PROGRESSIVES, AKA, THE HETERODOX, SIMPLY DON’T GET IT: THEY ARE THE CAUSE OF THE SEXUAL IMMORALITY IN THE CHURCH TO INCLUDE HIGH AND LOW CLERGY AS WELL AS THE LAITY

PROGRESSIVES, AKA, THE HETERODOX, SIMPLY DON’T GET IT: THEY ARE THE CAUSE OF THE SEXUAL IMMORALITY IN THE CHURCH TO INCLUDE HIGH AND LOW CLERGY AS WELL AS THE LAITY

Mortal sin abounds in the Catholic Church as well as mortal sinners. There is nothing new under the sun in this regard.

True pathology that leads Catholic clergy and laity to be serial abusers may well remove one of the criteria for what is considered a mortal sin–full consent of the will in a grave matter.

However, what about the enablers who should have known better, but did not act to stop a serial abuser?  Bishops and lower clergy as well as laity who turned a blind eye or worse yet forgave the sins of serial abusers without the appropriate penance such as the removal from ministry, reporting to the civil authorities and transparency on what had happened, may well be the mortal sinners having fulfilled all the criteria of what constitutes a mortal sin.

But make no mistake about it–it is the new morality (moral theology) of the post-Vatican II, spirit of Vatican II Church that has exacerbated the scandal of clergy and laity who commit mortal sins because the new moral theology of Vatican II enables sinners to commit sins and not feel guilty if they have made their decision/discernment to commit any sin after a thorough decision/discernment of personal conscience. Conscience in this context trumps everything else to include the authoritative moral teachings of Christ and His Church.

I was taught this new morality in the 1970’s seminary I attended. Let’s say a woman was pregnant and  didn’t feel she could carry the child to term. What should this Catholic woman do to arrive at a decision of conscience that could open the door to an abortion and to do so in good conscience? This could be applied to the use of artificial contraception by married couples which would include the man too. It can be applied to decisions of conscience of those who have same sex attractions. It applies to almost every issue of morality and immorality.

This is how a Catholic following the new morality makes a decision/discernment of conscience, personal conscience:

1. The person prays about what they should do–let’s use the artificial contraception issue here. Does the couple want to follow Church teaching to the law (Humanae Vitae) or are there extenuating circumstances, (situational ethics) which need to be considered, such as cost of more children, psychological burdens of more children, health, etc. Of course knowing what the Church teaches is important in this prayerful discernment/decision of conscience.

2. Then the couple seeks counsel from family members and close friends they respect and listens to their advice and takes it into prayerful consideration.

3. Thirdly, the couple consults with a member of the clergy, a religious sister or other pastoral worker and seeks their counsel but choosing someone who doesn’t see just “black and white” but the various 50 shades of gray, so to speak.

4. Then the couple makes their prayerful decision of conscience and if there are situational ethics or good reasons to use artificial birth control, choose an abortion, continue to live in sexual sin, then they can do so in good conscience because they arrived at a decision of conscience by following the new moral theology’s recipe. Conscience must always be respected in this new moral theology.

Why do I recall this for you? Because this flawed method of making a decision of conscience has led Catholic clergy who are normal in their sexual orientation to break their vows/promises and to do so in good conscience. The same with married couples who break their vows and decide it is quite okay to receive Holy Communion in good conscience even though they live and act in an adulterous way.

It has led Catholic clergy to include bishops who are disordered in their sexuality and have disordered affections to follow through on their sinful inclinations because they are making a decision of conscience to have sex or  some kind of sexual activity which they truly believe is consensual (even though of course it isn’t truly). It has assisted practicing Catholic laity to do the same, BTW.

And those clergy who are truly pathological in their sexual appetites and emotional needs,  we have seen  (as though in a field hospital)  what has happened and how those in Catholic authority have treated them with such compassion and mercy and a desire to cure them through psychological means and spiritual renewal and then place them back in a situation where they could continue their serial abuse.

Pope Francis’ “cautious ” opening to allow Catholics in adultery and other sexual mortal sins to receive Holy Communion is nothing new, it is the spirit of Vatican II’s method of making a moral decision/discernment and is the source of corruption that we see in so many Catholics to include cardinals who make a moral decision to commit and live in a state of mortal sin because they have followed a recipe of moral discernment and a decision of conscience.

As for the homosexual lobby in the Catholic Church and the theology of winks and nods for any kind of illicit sexual relationships (in the moral and legal realms) the spirit of Vatican II has it method of madness to form a new world and a new paradigm of morality in that new world.

I can remember hearing Cardinaless McCarrick say many years back that he would not necessarily be in favor of same sex marriage but he clearly endorsed calling it “civil unions.” I found his answer so peculiar coming from a Cardinal but it all makes sense now–he sees nothing wrong with homosexual sex (sexuality) and endorses Catholics to enter “civil unions” to find civil benefits in their mortal sins. It was and is outrageous but there were no corrections of this now cardinaless archbishop by other high rank cardinals and bishops as I recall.

Shades of gray trump clear black and white moral teachings of the Church!

Facebook
Twitter
Google+
http://angelqueen.org/2018/07/29/83652/
Get AQ Email Updates
AQ RSS Feed

One comment on “PROGRESSIVES, AKA, THE HETERODOX, SIMPLY DON’T GET IT: THEY ARE THE CAUSE OF THE SEXUAL IMMORALITY IN THE CHURCH TO INCLUDE HIGH AND LOW CLERGY AS WELL AS THE LAITY

  1. “True pathology that leads Catholic clergy and laity to be serial abusers may well remove one of the criteria for what is considered a mortal sin: full consent of the will in a grave matter.”

    Whoa. Whoa. Whoa.
    Hang on here, Father, this just isn’t good enough. This matter is way too important to just throw off without making the needed distinctions.
    The pathology in question has to be not only a true one (i.e. like truly uncontrollable behavior), but also one NOT acquired through one’s own FAULT.
    /
    To illustrate by extremes, one case might be that of a child raised from infancy by two fag parents, who sexually abused him, and trained him to think such behavior was not only normal, but good.
    Another case might be that of a man who was raised by very good Catholic parents, and excellent instruction in Catholic Faith and morals. He even went to seminary. There, however, he met a certain priest, seminary rector or even bishop or cardinal — does the name McCarrick come to mind? — who by artful words and deeds converts him to faggery.
    /
    The former might be excused from mortal sin for acts of homosexual child molestation when he grows up, provided that he never had the opportunity to be sufficiently enlightened.
    The latter *knew* better from the beginning. His capitulation to faggery was a mortal sin itself, and therefore, *even if later on his acquired habit of faggery becomes pathological and thus uncontrollable*, he is guilty of mortal sin each and every time he commits an act of faggery, because the pathology itself is HIS OWN FAULT.
    /
    In short, ignorance or obsessive compulsion does NOT excuse when it is AFFECTED, or is the result of deliberately killing one’s conscience. In that case, the cause of one’s ignorance is a mortally sinful refusal to accept a truth that one could have, and should have, known.

Leave a Reply