jump to navigation

What happens when you reject traditional Christian doctrine May 10, 2010

Posted by Tantumblogo in asshatery, General Catholic, Society.
comments closed

The Anglican Church was the first Christian denomination of any sort to accept the use of birth control – this occurred at the Lambeth Conference in 1930.  The Catholic Church reacted quickly and authoritatively with Casti Connubii, released by Pope Pius XI  just months after the Lambeth Conference, reaffirming tradition Chrisitan doctrine that artificial birth control can never, ever be used for any reason, and adding that even periodic abstention to frustrate pregnancy can only be used under grave circumstances.  

With the Lambeth declaration, Anglicans stated that birth control could only be used with the approval of a bishop.  Within a few years, that had changed to the approval of a pastor, and then for ‘serious’ reasons.  By the late 1950’s, Anglican theologians were opining that birth control was a positive good, having adopted the progressive argument that the world was heading towards an over populated nightmare.  This view is still the dominant view in the Anglican Church, where it is rare to find much support for what used to be the traditional Christian view that children are a positive good in and of themselves, and that married couples should be open to children throughout their married lives.  This view, this hostility towards large families, is now so ingrained in Anglican thought that, in spite of the evidence of demographic decline and the concommitant disaster that threatens virtually every advanced country, the Anglican Church is still spinning out the tired old 60s rhetoric that poor Gaia is overwhelmed with people and Anglicans would be better off not having children

The Anglican Church wants Australians to have fewer children and has urged the federal government to scrap the baby bonus and cut immigration levels.

The General Synod of the Anglican Church has issued a warning that current rates of population growth are unsustainable and potentially out of step with church doctrine – including the eighth commandment ”thou shall not steal”.

In a significant intervention, the Anglican Public Affairs Commission has also warned concerned Christians that remaining silent ”is little different from supporting further overpopulation and ecological degradation”

So, now, they’ve gone so far as to state that having children is a SIN!  Are you kidding me?!?  Can anything else sum up how far off the rails a Church can go once it starts down the path of progressivism?  This isn’t some random Anglican rector of Smallsville church – this is the national conference of one of the countries where Anglicanism has its biggest presence – Australia.  Do you think Rowan Williamson, High Chief of the Druid Church Archbishop of Canterbury, is going to issue a statement categorically denying the Australian synod is out of line?  Or, rather, has this not become the dominant view? 

Talk about your self-defeating acts.  In a Church that is already splitting apart in several directions, informing the faithful that giving birth to the future generation is a sin is pretty novel.  The reason for this recent pronouncement is to encourage opposition to incentives the Australian government has given to its citizens to have more children – something badly needed in a country with a fertility rate well below replacement.  With global population set to peak sometime in the next 30 years, and then begin the first decline in population seen in many centuries, and with so many countries facing economic disaster due to a lack of children, what does it say about a Church that has major synods issuing laughable, frankly anti-Christian proclamations such as this?

Deal Hudson on Sr. Carol Keehan May 10, 2010

Posted by Tantumblogo in Abortion, General Catholic, scandals.
comments closed

Deal Hudson, who writes regularly on a number of Catholic topics, discusses Sr. Carol Keehan’s continued Orwellian doublethink regarding her support for Obamacare.   There is not too much new here for my readers – I’ve already explained in depth my belief, shared by Archbishop Naumann of Kansas City, that Sr. Keehan was either hopelessly naive or disingenuous regarding her supposition that Obamacare did not provide funding for abortion.  Planned Parenthood, of course, disagrees……they are engaged in a building spree to meet the expected surge in on-demand abortion. 

But there is this quote from Hudson’s post, a comment made by Michael Sean Winters of American magazine (blech) on a standing ovation Sr. Keehan received at a gathering of Obama’s catholyc supporters:

That applause came from somewhere deep in the consciousness of the assembled Catholics, all of whom share a commitment to the Church’s social justice traditions and teaching.

There it is, for the umpteenth time – the ‘progressive’ trade off.  Social justice for all, provided you’ve managed to escape the mother’s womb.  But, looking at the prose, I’m left aghast.  Do these people believe in their heart of hearts that accepting legislation that will, or even could, threaten the lives of millions of unborn children is not just acceptable, but a right, moral, and proper thing to do, so long as it achieves their progressive political ends?  To me, that’s a melding of a frightening form of Catholic religious fervor with a demonic means to achieve a desired end.  That way, my friends, lies hell on earth – for there is no end to the lengths to which someone will go when trying to do something ‘for the greater good’.   History is replete with examples.  We in the Church are supposed to be the shining light of Truth that refutes this kind of mentality, but instead, is there a large percentage of those who call themselves Catholic who have bought into the progressive utopian fantasy lock, stock, and barrel?   If so, I have a hard time seeing how this is consonant with the Truth Christ has revealed through His Church – life has to come first without exception and without even risk, no  matter what else can be achieved.

Double Duty May 10, 2010

Posted by Tantumblogo in Dallas Diocese, General Catholic, North Deanery.
comments closed

I blogged recently on the ordination of two new coadjutor auxiliary bishops here in the Dallas Diocese.  I just learned over the weekend that it has been announced at St. Joseph Parish in Richardson that the replacement for retiring Monsignor Don Fischer has just been named…….and it is one of the new coadjutor bishops, Doug Deshotel.  In addition, the new Bishop Seitz will continue as pastor at St. Rita’s in Dallas. 

Whew.  Those guys are going to be beyond busy.  They are going to be doubly in need of prayers.  As is our diocese……it is the shortage of priests, especially native born priests who can serve as pastors of a large parish that has led to this double duty.  It is becoming incredibly critical that we start to see far more seminarians be ordained……we can’t have classes of 20 seminarians producing 1 or 2 priests anymore.

Sad Anniversay – 50th anniversay of ‘The Pill’ May 10, 2010

Posted by Tantumblogo in Abortion, foolishness, General Catholic, Society.
comments closed

The pill – hormone induced prevention of the egg attaching to the lining of the uterus – was first marketed for public use in May 1960.  The brainchild and ‘daughter’ of hate filled eugenicist Margaret Sanger, was supposed to ‘free women from the burden of bearing excessive numbers of children,’ make marriages stronger since parents wouldn’t be beat down by having umpteen kids, and help reduce the horrid pressures of overpopulation around the world, especially among those ‘colored people’ Margaret Sanger disliked so much.  Wow!  Sounds amazing – how did it all work out?

Not so good.  While, yes, the pill has freed women from the burden of bearing more than a planned, small number of children, that freedom, if it can be called such, has come at a huge cost.  Skyrocketing rates of breast and other forms of cancer, heart attack, high blood pressure, dramatically reduced libido, depression, mood swings, are just some of the physical and emotional impacts of the pill.  Even worse, the pill has encouraged sexual selfishness that has led to incredible increases in adultery, divorce, and having children out of wedlock.  The pill has been successful in dramatically reducing the number of live births per woman, but primarily among wealthy whites and Asians, not as much among Ms. Sanger’s original target audience (although, depressingly, the birthrates of people in the Mid East, India, and Africa are rapidly falling to Western levels). 

But, most depressingly, the pill has led to abortion.  Over 2/3 of abortions come about because of failed contraception.  Once you put yourself in a mindset that you won’t accept the gift of a child from God, but contraception fails in some way and you wind up pregnant, it’s a relatively short road, in practice, from taking a pill to having  a doctor cut your living child out of your body.  Add in to the fact that the use of the pill does not necessarily prevent conception, only implantation, and it is impossible to tell how many millions, possibly billions of children have been killed through the use of the pill.  The pill is probably responsibly for more deaths than any other single agent in human history, discounting natural causes. 

Robert Stacy McCain is a protestant with 6 kids.  I highly encourage you to read this whole post on the subject by him.

Unnatural Ideas Have Natural Consequences

More generally, The Pill fostered a prevalence of the belief that sex without pregnancy is normal. This utterly unnatural idea is the foundation of the Contraceptive Culture……

Throughout human history, recognition of the natural connection between sex and procreation was fundamental to society’s laws, customs, attitudes and behaviors in regard to relationships between men and women. These traditions had varied from place to place, and shifted slowly from time to time, but in all times and all places, social norms had been founded on the understanding that sex and pregnancy were intrinsically linked. Indeed, from a strictly biological perspective, reproduction is the sole purpose of sex.

The Contraceptive Culture, by contrast, is based on the negation of what we may rightly call natural sexuality. As previously mentioned, The Pill was launched in 1960 with a blitzkrieg of media hype, much of it sponsored by non-profit foundations. Historian Donald L. Critchlow chronicled this phenomenon in his excellent 2001 book, Intended Consequences: Birth Control, Abortion, and the Federal Goverment in Modern America, and as I explained last July:

The population control movement . . . was largely the brainchild of John D. Rockefeller III. Rockefeller funded much of the movement himself and through a number of family trusts and foundations, and he encouraged other foundations (Ford, Scaife, Carnegie) to do the same. . . .
[B]etween 1959 and 1964 one organization alone, the Population Council, got more than $5 million from the Rockefellers, $8.4 million from the Ford Foundation and $2.1 million from Scaife. So that’s $15 million in five years, back when a million dollars was a lot of money.

The Population Council was among a number of groups that helped promote positive publicity for The Pill, a P.R. campaign orchestrated by some of the best marketing strategists in the business. Among the ideas central to that public-relations blitz were (a) that unwanted pregnancy was a horrible burden on families, as well as on society at large, and (b) that The Pill, by exempting women from the dreaded prospect of becoming pregnant, would usher in a carefree new era of sexual fulfillment.

What actually happened, of course, was something quite different.  The 1960s were a decade of unprecedented increases in divorce, drug abuse and teen suicide. Most especially, the ’60s saw skyrocketing rates of sexually-transmitted diseases

Contact State Board of Education for improved curricula May 10, 2010

Posted by Tantumblogo in Society.
comments closed

The Texas State Board of Education has been formulating new study plans and textbook guidelines on a variety of subjects which, if finally accepted and put into practice, would do a great deal to reduce the influence of leftism/modernism in Texas public education and bring a greater focus on fact based learning.  These new plans are being assailed violently by those often associated with progressive/modernist movements, the ACLU and various progressive teacher’s associations.

On May 19th, the State Board of Education will hold its final hearings on the Social Studies Curriculum.  Encompassing subjects as diverse as history, civics, and sociology, Social Studies is one of the main areas where the modernists have tried to push thier agenda most stridently. 

The following is from an e-mail that is being distributed by Liberty Institute, letting you know how you can contact the state board of education:

Posted by Liberty Institute — 5.5.10 —

Stop the Liberal Takeover of Texas Education! Take Action!

Do you want to take a stand for accurate history and the future of Texas school children? We want to help you make a difference.

Fringe liberal groups and media are working overtime to spread misinformation, hoping to convince Texans that the Board has completely removed Thomas Jefferson from the social studies standards (Jefferson is actually more prominent in the U.S. History standards than anyone else except George Washington) and not fairly representing minorities (approved standards actually contain more minority representation than ever before).

The ACLU and others are using misinformation to force their ideology into the curriculum and force the State Board of Education  (SBOE) to delay the final vote on the social studies standards until after the November elections, hoping there will be more liberal representation on the Board. The Board has been working on social studies for over 14 months now, and it’s time to vote!

Action: Contact the Board now
to rules@tea.state.tx.us and thank them for standing for our founding principles, ask them to take a final vote on May 21, tell them you oppose a liberal takeover over of education, and that you support teaching the Constitution, religious heritage, and American Exceptionalism!

Find out how to contact your SBOE member and how you can make an even bigger difference now, or email us at legislative@libertyinstitute.org! Find out more on our Texas Legislative Update blog.

If you contact the state board at the ‘rules’ e-mail address, make sure to put the words social studies in the subject line.  Homeschoolers may think this doesn’t apply to them, but anything that raises the general standard of education deserves support.  In addition, changing the ‘rules of discourse,’ by re-introducing more traditional views of America can start to change the entire intellectual environment, and may serve to over time reduce those threats that caused many people to homeschool in the first place.  You can even try to go to Austin to testify before the board if you are particularly motivated.