The May 2010 Euthanasia Prevention Coalition Newsletter can now be found at: http://www.euthanasiaprevention.on.ca/Newsletters/Newsletter108(May2010)(RGB).pdf Bill C-384 was soundly defeated by a vote of 228 to 59. Check how the Members of Parliament voted at: http://www.euthanasiaprevention.on.ca/HowTheyVoted.pdf On June 5, 2010, we are co-hosting the US/Canda Push-Back Seminar at the Radisson Gateway Hotel at the Seattle/Tacoma Airport. The overwhelming defeat of Bill C-384 proved that we can Push-Back the euthanasia lobby in the US and Canada and convince people that euthanasia and assisted suicide are a dangerous public policy. Register for the Seminar at: http://www.euthanasiaprevention.on.ca/2010SeminarFlyer(RGB)(LetterFormat).pdf The Schindler family are being attacked by a Florida television station and Michael Schiavo. The Euthanasia Prevention Coalition is standing in solidarity with the Schindler family. My blog comments: http://alexschadenberg.blogspot.com/2010/05/att...
Reflections from the pastoral ministry of an Evangelical Catholic Priest.
This topic at this time could sound like someone’s idea of a sick joke. One day hear of some bishops letter ordering their subordinates not to protect the innocent and “ most vulnerable” from the beasts among them. Then the next day we hear of a bishops letter pleading for the world to protect the unborn.
ReplyDeleteI sure hope for the sake of everyone involved -including the unborn-that this is not what it seems to be for the rest of us ( non clergy) population in the world. Most are catching on.
It adds insult to devastation for the victims and their loved ones.
No matter what the intent , the timing is thoughtless, inconsiderate and assumes no regard for victims associated with the subject involved in the letter alluded to earlier this week.
Larry: Did you actually read the letter from the Vatican? It says no such thing as telling subordinates not to protect the innocent. It established the proper procedures so as not to screw things up in a way that would let offenders be able to remain in the priesthood.
ReplyDeleteDo you want to see these predators remain as priests? I sure as hell don't!
As to +Dolan's letter to members of congress, he is doing exactly what our faith demand of him: teaching an preaching the Catholic message.
The timing was not thoughtless as who knew that the NYT was going to publish this letter at the same time as he was writing to congress. If you want to blame someone, blame the NYT, not the archbishop.
Fr. Tim
Fr. Tim
In this letter from the U.S. conference of bishops, they claim they are defenders of marriage. Actually if one looks at the facts such as the easy granting of so-called annulments, one finds that the U.S. RCC finds it very easy to declare that marriages that have existed for years were never really valid.
ReplyDeleteOne article says:
"68% of annulments today are granted because of "defective consent," which involves at least one of the parties not having sufficient knowledge or maturity to know what was involved in marriage. The ingenuity of judges in confidently asserting that such knowledge or maturity was lacking is amazing. Vasoli says that it is done by substituting "junk psychology" for sound psychology and psychiatry. He quotes the statement of one matrimonial judge: "There is no marriage which, given a little time for investigation, we cannot declare invalid."
http://catholicinsight.com/online/church/divorce/printer_c_annul.shtml
From 1984 to 1994, the U.S. RCC granted an average of 59,000 annulments a year. From the information found on the internet, most of them were simply declared annulled on the basis the partners "lacked sufficient knowledge or maturity" to know what they were doing.
There is nothing in the bible to even condone a system of annulment of marriage. Only the RCC hierarchy claims to have the authority, which Scripture does not give it, to invent such a system.
The second point which casts doubt on their claim to be authoritative spokemen on the subject of marriage, is their continuing support of the RCC dogma of chastity for it's priests. This system of mandatory celebacy is completely contrary to the teaching of Scripture. The RCC appears to have the unbiblical view that the unmarried priest office is a holier state than the married state. If you wish to read more on this subject, I would recommend former priest Richard Bennett's excellent article:
"Better to Marry than to Burn". Go to this website and under the heading "On Catholicism" you will find the article.
http://www.bereanbeacon.org/articles.php?link=?name=Articles