jump to navigation

Over 80 years ago, men predicted the coming homosexualization of the culture January 28, 2014

Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, Abortion, Basics, contraception, disaster, Ecumenism, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, sadness, scandals, self-serving, sickness, Society.
trackback

When the Anglican church at the Lambeth Conference of 1930 became the first Christian church or sect to break ranks with the 2000 year belief and practice of the Christian Faith regarding contraception, there was massive scandal in religious circles.  The breech in doctrine was roundly derided even by most other “mainline” liberal protestant sects.  Of course, Pope Pius XI responded with the seminal Casti Connubii, which just absolutely castigated the Anglican position and still is the most comprehensive Magisterial statement on the evils of contraception and the “sex for pleasure” mentality that has ever been released.  All Catholics should read it – the differences between Casti Connubii and Humanae Vitae are stark.

Even still, the breech created by the Lambeth declaration was minuscule compared to the gaping departures from Christian belief embraced by most protestants and Catholics today.  Lambeth allowed married couples only to discern, in concert with a minister, whether they might use contraception due to some ostensibly serious reason for what was intended to be a limited period of time (the precise same reasoning used to justify Natural Family Planning).  But a breech once made in a matter of Dogma soon turns into a chasm.  Even though many protestant sects originally protested the Lambeth decision, some vehemently, it wasn’t even 5 years before many began to issue their own, similar statements.  Within 20 years, permission for use of contraception had become pretty much blanket within the sects.  Within 30 years, you had major theologians in numerous protestant sects claiming that not only was contraception acceptable, it was a positive good, and such a good that ALL responsible people were obligated to use it.  And at the same time, you had protestant theologians also embracing the “good” of abortion in that same timeframe.

That is to say, the slippery slope fallacy is one that often proves true in a religious context.  What is interesting to me is that some orthodox faithful, inside and outside the Church, predicted this rapid demise of Christian moral doctrine as soon as the Lambeth declaration was made.  And even more, they foresaw that separating the possibility of procreation from the marital act would even lead to a societal acceptance of sodomy and sodomites.  There were even Anglican bishops who saw this connection, such as a Bishop Gore.  Even the Washington Post, in an editorial printed on March 22 1931 (taken from p. 471 of The Crisis of Christendom) observed that this seemingly small rejection of Dogma would lead to massive repercussions:

The departures from Christian teachings are astounding in many cases, leaving the beholder aghast at the willingness of some churches to discard the ancient injunction to teach “Christ and Him crucified.”…..Carried to its logical conclusion, the committee’s report……….would sound the deathknell of marriage as a holy institution by establishing degrading practices which would encourage indiscriminate immorality.  The suggestion that the use of legalized contraceptives would be “careful and restrained” is preposterous.

Is that not precisely what has occurred?  Over 80 years ago, men saw precisely what would happen if the marital act were separated from the possibility of procreation, as God has ordained.  They saw it would inevitably lead to the destruction of marriage and even societal acceptance of what had always been considered an absolute abomination – acts of sodomy and the female equivalent.  I pointed out last week that Churchill spoke as if societal acceptance of sodomy would be the very worst event imaginable.  That was mainstream thinking 80-100 years ago.

I imagine people from that time would be surprised at how accurate their predictions were – in fact, even these dire forecasts were rather happy visions compared to the reality we are faced with today.  Not only is the family all but destroyed, not only is marriage reduced to an economic arrangement of convenience, not only are about as many kids born bastards (remember when that was a great scandal?) as are born in marriage, but now we have gone even further, to pretending two sodomites can marry each other, or a person and a dog, or that even children can serve as fodder for an adults sexual gratification. Animal lust, pretend-marriage between groups of near-strangers who happen to exchange bodily fluids……mark my words, all those things are coming.  There will come a time when parents will have to guard their children almost like prisoners, to keep them from the predations of sickos whom the law will no longer see as deviant or criminal.  Who knows what further evil is possible…..when society rejects God, the depth of the evil is endless.

Where is the bottom? Where will it all end?  I’m afraid men will have to suffer mightily before they will return to God.  The sins are so great, people are so comfortable in their wickedness, the merciful chastisement  to shake them from their stupor will be awesome. That is, if our Blessed Lord doesn’t return, first.

The funny thing is, all these liberal sects thought being permissive would reverse the decline in their membership, but the opposite has proven true.  In fact, history has shown over and over again that the more permissive and liberal a church becomes, the more irrelevant it becomes and the more its membership collapses.

I personally pray this is a lesson our dear Holy Mother Church learns very well.

Comments

1. Michael - January 28, 2014

“Disorder in society is the result of disorder in the family.”
– St. Angela Merici

Sister Lucia said in 1970: “…in these times of diabolical disorientation, we must not let ourselves be deceived by false doctrines that diminish the elevation of our soul to God…”

This diabolical disorientation has been made manifest in the Church, the State, the family. None are preserved.

Our Lord is being scourged and the Apostles have fled. Meanwhile the government is asking: “Quid est veritas?”

Why is it that everyone freely admits there are problems in society, but no one cares to learn the answer?

Lorra - January 28, 2014

That’s a good question.

susan - January 29, 2014

…and Peter has most certainly denied Christ….at least 3 times.

http://www.harvestingthefruit.com/saint-peter-and-his-successor/

2. Branch - January 28, 2014

I really do not know what the Truth is in all of this. I was looking back over a post you link to here (https://veneremurcernui.wordpress.com/2010/05/06/did-humanae-vitae-unintentionally-undermine-the-authority-of-the-church/) and there are entirely different views there, by two Catholics, on whether HV was a proper development – a move from grave reasons to a you can play your own family stance – or a break from the Traditional view. How can this be?! They cannot both be right! Why is there this confusion?

tantamergo - January 28, 2014

There is great disorientation, even diabolical disorientation, abroad today. Even in the Church. It is a huge scandal. Basically, HV must conform to Casti Connubii in terms of interpretation. Earlier documents have greater precedence, all else being equal.

Branch - January 28, 2014

Ok. How do we know that earlier documents have precedence? Is that established somewhere? I’d like to learn more about this.

Wendy McClure - January 28, 2014

Because Truth does not — cannot — change. If the Church has taught something for centuries, you know it’s true.

Wendy McClure - January 28, 2014

Sorry, I also meant to say that nowadays you have to do your own research. Sadly, you can’t necessarily trust the clergy to know or teach the Truth. I highly recommend reading the Catechism of the Council of Trent, the original Baltimore Catechisms 1, 2, 3, and 4 (1880s or thereabouts copyrights), and the encyclicals of popes Leo XIII, Pius IX, St. Pius X, Pius XI, and Pius XII. They are refreshingly unambiguous and beautifully written. For an especially eye-opening exercise, read the Catechism of the Council of Trent side-by-side with the Catechism of the Catholic Church. Then ask yourself why the only canonized pope in modern times, Pope St. Pius X, is never referenced in the CCC.

Branch - January 28, 2014

Thanks, Wendy, though we’re about to have two more canonized Popes in modern times, one of whom put the Catechism you refer to together. So I’m not sure that provides any clarity.

3. Wendy McClure - January 28, 2014

But it does If you keep my first comment — Truth does not change — in mind as you’re reading. You’ll find the Catechism of the Council of Trent, the Baltimore Catechisms, and the encyclicals of the popes I mentioned (and those from before their time, for that matter) all match up. Most of the writings of the popes of the last 60 years, not so much. It’s like the old Sesame Street bit — “One of these things is not like the others…”

My comment about Pope St. Pius X was meant to highlight the fact that the CCC, because of most of its contents, could not logically reference anything written by that saint precisely because much of what he wrote was against modernism.

4. Hannah - January 28, 2014

The greater the sins, the greater will be the Chastisement for them. The Diabolical Disorientation is really unprecedented. And those who are supposed to be the leaders are silent when millions of souls are on their way to Hell. They’re too busy wanted to make us happy in this world, and pushing the New Church of Man and Modernism and God knows what else to even care.

We must pray and pray hard, especially to St. Michael.

Lorra - January 28, 2014

Someone recently suggested to me adding the Chaplet of St. Michael to my daily prayers. Maybe if more of us did that, together with our Rosary and even fasting, we can turn this around.

5. Wendy McClure - January 29, 2014

Excellent suggestion, Lorra.

6. skeinster - January 29, 2014

About thirty years ago, I used to get the newsletter of Human Life International, headed by the late Fr. Paul Marx. So many of the things he was predicting then have happened: the Islamization of Europe, the necessity for protecting our loved ones or ourselves from medical practicioners whose definition of care differs from the Church’s, the recognition of same sex “marriage”- pretty much anything against the natural law, common human decency and the Truth of the faith.
It’s hard sometimes to know which voices are truly prophetic and they are almost always drowned out by the world.
Very sad to look back from our perspective.

7. George R;.Kadlec - January 29, 2014

Some G.K. Chesterton quotes:

“There are an infinite number of ways to fall, but there is only one way to stand.”

“Is one religion as good as another? Is one horse in the Derby as good as another?”

“The Christian ideal has not been tried and found wanting; it has been found difficult and left untried.”

“The riddles of God are more satisfying than the solutions of man.”

“Once abolish the God, and the government becomes the God.”

“I believe in getting into hot water; it keeps you clean.”

“Fallacies do not cease to be fallacies because they become fashions.”

“Psychoanalysis is confession without absolution.”

“Be careful not to be so open-minded that your brains fall out.”

“Take away the supernatural and what remains is the unnatural”

“Moral issues are always terribly complex for someone without principles.”

“Only a live fish can swim against the current, the dead go with it.”

“When men cease to believe in God they do not thereafter believe in nothing; they believe in anything!”

8. Augustine Thomas - January 29, 2014

Are we finally ready to agree that heresy and apostasy is bad? Or should we keep stabbing each other in the back and calling names like “trad”?

tantamergo - January 29, 2014

I have no problem being called a trad!

9. Branch - January 29, 2014

Readers may find this of interest: http://www.thepersonalistproject.org/comments/reading_casti_connubii_and_the_tradition_in_light_of_the_insights_of_jpii

It’s another personalism clashes with past Magisterial teaching moment…

10. FairyTales - January 30, 2014

It is funny that you don’t mention the Catholic Church embracing the Anglican view w/in 30 years: VCII reversed the ends of marriage to “unitive” before creative – same w/new Catechism of Catholic Church.

http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2012/vatican-ii-and-the-two-ends-of-marriage.html

Also it was CATHOLIC Cardinal Cushing was working w/Plannned Parenthood to abolish state laws prohibiting contraception in the 1960s.
http://www.catholicculture.org/commentary/otn.cfm?id=812

This led to action by the Supreme Court which has ended by declaring not only contraception laws unconstitutional, but w/in short order declaring anti-abortion (after that good CATHOLIC Sarge Shriver ran w/McGovern on 1st pro abortion ticket in 1972) and (priest pedophile) homosexual laws unconstitutional.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Griswold_v._Connecticut

Catholics are spear heading abortion funding:
http://www.crisismagazine.com/2010/catholics-lead-abortion-funding-effort-in-congress

Also, there was no artificial birth control in Sodom, but there were a lot of homosexuals. How does acceptance of artificial birth control by Protestants explain Cardinals Bernardin, McCarrick & Martini, the homosexual Catholic priesthood, and the number of middle aged and elderly Catholic homosexual and homosexual-friendly politicians (Mikulski, O’Malley, Brown, Snowe, Durbin, Pelosi ad nauseam) spear heading homosexual “civil unions” throughout U.S. and Europe?

Jesuits don’t take artificial birth control:

tantamergo - February 4, 2014

The possibility that a different emphasis is given to which end is supreme only points to the mass confusion in the Church. Vatican II pointedly defined nothing new with regard to contraception, pending the review Pope Paul VI had already put underway. Humanae Vitae was the Magisterial document that undermined the traditional primacy of procreation as the end of marriage. That is one document, dozens if not hundreds of others say otherwise. Yes, the view you posit is widespread, but that does not prevent it from being problematic and quite potentially at odds with the Tradition. In short, it is not the trump card you present it as. I would argue vociferously, and have, that the procreative end will always be primary. Unfortunately, the Church is and has been in the midst of its greatest travail of doctrinal confusion, error, and heresy She’s ever had to endure.

All the things you point out subsequent to that are simply examples of scandal undertaken by unfaithful or very confused Catholics. Cardinal Cushing was a massively problematic prelate who did a great deal of damage. He has had his accounting, we should pray for the repose of his soul.

I’m sorry if a protestant prelate speaking of a protestant sect dumping 2000 years of Christian Dogma upsets you. That Anglican bishop quoted was merely pointing out the inevitable collapse that would follow from decoupling procreation from marriage. It started with protestants, but you are correct that the vast majority of Catholics in this country and worldwide have embraced this same disastrous error. But it started in protestantism, and protestants still formally teach and believe every day that contraception is perfectly acceptable, if not a moral obligation. Still not sure what your point is: that Catholics are as bad as protestants? That there is no coupling between contraception and acts of gross immorality? I violently disagree to the latter, you can paint a very straight line from contraception, to mass divorce, to mass fornication and cohabitation, to abortion, to acceptance of sodomy, to making sodomy equivalent to marriage, to the next things, bestiality and pedophilia. The arguments used for one are used in support of the other, all drawing from the same basic assertion: non serviam.

Your video does not exist.


Sorry comments are closed for this entry

%d bloggers like this: