elements in the Vatican trying to press this issue forward of their own initiative.

He also astutely remarks that no amount of verbal euphemisms will satisfy the detractors of the Church whose primary beef is not Her choice of words but Her beliefs.

Synod opens, CDF priest comes out

Game on. image

The Synod couldn’t have gotten off to a weirder start.

Jesus staked his position by stating His unchanging teaching on marriage in today’s Gospel reading:

“Whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery against her; and if she divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery.”

Meanwhile, a priest and university prof working at the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith announced that he’s gay and has a boyfriend. He also published a pro-gay Manifesto demanding that the Church change Jesus’ teaching on homosexuality. He was immediately fired. Read about the sad story here.

How will this impact the Synod debates? I dunno. But the fired priest is naturally getting a lot of coverage and sympathy from the mainstream media. That could provide momentum to the reformers in the Synod who want to change Church teaching.

The battle lines have been drawn. Saddle up.

Homosexual parade rerouted to pass St. Patrick’s Basilica

Social activist and blogger (Catholic-legate.com) John Pacheco, who organized a 15,000-strong March for Marriage in 2005, urged men to gather in front of the basilica to pray the rosary with their backs turned to the parade. About 40-50 men and women arrived shortly before 1 p.m. and began to pray.

Pacheco said he decided to urge prayers to turn their backs because he was not sure whether there would be nudity in the parade. He also thought having backs turned would encourage those participating to pray rather than engage in any arguments or confrontations.

But Pacheco ended up in a confrontation with a member of St. Patrick’s Pastoral Council, who told him they were being provocative. Sheila Jones sought the assistance of the basilica’s pastor, Father Bosco Wong, who asked Pacheco to stop the sidewalk prayer. The priest invited them to come inside to pray.

Pacheco told the protestors to listen to their own consciences, but he was going to do as the priest wished and go inside. About 25 people followed him, while about 10-20 remained outdoors.

“I had no option,” said Pacheco in an interview. “If we went against the pastor, we lost. We would be a house divided.”

But Pacheco hopes the Archdiocese as a whole will address the rerouting of the Pride Parade. “As a Church community we have to address what Catholics are permitted to do, in light of the provocation in changing the route.”

(Source)

We desperately need leadership….but fear, confusion, and uncertainty reigns in the Church today.

Faithful Catholics witness at Ottawa Pride while Catholic parish marches

Lifesite’s coverage of the parade can be found here.

“I was not opposed to them praying the rosary,” Wong said. He also stated he didn’t know the group was coming, and that he had a responsibility as the rector to protect his church. “I just don’t want to create an incident where the basilica will be violated.” Pacheco says he doesn’t recall Wong stating that if the people praying turned around to face the parade, they could stay. “Maybe he said that to me and it didn’t register. … I would have been very happy to do it. … It’s just a big misunderstanding.” People had asked Pacheco what to do, and he advised that they initially start the rosary with their backs turned to the march “because we didn’t know what was coming” as far as nudity or scandalous conduct. “It was really more protection to the women who came and joined us as well. It’s a difficult place to be.” Pacheco says he understands why Wong did what he did. “He has an obligation to try and protect the parish, and it’s one of the reasons I acted the way I did. … At the end of the day, God’s going to reward obedience, I think.”

Again, I don’t ever recall Fr. Wong ever suggesting to us, just to turn around.  That would have been easy enough to do, and goes against the whole discussion we were having.  Besides, weren’t there going to be hundreds and thousands of people on the streets, where we would barely be noticed?

Wong told LifeSiteNews he is going to make recommendations to the city to change both the route and the time of the Capital Pride parade next year.

Well, at least that was a bonus.  But the fact that we capitulated the first time around, we ceded the pavement to them. It’s gonna be all that harder to regain it…..unless….drum roll please….we fight for it.  They are not just going to give it to us.   If you were them, would you?  Hell no you wouldn’t.   This is the consequence of being the Church of non-confrontation, a church of capitulation.

St. Joe’s Approach to Gay Marriage

Lest someone tell you that St. Joe’s presence at the Gay Pride Parade is consistent with Church teaching.  I beg to differ.

Ewelina Frackowiak is head of St Joe’s LGBT ministry.  A sample from her 2014 “homily/reflection” said within Masses from pulpit:

“We, LGBT Catholics, have dignity and we will keep asking – we will be persistent as the Canaanite woman was – we will keep asking for the sacrament of marriage, we will keep asking to be welcomed in all Catholic communities the way we are welcomed here at Saint Joe’s”  (Source)