jump to navigation

Fr. Peter Carota on how Vatican II led to Roe v. Wade January 23, 2014

Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, Abortion, Basics, disaster, error, family, foolishness, General Catholic, sadness, scandals, sexual depravity, sickness, Society.
trackback

Abortion seems the theme this week, and rightly so.  Yesterday this nation – at least, those with souls less than dead – mourned the diabolical decision of a small junta of men to make the murder of babies in a mother’s womb legal.  But this decision did not come about as if by accident, nor did it happen in a vacuum.  There was extensive groundwork laid for the legalized murder of babies. 

Fr. Peter Carota, a priest in good standing in the Archdiocese of Phoenix, examines that groundwork, and states the obvious: Vatican II played a substantial role, at least as far as Catholics are concerned, in the debacle that is known as Roe v. Wade (as usual I add emphasis and comments):

In the last 40 years world wide there have been 1.72 Billion Pre Born babies murdered.  In China there have been 336 million.  196 million sterilizations and 403 million IUDs inserted. Here in the United States there have been 55 million lives lost….

…..All these “vulnerable” babies have been murdered because of not wanting the greatest gift  God could ever give us, a child.  It is like this: I want to bless you with 1 million dollars, well, maybe 2 million, or maybe 3 million or I will really bless you with 20 million dollars.  Who would say, no I would rather have just 2 or at the most 3 million.  They would have to be crazy.

But when it comes to the greatest gift ever, children, we say, please, no more blessings, in fact they are “no longer blessings” after I have my boy and girl.

It all started in the Catholic Church when the Pope Paul VI formed a commission study the good and bad of birth control.   My parents very good friends, Pat and Patty Crowley, were on that committee.  Just bringing up the idea of questioning if birth control is good or bad by a pope, opened up the door to questioning all Catholic doctrine.  How could a pope even ask a committee to study the change of christian doctrine? [Indeed, merely asking the question of whether an extremely well established Dogma like the evil of contraception could be somehow changed sends the message that the Truth is up for debate.  And that immediately creates in people’s minds the impression that the Truth – all Truth – is suddenly passe’, obsolete, or at least debatable. And entire generation of Catholics had their formation essentially ruined by the prospect that a constant belief of the Faith – one that affected people’s lives most intimately – might change.  Millions affected by this potential shift never recovered from that.]  This is the work of modernism. [Dang right. It’s good to say it.] We have evolved to now see that what was wrong before is now good for families and society.

When Pope Paul VI later decided against birth control, bishops, priests, religious, theologians, teachers and Catholics went wild. [Boy did they.  And many still are running wild, like it’s still 1968. Grow up!] They then went on to protest the pope’s encyclical “Humanae Vitae”.  So the mere questioning about established Catholic doctrine and morals, automatically calls into question the validity of Catholic doctrine and moral that were always held before.

But this “climate of questioning everything Catholic” had already been fomented by the way Vatican II was run.  Everything seemed to be up for grabs.  We were now “the new educated generation of Catholics” who could now clearly throw away medieval doctrine and come up with “modern” christianity that would be “relevant” to “modern man”.  And we see this in the wording of some of the councils documents.   They used words that changed the meaning of what the Church had always taught before, like on ecumenism, collegiality, and freedom of religion. [I wholeheartedly agree. It is, seemingly, impossible, without doing intellectual backflips, to reconcile portions of Vatican II with the previous dogmatic statements of the Magisterium.  Pope Benedict XVI described Vatican II as an “anti-syllabus,” referring to the dogmatic declarations of error made by Blessed Pius IX in 1864. The Council constantly billed itself – and was so described by the two popes who oversaw it – as non-dogmatic, non-defintional, strictly “pastoral.”  That is the only way some of the more problematic documents passed – bishops were assured nothing would really change, because no Dogma was being defined.  But as Fr. Ray Blake has pointed out, since the Council did not make any formal definitions of belief or error, the entire thing has come to be promoted as Dogmatic by its partisans.  But there are others who say no, the Council is only dogmatic where it re-states the previous Magisterium.  And I am referring to Cardinals, princes of the Church, holding these disparate opinions!  How are the lay people to understand Vatican II when even Cardinals disagree fundamentally on what it means!]

Many, many bishops, priests, religious and theologians began publicly and privately to dissented from the Church’s prohibition of the use of birth control.   I have read over and over their statements of dissent.  Most of you are too young to have lived through these times. [See the notorious “Winnipeg Statement,” still never formally renounced by the Canadian bishop’s conference. There are hundreds more examples.]

This is of utmost importance, because it set the foundation for the murdering of pre born babies.  As the Catholic couple starts being the one who chooses how many, if any, children to have, in stead of God, they open the door to not wanting children after the number they have arbitrarily decided on.  Once this mentality has set in, children become a commodity that can be chosen or rejected and disposed of, depending on the parents whims.

Now when you already have “the children you have decided is good for you”, additional children are unwanted and seen as a burden rather than a blessing.  So you use birth control to determine how many children you will have.  And this separates (divorces) [good term. There is no question in my mind that the explosion in divorce in the late 60s and early 70s was a by-product of separating sex from reproduction, which began to eat away at the fabric of millions of marriages.] biology from sex, or children coming from the reproductive organs.  After the 2-3 children have been born, sex becomes only for pleasure.

Before we knew it, sex has almost become totally separated from procreation.  It has become only for sexual pleasure, as is now seen in the prevalent perspective today in society. [and that is why people now seek to redefine marriage to include abominations that would have been unthinkable a few decades ago.]

So when sex was divorced from producing children by birth control, a pregnancy accidentally occurs, a terrible crisis comes about.  You were doing everything “correct” in your “safe sex” and now a terrible thing has happened. [and all forms of contraception have failure rates, which over a lifetime of use equal unity.  That has been shown already – so “unexpected” pregnancies are virtually guaranteed even with correct contraceptive use over a period of 10 or 20 years, and frequently far less. And most people do not use their contraception reliably, dramatically increasing the failure rate.]  This is when abortion becomes an option.  And this is what has actual happened, and more and more every day……

……So when we start with separating sex from its natural effect of producing children, it becomes predominately a source of pleasure.  Then when the natural effect happens, it is seen as a problem and has to be “resolved” by killing the child.  The child is an inconvenience for the couple having sex for sexual gratification. [what a sick state of affairs this is.]

So the beginning of all the 1.72 billion babies murdered in the wombs of their mothers started with birth control.  The “contraceptive mentality” leads to the murder of unwanted babies. [And this is a major division in the pro-life movement.  The vast majority of protestants, and even most Catholics, in the pro-life movement are pro-contraception, or they want to keep silent about it, because it is feared that to start to tell the masses that their contraceptive use is immoral will get the pro-life movement labeled as crazy and extreme. And they are unfortunately probably correct about this, but 40 years ago it was “crazy” to call a life in the womb a child, and to protest its killing. Now, after 40 years of effort, it is not a dominant opinion, but it is generally respected and treated as a serious point of view.  We must start laying similar groundwork with respect to contraception – we’ll never be rid of abortion as a national nightmare as long as people contracept in large numbers.]

All this bares repeating and studying, because we can help people realize that God was right after all when He taught through His Catholic Church, that sex is sacred and to be between a man and a woman in marriage to receive the greatest gift God can give this side of heaven, a child…..

…..And this is why we are traditional Catholics.  Because we know that trying to change Catholic doctrine to fit “modern man” only leads to death and doom. [And thus, the fallacies underlying mentality so much of what the most recent Council declared are exposed.] God is love and His rules are only for the our good. [Great closing.]

You could kind of look at this post as a corollary to the one below: how did Catholic formation and catechesis get so screwed up?  Well, the process of events explored above gives at least a big part of the answer – humanly speaking.  As for the rest, we won’t know definitively until we shuffle off this mortal coil. 

Comments

1. DiscipleoftheDumbOx - January 24, 2014

Fascinating. That is all I can imagine to write at this time about it. Truly fascinating.

2. skeinster - January 24, 2014

To be accurate- theologians did have to come to some decision about The Pill. Unlike previous methods, which manually (for want of a better term) interfered with the marital act, the Pill acted at a remove. This was something completely new, and needed some study.

The media played up that question- would the Pill be allowed?- rather than discussing BC, in general and the story played out as above. A combination of ’60’s rage against authority and unrealistic expectations.

Looking back from what we now know about the Pill and other hormonal contraceptives, Humanae Vitae was a gift.

tantamergo - January 24, 2014

Good points, there was some disordered hope the pill would somehow be treated differently. I think that really should have been shot down, and violently, as contraception is contraception, it’s not the type, it’s the disordered mentality that underlies it’s use.

But accepting that the pill was viewed as magically different at face value, and knowing that the commission Pope Paul VI appointed to study the issue reported back in favor of allowing the use of the pill (but it is commonly reported as being ALL contraception), it just confirms for me how wheels off Catholic theology was at that time. I was re-reading the Winnipeg Statement last night and it really upset me – it is incredible that Catholic bishops could not only write such a thing, but vigorously defend doing so for decades. Something was severely amiss at that time.

3. Branch - January 24, 2014

And something else has happened in its wake: you have ‘personalists’ who are so enamored with their dignity, their freedom, that this development in the Church has given them, that they can now plan their families in a moral way. It’s seen as a victory in the Church’s compassion for us. Some of them are the same people decrying abortion, covering it even at the March for Life for major networks like EWTN. It’s a cycle. They aren’t into things so much as obedience or listening to what the Church has always taught, it seems to me. They’d rather wax eloquently about how it’s all about the human person now, how the Church has come into her own – finally. It is no coincidence that precisely as the virtue of religion itself has all but died for many Catholics, that God Himself is practically ignored through banal worship, that devotion has been traded for causes or the marrying of philosophies with the Faith whenever it’s even remotely possible to do so, at the same time, so much other self-righteous, self-assured error has been accepted.

4. DiscipleoftheDumbOx - January 24, 2014

If Vatican II led to Roe v. Wade, would you like to hazard a guess at what would provide an exodus from this Federally-sponsored, Supreme Court-mandated tyranny? It begins with an “S” and rhymes with ‘recede’.

Oh, but do go ahead and continue to believe that we just need to elect the right people who will then appoint the right folks to the proper positions of federal power.

How’s that been working out for us?

Baby-lovin’ and God-fearin’ Texans, please consider joining me in the Texas Nationalist Movement.

tantamergo - January 24, 2014

Hey I liked the video you sent me. It got me thinking about this again. I was considering some of the problems. I might do a post. I need to think it out some more.

St. Benedict's Thistle - January 24, 2014

Being a newbie Texan, I am intrigued by the amount of interest and support for this movement.

However, I have to say that Texas is not as free as she sometimes makes herself out to be. For instance, my daughter is taking college courses at a local community college, and they are every bit as leftist and Marxist as what we experienced on the east coast. And I am sure everyone is aware of the kinds of school books in the public school system that are sold to school districts, not to mention Common Core.

In my daughter’s business course, for instance, her professor stated in his introductory letter, that the USA has not been a nation of individuals since 1787, but a collective! Her textbook is full of praise for Obama’s economic policies that have supposedly saved the economy, and so on.

I truly believe that until the bishops give up their marxist liberation theology and their flirtation with communism, their social justice mantras and their kowtowing to liberal ‘Catholic’ politicians, nothing will change. As the Church goes, so goes the world (and eventually Texas).

The leftists are trying very hard to turn Texas to a blue state. The moment they accomplish that feat (God forbid) is the moment that abortion advocates will have free reign in Texas.

DiscipleoftheDumbOx - January 24, 2014

I am trying to turn Texas blue as well, that is, the Bonnie Blue color of independence.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e5/De_Zavala_Flag.svg

The moment we do that, Roe v. Wade, along with a whole host of other unconstitutional impositions of the black-robed gods of the Supreme Court simply slip away into the ether. Then, we let Texians decide for themselves.

5. Baseballmom - January 24, 2014

My experience with family and friends has been quite simple…. The divorce occurs with contraception/sterilization…. Sometimes it takes a few years for the paperwork to be completed.

6. TG - January 24, 2014

Off topic but let us all pray for the repose of the soul of Penny Lord, one of the hosts of Super Saints on EWTN. I just learned last night after watching the March for Life (on DVR) that she passed away. When I first began watching EWTN, I watched every episode of Super Saints. I really enjoyed it and learned a lot about the saints and saw a lot of beautiful churches. Penny was a fine lady.

tantamergo - January 24, 2014

Thank you for letting me know. I still love that show. God bless her.

TG - January 24, 2014

I cried because I felt like I know her. May she be meeting all the saints she told us about.

Lorra - January 24, 2014

Yes, she was a fine lady. Back in the eighties, we didn’t have much. EWTN was just beginning and most cable companies wouldn’t carry it. Please put what I am about to write in the context of the time (the eighties), but back then all I had was Father Groeschel (who was still a Capuchin) and Bob and Penny Lord. And a Capuchin parish that had all night vigils.

Does anyone know what she died from? I’m glad she went before her husband as I don’t think she would have lasted long had Bob died first.

7. Dismas - January 25, 2014

No time to respond well, but an excellent case can be made that much of the modernist phenomena – the mass, the Council, the new catechism – carry a whole lot of responsibility for abortion, contraception, and the list of moral evils that have gained prominence. Their embracing of the entire novus ordo/modernist agenda has hampered the Catholic pro-life groups considerably.

8. beati pacifici - January 26, 2014

Tomorrow’s reading made me think of this blog. Follow Christ and live in his love.

Reading 2 1 COR 1:10-13, 17

I urge you, brothers and sisters, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ,
that all of you agree in what you say,
and that there be no divisions among you,
but that you be united in the same mind and in the same purpose.
For it has been reported to me about you, my brothers and sisters,
by Chloe’s people, that there are rivalries among you.
I mean that each of you is saying,
“I belong to Paul,” or “I belong to Apollos,”
or “I belong to Cephas,” or “I belong to Christ.”
Is Christ divided?
Was Paul crucified for you?
Or were you baptized in the name of Paul?
For Christ did not send me to baptize but to preach the gospel,
and not with the wisdom of human eloquence,
so that the cross of Christ might not be emptied of its meaning.

tantamergo - January 27, 2014

Just this blog?

This could be taken one of two ways, couldn’t it?

Do you think I read that and I don’t pause and reflect? Was this meant to be a crushing blow? I pray about this all the time. Perhaps I am just indulging in parochialism, I pray I am not. I pray I am helping souls understand the Faith better, and perhaps if enough do so, things might begin to change.

So, it’s wrong to point out the glaring deficiencies in the Novus Ordo? It’s wrong to question leadership that say and do things that lead souls astray? Perhaps it is. That is the crux of my most recent post. It is a terrible trial. Some are more prone to fighting than others. But sometimes, the mere presence of the fight causes others pain. There is great comfort in complacency. But it’s a very difficult subject, one on which souls of good will can and will, pretty much inevitably, disagree.


Sorry comments are closed for this entry

%d bloggers like this: