Monday, January 12, 2009
Conscious Parenthood
Speaking at the Pontifical University of the Holy Cross last month, Smith said that although "responsible parenthood" is good in itself, it has a utilitarian meaning in English, associated with performing the duties of a parent well, or keeping the size of a family manageable. Replacing it with "conscious parenthood" instead better conveys the true nature of the conjugal relationship."If people are conscious of the fact that sex leads not just to a baby but to being a parent with someone, they will much more responsibly pursue sexual relationships," Smith explained. "
If I'm going to be a parent with someone, I must clearly love that person and I must want to affirm that person. So I choose as a future spouse someone suitable to be a parent. I've chosen that person because of what I think are their virtues and goodness rather than just my sexual desires."Smith stressed that John Paul II considered sexual desire to be a very important part of finding a spouse (what he called the "raw material" of love), but added that it must be "tested against the virtue of the person" because the two will eventually become parents together. Being conscious of parenthood, she said, will "guide a couple's decisions about sexual matters, help them experience many personal goods, among them growth in self-mastery and the ability to select a spouse well."
Using the term "conscious parenthood" also directs attention away from the self while conveying the awesome call to being a parent. "It means you really understand what a fantastic thing it is to be able to bring into existence a new human being," Smith continued, "that you are basically, what he [John Paul II] calls a pro-creator with God, that you are bringing something forth of infinite value, and you've chosen this other person, this spouse, to be the one with whom you engage in that.
"This teaching is especially poignant in today's society where sex has been severed from its true meaning and purpose, becoming a means of recreation rather than procreation. Like many others, Smith blames contraception for this rupture, leading to the erroneous belief that having sex and having babies are two entirely different activities. "The task of finding a sexual partner is very, very different from finding a future parent, and so you assess people very differently," she explained.
By Edward Pentin (Zenit.org)
Sunday, January 11, 2009
Global Warming?
Ouch!
Other headlines from Drudge:
Life At -78 Degrees In Alaska...
What To Wear...
Wisconsin: Record snow steals spotlight from frigid temps...
Snow continues to trap thousands at Madrid airport
Saturday, January 10, 2009
Truncated Freedom!
"I believe it is incumbent on all of us who are Catholic citizens to let our representatives know of our concerns about FOCA so that a bad and harmful law will not be passed. You can sign a postcard, write a thoughtful letter, make a phone call, send an e-mail, meet with your Representatives and Senators’ staff so that the dangerous extremes in this law might be eliminated."
Most Reverend Daniel F. Walsh,Bishop of Santa Rosa
Citing a recent national poll showing that just 9% of U.S. adults support abortion for any reason throughout the nine months of pregnancy, the USCCB’s pro-life committee says, “The national postcard campaign will send a timely message to Congress that abortion advocates are out of step with mainstream America, and that their agenda should not become a part of our nation’s laws in any way.
The FOCA is the next sick chapter in the book of abortion. If made a law then all limitations on abortion will be lifted which will result in the following:
1) All hospitals, including Catholic hospitals in the USA, will be required to perform abortions upon request. If this happens Bishops vow to close down all Catholic hospitals, more then
30% of all hospitals in the United States.
2) Partial birth abortions would be legal and have no limitations.
3) All U.S. tax payers would be funding abortions.
4) Parental notification will no longer be required.
5) The number of abortions will increase by a minimum of 100,000 annually. This is an estimation.Needless to say this information is disturbing, but sadly true. As Catholics, as Christians, as anyone who is against the needless killing of innocent children, we must stand as one.
We must stop this horrific act before it becomes a law.
Thursday, January 8, 2009
Richard John Neuhaus, 1936-2009
This sad news comes to us from Joseph Bottum of "First Things.""Fr. Richard John Neuhaus slipped away today, January 8, shortly before 10 o’clock, at the age of seventy-two. He never recovered from the weakness that sent him to the hospital the day after Christmas, caused by a series of side effects from the cancer he was suffering. He lost consciousness Tuesday evening after a collapse in his heart rate, and the next day, in the company of friends, he died."
A holy priest, prolific writer, founder of Frist Things, and fierce defender of life he will be deeply missed by his countless friends and by the pro-life movement of the USA.
Eight years before he died he wrote a marvelous essay on the subject of death:
“We are born to die. Not that death is the purpose of our being born, but we are born toward death, and in each of our lives the work of dying is already underway. The work of dying well is, in largest part, the work of living well. Most of us are at ease in discussing what makes for a good life, but we typically become tongue-tied and nervous when the discussion turns to a good death. As children of a culture radically, even religiously, devoted to youth and health, many find it incomprehensible, indeed offensive, that the word “good” should in any way be associated with death. Death, it is thought, is an unmitigated evil, the very antithesis of all that is good. …”
Wednesday, January 7, 2009
Most Holy Redeemer Update
"Mr. Cooney, I lived for thirty years in the homosexual world before I came back to the Church. When I was in the process of deciding whether I could accept what the Church teaches on homosexuality I realized that I had made it my own god, and just as St. Paul says, all sin is form of idolatry. But there does seem to be something more idolatrous about homosexuality. Perhaps it's because it is not just a single act of sin, or even a whole series of acts that are sins. After all, an alcoholic indulges his sin all the time, yet alcoholism, though a form of idolatry, does not become a religion in the same way that homosexuality does. Maybe it's because that alcoholics and other sinners do not convert their behaviors into something to be praised. Anyways, I'd like to know what I can do to reach out to the community of people with SSA? I already write on-line a fair amount. But where else do you think I could be helping people who are trapped in this death-style?"
How much is packed into this short comment!
First, God bless you for your effort. May you be an example to all of us who are struggling with our own particular sinfulness!
"But there does seem to be something more idolatrous about homosexuality... Maybe it's because that alcoholics and other sinners do not convert their behaviors into something to be praised."
You hit the nail right on the head. The issue at MHR is not that people are sinners--the number of sinners in any church is 100%. The issue is that at MHR we have an entire church denying that one particular sin is not only not a sin, but is something to be celebrated. In fact, as you say, the issue is idolatry.
As to the question: what can you do? It sounds to me like you are already doing the best thing--living your life in accordance with the teaching of the Church, preaching the truth, and meeting our same-sex attracted brothers and sisters with love. If we can reflect the love of Christ the Holy Spirit will do the rest. And don't lose heart. You are living proof, and you are far from alone! If there is a "Courage" apostolate in your diocese, they could probably use your help. A happy, thoughtful person living in accord with the teaching of the Church is the best evangelization.
What is quite upsetting is that this commentator, and other same-sex attracted Catholics like John Heard and Eve Tushnet are being largely left to carry this burden by themselves. At least in our Archdiocese, those responsible have been unwilling to address the issue. For whatever reason, over the past 30 years the Archdiocese of San Francisco has been passive, at best, and now we see the result. Openly same-sex "married"and "transgendered" lectors, acolytes, and Eucharistic Ministers serve Mass and trumpet their "marriage" in the pages of the Archdiocesan newspaper. It is clear that the Archdiocesan approach, if it can be even be called that, has failed. And most importantly, that failure includes causing scandal to those who, like our commentator, are struggling to live a chaste life, but perhaps lack his fortitude.
I understand that if the Archdiocese ever insists on Catholic teaching at MHR, MHR will lose the vast majority of its parishioners. (according to the San Francisco Chronicle, in 1998 90% of the parishioners were gay). It might have to close. But at some point this will have to happen, and the point is not keeping buildings open, it's the salvation of souls.
Posted by Gibbons J. Cooney
Tuesday, January 6, 2009
Congratulations and Thanks, Bishop Vigneron!
Good Bishop Allen H. Vigneron of the Diocese of Oakland has been named Archbishop of the Archdiocese of Detroit. A cardinal's hat often goes with this particular post.We congratulate His Excellency, and we pray that the Holy Spirit will send the Diocese of Oakland a worthy succesor.
"Cosmos and Human Nature"
I.
Did you know that your body, as you are sitting here, contains material that goes back something like 15 Billion years? After all, everything material in this world, the whole universe was contained in the first moments of the Big Bang in an unimaginably small space and incredible amounts of energy. It took Billions of years to develop all the elements from hydrogen to helium down to all the other heavier elements. They are the result of nuclear reactions in stars and supernovas. Your very body that is sitting here in the pews consists of stuff that was once part of a supernova. This is quite amazing to think about.
II.
Now consider that God in Jesus Christ took just one of those bodies as part of our human nature. That is what we call the Incarnation; we celebrate it at Christmas: God took our human nature in order to express his love for us. Already in Adam he used those flesh and bones to make an image and likeness of himself. Now in Jesus he takes up this human body with its elements in person. What this means, and what is important to notice here is that God is able to express his very own life in this nature of ours, including all the elements that it took billions of years to develop. This sheds some light, in retrospect, on the Big Bang itself, on the development of the entire cosmos with all its endless stars and galaxies. They are not just a meaningless cosmic explosion of which we are a random product. That God comes in the flesh means that he prepared for himself a body not just beginning from the promise to Abraham and the patriarchs, but from the creation of the world on. We know today that all those elements would not have emerged, if the Big Bang with its physical constants would have been just a tiny little bit off from what it actually is. Physicists have been puzzled by the minimal probability of the emergence not just of this our planet, with water and atmosphere, with life and the intelligent life that we have; even the emergence of just the heavy physical elements in the cosmos as a whole (which are a precondition for our life), are so improbable that one naturally has to suspect the hand of a creator who has orchestrated it, and who created the Big Bang in the first place.
Of all this we might want to think when we see the star over the manger. It indicates the cosmic background of the human nature with its tiny body lying in that manger. Both indicate the presence of God, guiding the astronomers of old to recognize him. In terms of importance, it puts the planet earth where older cosmologies always suspected it: in the middle of the universe. And in the middle of the earth we, like the magi, can find the manger.
III.
Not all, however, allow themselves to be guided by this evidence. The first reading from the letter of John calls these the “false prophets” in the “spirit of the Antichrist.” They deny that God came in the flesh. Accordingly, they will not see the history of the cosmos, in spite of all its improbability, as the result of God’s plan and providence. For a scientist as such, be it physicist or biologist, it would indeed be proper to remain agnostic about this question, in so far as they are engaging in a particular field of science that does not make statements about these kinds of interpretations. Many, however, go outside the realm of their competence by denying that there is a God and creator, let alone one that can became incarnate in our nature. Everything, they say, is the outcome of chance, of random mutations, survival of the fittest and the like. As an ideology, this can properly be called the ideology of the Antichrist. It certainly is not science, because science as such cannot prove this point; if anything it rather points beyond itself.
IV.
This is not an abstract speculation, but it has consequences for our lives. It has consequences for how we view our own human nature, our very body with its physical elements and its design. Is it the outcome of God’s providence from the beginning of the world? Or is it a meaningless product of random happenings that can equally randomly be changed by modern technology, by surgery or genetic manipulation?
Pope Benedict recently was attacked in Europe for saying that we do not only have a duty to protect the nature of wildlife from the destructions of modern technology and economy; with that the ecologists will agree (and Pope Benedict is actually one of the most “green” popes ever). But he added that this includes human nature, which is equally subject to technological destruction and social deformations. That he mentioned the separation of what is now called “gender” from the biology of our human nature and sexuality in order to redesign it accordingly, naturally made many people angry. But this is indeed one of the implications of the new world view. Here is where cosmological hypotheses end up changing our view of human nature and life.
Here is what Pope Benedict said verbatim, outlining our responsibilities:
“Since faith in the Creator is an essential part of the Christian Creed, the Church cannot and should not confine herself to passing on the message of salvation alone. She has a responsibility for the created order and ought to make this responsibility prevail, even in public. And in so doing, she ought to safeguard not only the earth, water, and air as gifts of creation, belonging to everyone. She ought also to protect man against the destruction of himself. What is necessary is a kind of ecology of man, understood in the correct sense. When the Church speaks of the nature of the human being as man and woman and asks that this order of creation be respected, then this is not the result of an outdated metaphysic. It is a question of faith in the Creator and of listening to the language of creation, the devaluation of which leads to the self-destruction of man and therefore to the destruction of the same work of God. That which is often expressed and understood by the term ‘gender’, results finally in the self-emancipation of man from creation and from the Creator. Man wishes to act alone and to dispose ever and exclusively of that alone which concerns him. But in this way he is living contrary to the truth, he is living contrary to the Creator Spirit. Yes, the tropical forests are deserving of our protection, but man merits no less as a creature, in which there is written a message which does not mean a contradiction of our liberty, but its condition. The great Scholastic theologians have characterized matrimony, the life-long bond between man and woman, as a sacrament of creation, instituted by the Creator himself and which Christ-- without modifying the message of creation-- has incorporated into the history of his covenant with mankind. This forms part of the message that the Church must recover: the witness in favor of the Spirit Creator present in nature in its entirety and in a particular way in the nature of man, created in the image of God. Beginning from this perspective, it would be beneficial to read again the Encyclical Humanae Vitae: the intention of Pope Paul VI was to defend love against sexuality as a consumer entity, the future as opposed to the exclusive pretext of the present, and the nature of man against its manipulation.” So far the Holy Father.
V.
What we are celebrating at Christmas, therefore, is also an Epiphany or manifestation of our very own human nature. It is only a natural consequence, if in today’s Gospel we see Jesus healing our physical nature and teaching our minds to see this nature correctly. Indeed, “the people who sit in darkness have seen a great light”; it is God’s light, manifested in the cosmos as well as in our nature, in the light of the star over Bethlehem and in the light shining from the manger, God’s light and life expressed in our human nature.
Sunday, January 4, 2009
Most Holy Redeemer Pastor Sympathizes with Prop. 8 Vandals--Just Sorry They Picked His Church.
And here's an amazing quote from the story on the KCBS website:
"Pastor Steve Meriweather told KCBS his parishioners actually share the vandals' sentiment against Prop 8. 'I think it's unfortunate that they selected our community to attack,' said Meriweather, 'because it's the wrong one."'
Meaning there are other, right places to attack? Quite the spiritual director is Fr. Meriwether.
But one can see his point. Since 1982, when Fr. Tony McGuire was installed, Most Holy Redeemer has steadily changed itself from a Catholic Church into a spiritual institution whose orienting principle is the celebration of homosexuality. (Go here.) It's no longer recognizably Catholic--so why is it being attacked for positions the Catholic Church takes?
So one can understand Fr. Meriwether's peevishness--I mean, here's a picture of one of his Eucharistic Ministers posing with his "husband" in the nave of the church:

And below is a photo (courtesy Most Holy Redeemer website) of Archbishop Niederauer's visit back in October, 2007. That's the Mass that was disrupted by the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence. But what this picture shows is: why worry about the "Sisters" in the pews when you've got two open lesbians and a leather daddy on the altar? Our Archbishop is surrounded and he doesn't even know it. Or maybe he does know it, and realizes how much the good word is needed.

In the picture you see four altar servers in white. The lady with the candle and the lady in the background (whose head is behind the candle the first lady is holding) have both "married" persons of the same sex, according to published reports. And (caution: adults only) the big guy in the back (bald head above first lady) is the Master of Ceremonies--he's a well-known attendee at public leather s/m events. He was even honest enough to complain in a letter to the editor about KRON-TV's coverage of the 2007 "Gay Pride" parade--because they did not give enough coverage to the "leather" community, to what he called "his" community! He also happens to be the coordinator of the parish's Liturgy Planning Group.
So one can understand Fr. Meriwether's surprise and chagrin at "his" church being attacked. He's got seven (at least) lectors, acolytes, and/or Eucharistic Ministers on staff who have "married" persons of the same-sex and at least five current and former Pastoral Council members who donated to the "No on Proposition 8 Campaign."
I mean, what more does he need to do to prove his credibility to the gay community?
Posted by Gibbons J. Cooney
A Catholic 'Wannsee Conference'
Yesterday, Diogenes linked to a story in the Wall Street Journal by Anne Hendershott called "How Support for Abortion Became Kennedy Dogma."
From the story:
"At a meeting at the Kennedy compound in Hyannisport, Mass., on a hot summer day in 1964, the Kennedy family and its advisers and allies were coached by leading theologians and Catholic college professors on how to accept and promote abortion with a 'clear conscience.'
The former Jesuit priest Albert Jonsen, emeritus professor of ethics at the University of Washington, recalls the meeting in his book 'The Birth of Bioethics' (Oxford, 2003). He writes about how he joined with the Rev. Joseph Fuchs, a Catholic moral theologian; the Rev. Robert Drinan, then dean of Boston College Law School; and three academic theologians, the Revs. Giles Milhaven, Richard McCormick and Charles Curran, to enable the Kennedy family to redefine support for abortion.
Mr. Jonsen writes that the Hyannisport colloquium was influenced by the position of another Jesuit, the Rev. John Courtney Murray, a position that 'distinguished between the moral aspects of an issue and the feasibility of enacting legislation about that issue.' It was the consensus at the Hyannisport conclave that Catholic politicians 'might tolerate legislation that would permit abortion under certain circumstances if political efforts to repress this moral error led to greater perils to social peace and order.'
Father Milhaven later recalled the Hyannisport meeting during a 1984 breakfast briefing of Catholics for a Free Choice: 'The theologians worked for a day and a half among ourselves at a nearby hotel. In the evening we answered questions from the Kennedys and the Shrivers. Though the theologians disagreed on many a point, they all concurred on certain basics . . . and that was that a Catholic politician could in good conscience vote in favor of abortion.'
All emphases added.
I'd never heard this before, and I am genuinely shocked. Here we have Catholic Priests laying the groundwork for the murder of (to date) 49 million American children.
Diogenes closed his post:
"It was a critically important event, illustrating how the Kennedy family has consistently exploited its Catholicism-- to the betterment of Kennedy political prospects, and the detriment of the faith. The more people know what happened at Hyannisport, the better."Posted by Gibbons J. Cooney
Friday, January 2, 2009
A Sight for Sore Eyes

Take Heart
The Pope made this exhortation Wednesday during his homily at a ceremony in St. Peter's Basilica that included first vespers for today's feast of Mary, Mother of God, and the singing of the Te Deum in thanksgiving for the graces of 2008.
"This year closes with the awareness of a growing economic and social crisis that already concerns the entire world," he said. "Though not a few shadows are appearing on the horizon of our future, we should not be afraid.
"Our great hope as believers is eternal life in communion with Christ and with the whole family of God. This great hope gives us the strength to confront and overcome the difficulties of life in this world." (Zenit.org).-