These days, people say "Season's Greetings," which, when you think about it, means nothing. It's like walking up to somebody and saying "Appropriate Remark" in a loud, cheerful voice.

Featured Posts


Creative Minority Reader

Since When Is Abandoning The Faith Pastoral?

What the...What?

Archbishop Nichols, the same bishop who so recently decried as un-Catholic bloggers who complain, says that allowing your children to not be raised Catholic is the 'pastoral' thing to do. Well, guess what? I have some complaining to do.

LONDON (CNS) -- Church leaders have told the British government that members of the royal family who marry Catholics under recently passed legislation will not be obliged to bring up their children in the Catholic faith.

Lord Wallace of Tankerness, speaking on behalf of the government, said he had been assured personally by Msgr. Marcus Stock, general secretary of the Bishops' Conference of England and Wales, that the canonical requirement of Catholics to raise their children in the faith was not always binding.

"I have the specific consent of Msgr. Stock to say that he was speaking on behalf of Archbishop (Vincent) Nichols (of Westminster) as president of the Catholic Bishops' Conference of England and Wales and can inform the House that the view taken by the Catholic Church in England and Wales is that, in the instance of mixed marriages, the approach of the Catholic Church is pastoral," he said.
What?

If it is permissible to allow your children to be brought up in another faith, the faith is dead in England and Wales. This is absolutely absurd and profoundly un-Catholic.

2225 Through the grace of the sacrament of marriage, parents receive the responsibility and privilege of evangelizing their children. Parents should initiate their children at an early age into the mysteries of the faith of which they are the "first heralds" for their children. They should associate them from their tenderest years with the life of the Church.34 A wholesome family life can foster interior dispositions that are a genuine preparation for a living faith and remain a support for it throughout one's life.

2226 Education in the faith by the parents should begin in the child's earliest years. This already happens when family members help one another to grow in faith by the witness of a Christian life in keeping with the Gospel. Family catechesis precedes, accompanies, and enriches other forms of instruction in the faith. Parents have the mission of teaching their children to pray and to discover their vocation as children of God.35 The parish is the Eucharistic community and the heart of the liturgical life of Christian families; it is a privileged place for the catechesis of children and parents.


Aiding and abetting apostasy is now considered pastoral?

Who needs shepherds who feed the littlest lambs to the wolves?
*subhead*Outrage.*subhead*

Your Ad Here

13 comments:

Gail Finke said...

When we got married, my husband and I were not practicing Catholics. Our parents on both sides were upset because we would not have a Catholic wedding, but the reason we didn't was that we took Catholicism seriously enough that we would not promise to raise our children Catholic, because we did not intend to do so and we didn't want to lie.
We came back to the Church and we DID raise our children Catholic. But that kind of "pastoral" rule just tells people the Church doesn't really mean what she teaches. Maybe this is a diplomatic move, but if so it sure muddies the water for Catholics trying to make sense of how to live in a secularized world.

Proteios1 said...

We have a secular world if we want it. We have loose morals if that's what we seek. If I decide to be intellectually lazy and exert my tendency to mockery I have atheism. If I want deep faith and conviction we have the Church. So what's wrong with Catholics being Catholic. If people want something else, it's there for them. But yikes! Church leaders handing over the faith, watering it down or just simply getting it wrong. Unacceptable.

August said...

Yeah, well, with the pope adopting Obama's campaign motto for the whole Church- FORWARD!- my church keeps moving around. I am not sure where it has gone. I am not even sure where it is going, because it doesn't appear to know where it has come from in the first place, it is isn't like there is a BACKWARD to compare it to- though the unity Christ prayed for is in the past, so maybe this guy just figures since we are going FORWARD we might as well just accept we ain't never going to get anywhere on that one.
One a simpler note, this kind of stuff has been done on the local level for quite sometime. Did you think the priest saying it was going to get fired or something? No, they get promoted eventually.

Mack Hall, HSG said...

The archbishop might be a devouring wolf around children, but to the Spirit of Vatican II lot he is merely a pet hamster.

Blackrep said...

Now, let's not be so hasty. Our own Pope Francis told Anglican Bishop Venables of Argentina it was not necessary to leave the Anglican Church at all. He added: "He called me to have breakfast with him one morning and told me very clearly that the Ordinariate was quite unnecessary and that the Church needs us as Anglicans."

That ought to calm your worried mind. Just think pastorally when someone breaks a Church law, throws off centuries of tradition, or develops a doctrine completely at odds with one that has gone before. Pastoral. It's a magic sort of word.

Joseph D'Hippolito said...

The archbishop might be a devouring wolf around children, but to the Spirit of Vatican II lot he is merely a pet hamster.

BRAVISSIMO, MACK HALL!!! :)

Nichols' opinions on the Royal Family converting to Catholicism, combined with those about blogging Catholics, expose him to be no different than any other First World bishop: Intoxicated by associating with the high and mighty while ignoring the Catholics in the trenches (both laity and priests).

Not for nothing did St. John Chrysostom say, "the floor of Hell is paved with the skulls of bishops."

Methinks Nichols' has a spot for his skull already reserved for him in the Infernal Regions....

Just think pastorally when someone breaks a Church law, throws off centuries of tradition, or develops a doctrine completely at odds with one that has gone before. Pastoral. It's a magic sort of word.

JPII did the exact same thing when it came to capital punishment for murder...

http://archive.frontpagemag.com/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=1463

and nobody holds him to account for it. In fact, he's being seriously considered for sainthood!!

Now, Clinton, if that doesn't demonstrate how apostate the Catholic Church is, then I don't know what does....

Gail Finke said...

Maybe this is why:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/10013905/Future-of-Catholic-weddings-in-Britain-in-doubt-MPs-and-Peers-told.html?fb
Catholic weddings might be about to be polite fictions in Great Britain

schmenz said...

Not until the Vatican deals firmly and forthrightly with treasonous Bishops like this will anything get better.

The only thing these people understand is sheer, raw power aimed in their direction by a Pope who means business. But if they're not called on the carpet they will simply continue their undermining.

Katalina said...

This is because of a loss of a strong Catholic identity and "ecumenism" that came out after Vatican II. These Shepherds simply don't want to "rock the back" or be bold in their approach, and this continuing watering down of the Faith is the reason why so many people are confused and even leave altogether. They are like the Pope bound to the Documents of Vatican II and the Code of Canon Law which all Catholics are bound to follow.

Assisi said...

This is all about money.

As long as you're amply filling the parish or diocesan envelopes, you can proceed on your "faith-journey" however you please. It's a disgrace.

American churches have been closed, or sold, the past 50 years because they have Bishops, by and large, who no longer believe it is necessary to die a good Catholic to be saved. The USCCB's ecu-maniacal efforts at evangelization would seem to more than qualify for the "desolating sacrilege" mentioned by Our Lord, Daniel, and in St. John's Apocalypse, then any courageous care for souls.

One of the chief problems today is the Balthasarian (neo-universal salvation) heresy, evident in Barron's deceptively titled series, "Catholicism", believing while hell is real, no-one's there, except, maybe Hitler, with poor demons having to wait in line to get their shot at the little German bastard. So, if no one is lost, why should I miss out on a little extra sleep on Sunday?

Certainly Muhammed, Tamerlane, Luther, Stalin, or Mao are not lost, these prissy prelates would protest, but if Hitler has company there, it's probably with those traditional Rosary-sayers who don't believe The Catholic Church was founded in 1963!

Somebody should ask the Chancery bean-counters, how many of the 500 million babies killed worldwide, 50 million in America, (not counting chemical abortions) the past 40 years, by daily Gosnell-ian atrocities, might have been Catholic and, with a certain purposeful demographic destiny, filled those envelopes!

Another question an average Catholic might pose, to the hush-money hounds, is if a Bishop isn't ready to commit every resource, and his life, as his red-hat is supposed to remind him, to stop millions of cases of the incomprehensible evil of institutional infanticide, what good is he?

So what if their democratic co-conspirators cut out the 70% of government funding that is the lie that is Catholic Charities? A lie because nothing Catholic happens from that trough. It is as much Catholic as the ACLU fund for the poor..

As the Bishops today milk amnesty for the financial and political wind-fall it means for
their liberal boy-lollipops, and even more silver from Caesar's treasure, I wonder if any one of them can explain to me the moral theology behind breaking into someone's house if I want something, which is what all illegal immigrants do, and all legal immigrants don't.

Being relatively poor, I'll believe the Bishops are sincere when I'm allowed to break in and squat at my Ordinary's palatial digs.

Our Lady of Lasallette, Fatima, and Akita..Pray for US!

VIVA CHRISTO REY!!!

Anonymous said...

Yeah, I'd much rather join a church full of people like all of you--crabby, back-biting and self-righteous.

Assisi said...

Our Lord mentions hell 39x in the Gospels, but Heaven only 13x. Maybe THE KING OF GLORY was just a little moody? Our Lord curses ("Woes"..)3x as much as he Blesses ("Beatitudes"). Maybe THE SACRED HEART needs some sensitivity classes? Our Lord speaks of the necessity of "entering thru the narrow gate", "needing a wedding garment", and cursing even miracle-workers with "I do not know you.." (Not a part of The Bride of Christ--the ONE, HOLY, CATHOLIC, and APOSTOLIC FAITH), maybe THE WORD MADE FLESH is being intolerant and judgmental?

There are plenty of man-made enterprises that make you feel good, flatter you, and don't challenge you to give up anything for love of God..

Then..

There's the only Church, started by Christ, in which the source and summit of Our Faith, The Blessed Sacrament, is given in the context of a HOLY SACRIFICE OF THE MASS, not a raucous, glad-handing, back-slapping, and high-fiving celebration. PAX CHRISTI!

VIVA CHRISTO REY!!!

Anonymous said...

I'm pretty sure that what the Church leaders told the British government was, in fact, correct.

If a Catholic marries a non-Catholic (in a Catholic, sacramental marriage), the Catholic party must make a sincere promise to do all in his/her power so that all offspring are baptized and brought up in the Catholic Church. The non-Catholic party must be informed about the promise that the Catholic party makes, but ***he/she is not required to make that same promise***. Thus, the non-Catholic party to the marriage is not obliged to raise his/her children in the Catholic faith.

Note that the promise to do all in one's power to raise the children according to the Catholic faith has some leeway in its interpretation. I would expect that many priests would say that if the only way to baptize a child and raise it Catholic is to do so against the non-Catholic parent's will -- which would likely cause great distress in the marriage and possibly threaten the stability of the family -- then it is not really within one's power and the Catholic party has not violated the promise.

All that said, if the Catholic party to a marriage knows full well ahead of time that the non-Catholic party absolutely will not tolerate their future children being baptized Catholic or raised in the Catholic faith ... one would hope that it might lead him/her to question just how compatible their relationship is.

Post a Comment