Does the Catholic Church Allow Divorce?

The Catholic Church holds a definitive and unwavering stance regarding the sanctity and indissolubility of marriage, categorically opposing divorce as a means to dissolve the marital bond as recognized by the Church. This position is deeply rooted in Scripture, Tradition, and the Church's Magisterium, affirming that marriage is a sacramental covenant, a divine institution established by God, and, as such, cannot be broken by any human authority.

The foundation of the Church's teaching on marriage is found in the words of Jesus Christ Himself, who unequivocally stated, "What God has joined together, let no man put asunder" (Mark 10:9). This scriptural mandate underscores the permanence of the marital union, which is reflective of Christ's enduring commitment to His Church. The Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC) reiterates this, stating in paragraph 1614, "In his preaching Jesus unequivocally taught the original meaning of the union of man and woman as the Creator willed it from the beginning: permission given by Moses to divorce one's wife was a concession to the hardness of hearts. The matrimonial union of man and woman is indissoluble: God himself has determined it 'what therefore God has joined together, let no man separate.'"

Given this divine ordinance, the Church teaches that a valid sacramental marriage, once consummated, cannot be dissolved by any human power or for any reason other than death. The Church's Code of Canon Law, canon 1141, affirms this principle, stating, "A marriage that is ratum et consummatum can be dissolved by no human power and by no cause, except death."

It is important to distinguish between civil divorce and the concept of annulment in the Catholic Church. While civil divorce might legally end a marriage in the eyes of the state, it does not alter the marital status of the individuals within the Church. The Church may, however, issue a declaration of nullity (commonly referred to as an annulment) under specific circumstances. This declaration is a finding by a Church tribunal that a marriage, though appearing to be valid, lacked one of the essential elements required for a binding sacramental union from its beginning. Such a declaration does not dissolve a marriage but rather states that a valid marriage was never sacramentally present.

The Church's firm opposition to divorce is not merely a legalistic stance but a profound affirmation of the dignity and sanctity of the marriage covenant. Divorce is seen as a grave offense against the natural law, causing harm to the spouses involved, to children, and to society as a whole by undermining the concept of fidelity and the stability of the family unit. The CCC, in paragraph 2384, describes divorce as a moral offense that introduces disorder into the family and society. This teaching is not intended to burden the faithful but to protect the sacredness of marriage and to remind the faithful of the gravity of their marital vows before God.

In conclusion, the Catholic Church's opposition to divorce is unequivocal and grounded in its commitment to uphold the sanctity and permanence of the marriage covenant as instituted by God. While the Church acknowledges the complexities and challenges that married couples may face, it encourages them to seek reconciliation and healing within the sacrament of marriage. The Church, through its pastoral care, stands ready to support and guide couples in difficulty, always aiming to lead them towards the fulfillment of their marital vows in accordance with God's divine plan for marriage.

Does the Catholic Church Believe in Evolution?

While the Catholic Church does not explicitly reject the theory of evolution, it exercises caution and provides critical guidance regarding its interpretation, especially when such theories are considered in relation to the truths of faith. The Church maintains a prudent stance, emphasizing that while it does not venture into purely scientific debates, it firmly upholds the doctrinal truths that must not be compromised by scientific theories.

The primary concern of the Church regarding the theory of evolution pertains to the philosophical and theological implications that are often attached to it, especially when it is presented in a manner that undermines the understanding of divine creation, particularly the creation of the human soul. The Church insists that any discussion on human origins must acknowledge the immediate creation of the soul by God. This is a non-negotiable aspect of Catholic doctrine, as it touches upon the fundamental belief in the special creation of human beings, made in the image and likeness of God (Imago Dei).

Pope Pius XII, in "Humani Generis" (1950), while not dismissing the scientific study of human origins, cautioned against interpretations of evolution that deny the essential intervention of God in the direct creation of the human soul. This encyclical highlights the dangers of adopting materialistic and deterministic views of human existence that are often associated with evolutionary theory. Such views are incompatible with the truth of human dignity and the spiritual realities affirmed by the Church.

The Church has not issued any official endorsement of the theory of evolution. Its engagement with scientific theories is always guided by the principle that faith and reason are complementary, not contradictory. However, this engagement does not equate to an acceptance of specific scientific theories as definitive explanations of human origins, especially when such theories are still subject to scientific debate and revision.

In sum, while the Catholic Church recognizes the legitimate domain of science in investigating the material world, it remains vigilant against ideologies that misuse the theory of evolution to challenge the doctrinal truths of the Catholic faith. The Church's main concern is to safeguard the faith from interpretations of evolution that diminish the role of divine providence in creation, particularly the direct creation of the human soul by God, the spiritual nature of human beings, and the ultimate purpose of human existence. This cautious stance underscores the Church's commitment to protecting the integrity of faith amidst the complexities of scientific inquiry.

Does the Catholic Church Allow Cremation?

The Catholic Church, deeply rooted in tradition and reverence for the sacredness of the human body, has historically advocated for the burial of the deceased. This preference is not merely ceremonial but deeply theological, reflecting the belief in the resurrection of the body, a fundamental tenet of Christian faith. The practice of burial, mirroring the burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ, serves as a powerful symbol of the Christian hope in eternal life and resurrection.

For centuries, cremation was prohibited within the Catholic Church. This prohibition was grounded in the Church's desire to distance Christian practice from non-Christian customs, particularly those that denied the resurrection of the body. The association of cremation with pagan practices and a denial of the Christian doctrine of resurrection contributed to the Church's longstanding opposition to the practice.

The Code of Canon Law of 1917 explicitly reflected this stance, underscoring the preference for burial as a manifestation of belief in the resurrection of the flesh. The Church's position was not only doctrinal but also pastoral, aiming to guide the faithful in practices that affirm their faith in the face of death.

While the 1983 Code of Canon Law and the instruction from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith in 1963 marked a concession, allowing cremation under certain conditions, this should not be misconstrued as an endorsement of the practice. The permission granted for cremation comes with significant caveats, primarily that it must not be chosen for reasons contrary to Christian doctrine. The Church's allowance for cremation is a reluctant concession to changing societal circumstances, not a change in doctrinal understanding or an affirmation of the practice.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church states, "The Church permits cremation, provided that it does not demonstrate a denial of faith in the resurrection of the body" (CCC, 2300). This statement, while acknowledging the allowance for cremation, implicitly reaffirms the Church's preference for burial. The conditional nature of this permission highlights the Church's ongoing concerns regarding the practice.

The 2016 instruction "Ad resurgendum cum Christo" further emphasizes the Church's cautious stance towards cremation, stipulating that ashes must be kept in a sacred place and not subjected to practices that could diminish their dignity or suggest a denial of Christian beliefs about the afterlife and resurrection. These guidelines reflect a broader concern for maintaining the sanctity and integrity of the faith in the context of funeral practices.

In advocating for burial over cremation, the Church upholds a practice that more clearly reflects and honors Christian beliefs about the body, death, and resurrection. Burial serves as a tangible expression of faith in the resurrection and the unity of the body and soul, destined for glorification in eternal life. While cremation is technically allowed, the Church's historical and doctrinal reservations about the practice underscore a clear preference for burial—a preference that honors the Christian understanding of the body as a temple of the Holy Spirit and a participant in the resurrection to come.

Does the Catholic Church Support Israel?

The Catholic Church's stance towards Israel, like its approach to all nation-states, is guided by principles of neutrality in political conflicts, a commitment to peace, and the promotion of justice and reconciliation. The Church does not issue blanket endorsements or criticisms of any country, including Israel. Instead, it focuses on the well-being of all people involved in conflicts, the respect for human rights, and the sacredness of life. The Church's support for Israel, as for any nation, is contingent upon these principles and the actions of the state in question in upholding them.

The Vatican formally recognized the State of Israel in 1993, establishing diplomatic relations in an agreement that acknowledged Israel's sovereignty while also calling for peaceful solutions to conflicts in the region, particularly the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. This recognition marked a significant step in the relationship between the Holy See and Israel, aiming to foster dialogue and mutual understanding.

The Church's support for Israel, as well as for Palestine, is framed within the context of its advocacy for peace and justice. The Holy See has consistently called for the respect of international law and the rights of all people in the region to live in peace and security. The Church emphasizes the importance of dialogue and negotiation as the paths to achieving a just and lasting peace that respects the rights and aspirations of Israelis and Palestinians alike.

Pope John Paul II, Pope Benedict XVI, and Pope Francis have all visited Israel, gestures that underscore the Church's commitment to fostering positive relations with Jews and promoting interreligious dialogue. These visits have been occasions to pray for peace, to encourage the faithful, and to strengthen the bonds of friendship and understanding between Christians and Jews.

The Church's teachings and the actions of its leaders highlight a nuanced approach to supporting Israel. The Church advocates for the protection of the Holy Places and the rights of Christians in Israel, along with the freedom of religion and access to sacred sites for all faiths. At the same time, the Church expresses concern over policies and actions that may undermine the prospects for peace or violate human rights, regardless of the parties involved.

The Catholic Church's approach is ultimately rooted in its broader moral and spiritual principles rather than political alignments. It supports efforts that advance peace, justice, and the common good in Israel and the broader Middle East. The Church's vision for the region is one where all people, regardless of nationality or religion, can live in dignity, peace, and mutual respect, with their rights fully protected.

In summary, the Catholic Church's stance towards Israel is characterized by a desire for peace and justice, guided by the principles of neutrality, dialogue, and the promotion of human rights. The Church supports Israel insofar as it upholds these values and works towards a peaceful resolution of conflicts, always within the context of its commitment to the well-being of all people in the region.

How to find Catholic Mass Times when Traveling

Whenever I travel, be it abroad or within my own country, finding a Mass for Sunday is a priority. Here's a quick guide to help you locate a Catholic church and Mass times near you:

Search Engines: Simply type “Catholic Church near me” or “Mass times near me” into your preferred search engine. This will provide a list of nearby churches with addresses and contact details.

Google Maps: Open Google Maps and enter “Catholic Church” in the search bar. This will show churches in your vicinity. Click on a church to see Mass times, usually listed under the 'About' section.

Masstimes.org offers a comprehensive database of Catholic churches and Mass schedules worldwide.

TheCatholicDirectory.com: This website provides church locations, Mass times, and even parish contact information for churches in the USA

Church Websites: If you have a specific church in mind, visit their official website. Most churches post their Mass and reconciliation schedules online.

One of my number one tips is to check the bulletin of the church you are interested in! Sometimes the website may not be updated, but if the bulletin has a date on it and it's recent, there is a good chance the schedule is also updated.

Diocesan Websites: Visiting the website of the diocese you're in can be helpful. They usually have a directory of all the churches in the area along with Mass times.

Parish Apps: Some parishes have their own apps or use platforms like the “MyParish” app. These can be very useful for finding Mass and reconciliation times.

Social Media: Check the church’s social media pages, especially Facebook. Be careful that it is updated though as social media often isn't.

Call the Parish: When in doubt, a quick phone call to the parish office can provide you with the Mass schedule. It's important to plan ahead. Often parish offices have very limited hours and for some reason many do not mention Mass times on their recordings.

Remember, Mass times can vary, especially during holidays and Holy Days of Obligation, so it's always a good idea to double-check.

Easter 2024 & Related Liturgical Dates: A Quick and Informative Guide

Hey everyone,

With Easter 2024 fast approaching, I thought it would be helpful to put together a quick reference guide covering the key dates and some fascinating background on how these dates are determined. This is for all of you who are looking for a concise yet informative overview.

Easter 2024 Date: Mark your calendars, Easter Sunday falls on March 31, 2024.

Key Dates Leading Up to Easter:

Ash Wednesday: The Lenten season begins on February 14, 2024.

Holy Week: Starts on Palm Sunday, March 24, 2024.

Holy Thursday: Commemorated on March 28, 2024.

Good Friday: Observed on March 29, 2024.

Holy Saturday: March 30, 2024.

The Triduum: These are the three days leading up to Easter Sunday, starting with the evening of Holy Thursday and culminating in the Easter Vigil on Holy Saturday night.

Post-Easter Dates:

Ascension of Jesus: Celebrated on May 9, 2024.

Pentecost: Falling on May 19, 2024, this marks the end of the Easter season.

How Is the Date of Easter Determined?

Easter's date varies each year. It's calculated as the first Sunday after the Paschal Full Moon following the vernal equinox. This method, established by the Council of Nicaea in AD 325, aligns Easter with the Jewish Passover based on lunar cycles, as Passover was the time of Christ's Crucifixion and Resurrection.

A Bit of History:

The observance of Easter has evolved significantly since the early days of Christianity. The precise date of Easter was a major point of contention in early Christianity, leading to the establishment of the current method at the Council of Nicaea.

This quick guide should help you keep track of the significant dates in the 2024 liturgical calendar. Whether you're planning community gatherings, personal reflections, or just curious about these dates, I hope this serves as a handy reference.

Stay blessed and keep these dates in mind as we journey through the Lenten and Easter seasons of 2024!

St. Thomas Aquinas: An Inspiring Doctor of the Church

I must apologize for the oversight, as yesterday was the feast day of the great St. Thomas Aquinas, a luminary whose life and teachings continue to inspire me deeply. Born in 1225 in Roccasecca, Italy, St. Thomas Aquinas was an exemplary figure in the Church, a true giant of theology and philosophy.

St. Thomas, a Dominican friar, theologian, and Doctor of the Church, is perhaps best known for his monumental work, the "Summa Theologica." This seminal text, a model of clarity and intellectual rigor, seeks to explain and defend the teachings of the Church. It covers a vast range of topics, from the existence of God to the nature of sin, and stands as a testament to the power of human reason informed by faith.

Educated at the University of Naples and later at the University of Paris, St. Thomas was a student of another great saint, Albert the Great. His writings, although deeply rooted in Christian doctrine, also drew extensively from the works of the ancient philosopher Aristotle. St. Thomas had a remarkable ability to harmonize reason and faith, showing that they are not in opposition but are complementary paths to understanding truth.

St. Thomas’s contributions were not confined to theology alone; he was also a master of metaphysics, ethics, and natural law. His concept of the 'law of nature' has profoundly influenced Western thought, emphasizing that certain rights and values are inherent and universally recognizable.

His life, marked by deep devotion and humility, was dedicated to the pursuit of truth. He experienced a mystical revelation towards the end of his life, after which he stopped writing, claiming that all he had written seemed like "straw" compared to the divine revelation he had experienced.

As we remember St. Thomas Aquinas, we are reminded of the depth and richness of our faith. His teachings encourage us to seek God not just with our hearts but also with our minds. St. Thomas Aquinas remains a beacon of intellectual and spiritual wisdom, guiding us in our quest to understand and live the truths of the Gospel.

Lenten Curiosities: Unusual Foods from Days of Abstinence

Hey everyone,

As we inch closer to Lent this year, with Ash Wednesday landing on February 14, it strikes me how this season not only unites us in spiritual practices but also in some rather unique culinary traditions. Today, let’s take a delightful detour and explore the quirky and sometimes downright strange foods people have consumed during days of abstinence in Lent.

1. Pretzels: A Twist of Faith

Starting with something familiar, did you know that pretzels were traditionally associated with Lent? Originating in Europe, these twisted breads were made simply with flour, water, and salt - aligning perfectly with the fasting rules. Their shape, believed to represent arms crossed in prayer, makes them a staple with a deep spiritual significance.

2. Fasting Bread of the Middle Ages

In medieval times, particularly in Europe, a special 'fasting bread' was often consumed. This bread, far from our usual loaves, was made with unusual ingredients like peas and beans, adhering to the strict Lenten prohibitions against certain foods.

3. Capybara: Swimming through a Loophole

In parts of South America, there's a fascinating history of eating capybara during Lent. Due to a peculiar classification by the Church centuries ago, this large rodent was considered fish, thus making it acceptable for consumption on days of abstinence. It’s a quirky example of how cultural and geographical factors influenced Lenten practices.

4. Barnacle Geese: A Fowl Fish?

Similarly, in medieval Europe, the barnacle goose was classified as a fish by some Christian scholars. This bizarre classification stemmed from a belief that these geese developed from barnacles - a theory that, while scientifically inaccurate, allowed people to eat them during Lent.

5. Ale and Beer: Liquid Bread

In some monastic communities, particularly in Germany, monks brewed special beers for Lent. These were nutritious, hearty brews, often referred to as 'liquid bread.' They provided sustenance during fasting and were a creative adaptation of Lenten restrictions.

6. Vegetable Lamb: A Botanical Oddity

Lastly, there's the curious tale of the 'vegetable lamb,' a mythical plant believed in medieval times to grow sheep as its fruit. While it never made it to the Lenten table (for obvious reasons), it’s a whimsical example of the lengths to which people went to reconcile dietary restrictions with their need for sustenance.

As we embark on our Lenten journey this year, these historical tidbits remind us of the rich and diverse tapestry of our faith. Lent is not just a time for spiritual reflection but also a period that has inspired creativity and adaptability in various cultures around the world. Whether you're sticking to traditional Lenten fare or exploring new culinary avenues, let's embrace this season with the joy and curiosity it deserves.

Until next time, keep the faith and maybe experiment a bit with your Lenten menu - who knows what interesting traditions you might discover!

funny

 

God make me like my daddy, big strong, and smart

 

Where in the Holy Scriptures can we find the foundations for the Lenten practice of fasting and penance?

With Lent soon approaching – starting in less than three weeks on February 14 – it's a great opportunity to reflect on the scriptural underpinnings of our Lenten traditions, particularly fasting and penance. It's like piecing together a beautiful mosaic from the Scriptures that illuminates our path to Easter.

The practice of fasting is deeply rooted in the Bible, with Christ Himself setting the precedent. In the Gospel of Matthew, we read about Jesus fasting for 40 days and nights in the wilderness (Matthew 4:1-2). This period of Jesus’ fasting, a time of solitude and deep communion with the Father, forms the bedrock of our Lenten practice. It's as if each year, through our Lenten fast, we join Christ in the desert, seeking to deepen our own spiritual communion.

Then there's the profound teaching of Jesus on fasting in the Sermon on the Mount. In Matthew 6:16-18, Christ instructs us on how to fast – not as a public display of piety, but as a private act of devotion. His words guide our Lenten observance, reminding us that our fasting is a personal journey of faith, seen not by others, but by our Father in heaven.

The concept of penance, too, finds its scriptural roots in the calls for repentance throughout the Bible. The Book of Joel, for example, implores us to "return to the Lord with all your heart, with fasting, with weeping, and with mourning" (Joel 2:12). This heartfelt return to God, marked by fasting and sorrow for sins, echoes the very essence of Lent.

As we count down the days to Easter, let’s remember these scriptural foundations of fasting and penance. They’re not just ancient texts; they're living words that guide us each Lenten season as we prepare our hearts for the glory of the Resurrection. It's a journey we take together, supported by the wisdom of the Scriptures.

History of Lent in the Church

As we find ourselves here on January 25, 2024, with the Lenten season just around the corner, beginning on February 14 this year, I thought it would be a fitting time to embark on a historical exploration. Let's take a stroll down the memory lanes of our Church's past to uncover the origins of Lent. This journey is not just about tracing our roots; it's about deepening our understanding and appreciation as we prepare to enter this sacred season. So, gather around, and let's travel back to the earliest days of our Lenten traditions, connecting our present with the rich tapestry of our faith's history.

Our first stop is in the era of the Didache, one of the earliest Christian documents, dating back to the late first or early second century. It's like a window into the practices of the earliest Christians, showing us their dedication to fasting, though it doesn't explicitly mention a 40-day Lenten period (Didache 8:1). It's fascinating to think how these early believers, much like us, sought to live out their faith through such disciplines.

Moving forward to around 180-190 AD, we encounter St. Irenaeus of Lyons. In his correspondence with Pope St. Victor I, he discusses the variations in the fasting period before Easter (Eusebius, 'Church History', V.24). This shows us that while the practice was widespread, there wasn't yet a uniform way of observing it. Imagine being part of those early discussions, shaping a tradition that we continue today.

The pivotal moment comes with the Council of Nicaea in AD 325. This council, which was crucial in defining key aspects of our faith, also sheds light on the Lenten practice. While the council's main focus wasn't on Lent, subsequent canons, like those from the Synod of Laodicea around 363-364 AD, reference a 40-day period of preparation for Easter, echoing Jesus' 40 days in the desert.

And in the early fourth century, St. Athanasius of Alexandria, in his Easter letters (Letter 4, 330 AD), urges his flock to observe a 40-day fast. It’s moments like these that connect us directly to the traditions we uphold today.

Isn't it amazing to think about how our Lenten journey ties us back to these early Christians? Each year, as we embark on our 40 days of prayer, fasting, and almsgiving, we're participating in a practice that's been a cornerstone of Christian life for centuries. It's a beautiful reminder of our shared faith and heritage.

A Sunrise and Belief in God

A Sunrise and Belief in God

Recently I was on my morning walk and I saw a beautiful sunrise, a veritable palette of magnificent colors. Red, peach, yellow. The red was especially intense between two hills, where in their trough was the ocean. This is a place in my city where one can best view this daily event.

I was in awe of the natural beauty before me, more spectacular than any manmade painting. Then an idea dawned on me (excuse the pun!): This is just one of the many ways God reveals himself to us. He could have created any kind of world, but just look how much he went above and beyond in creating absolute beauty and wonderment.

I thought of the idea presented by some that goes something like this: If God is real, why doesn't he make it extremely obvious. Various examples of how he could achieve this have been brought forth.

• He could create a massive structure in space, perhaps the size of the moon or even larger that conveys some kind of message such as "I am God, worship me".
• God could appear, perhaps taking on human proportions, again as a giant entity, in a way that he would be visible to all of humanity on the planet, again expressing something about himself and asking us to follow him.

There are surely countless other ways people have proposed for God to reveal himself. We can overlook the idea that we are demanding God "perform" in this way to serve us and satisfy our curiosity for the moment while we consider this argument.

I could respond to this line of reasoning in a way that many others have by stating that if God were to make his presence too obvious then our refusal to accept it would be impossible and thus we would not be freely choosing to love and trust him. However, I feel like this line of reasoning has been thoroughly explained by many people ancient and modern. I would like to take a slightly different approach.

For one thing, as I already mentioned with the sunrise, it seems to anybody who's paying attention that God is making his presence known in many ways all over the place. I've already discussed all of the natural beauty that surrounds us. We look at this as God's handiwork. Also look at all of the things that he has created right before our very eyes. Another angle to look at is the fact that God came to Earth in the form of a man. Yet despite fulfilling prophecy and performing miracles, he was rejected by many. I don't really know how God could make his presence any more obvious than he already has.

There's also an element of fallacy in the line of reasoning that if God were to make himself more obvious then people would automatically believe. Just imagine for example if God appeared as a giant being in the sky. If this were to happen now, in our current day and age, we would say that is very unusual and unbelievable but perhaps we would say this because it is not our current situation. If, however, since the dawn of humanity there were a giant being in the sky, many people would perhaps attribute his existence to the same things to which they attribute our own. They would say things like perhaps he evolved or he is just another, albeit a rather impressive, being in our universe. We have to understand that the Christian idea of God is not just one being among many. For example, our being is contingent whereas God's being is not contingent but necessary. All things that are in the universe ultimately stem from God and his creation. So he is fundamentally different than we are. But if a giant being was simply appearing in the sky, there's no reason to think that people would not simply think of him as another species just like we are.

Ultimately I think we all have that spark given to us by God to come to love and trust in Him and it's a choice whether we accept that spark. A quote attributed to St. Augustine sums it up: "To those who have faith, no explanation is necessary; to those without faith, no explanation is possible".

Did Pope Francis authorize same-sex blessings?

This is a very scary development. The pope has issued a statement paving the way for blessing of same-sex couples. Of course, it's not stated as plainly as that and in the details it seems that homosexual relationships continue to be deemed as sinful. However, that's not the impression everyone has and this decision can only lead to yet more confusion. To see the original document, go here.

Technically speaking, it seems there was a question presented to the Church asking whether or not a priest could bless a same-sex couple and the reply was that it's not possible to bless such a union. However, of course, the Church can bless individuals. Behind this blessing is the presupposition that the person in question, even if they are leading a sinful life in some aspect, affirms the Church's teaching and at least desires to follow the Church.

So technically a priest could bless a same-sex couple with the implicit understanding that they recognized the problem with their union and that they would struggle to live according to the Church's doctrines. This is what the pope has been promoting and announcing.

Of course, anyone can see the problem with this. It's very difficult to separate out specifically what is being prayed for. In Germany they are already having lay-led same-sex blessings done in Catholic Churches. Most lay Catholics are not very familiar with Church law and morality to begin with. Many live outside the dictates of the Church. Yet we're supposed to believe that these same people will grasp the subtleties of these particular blessings and understand the nuances: i.e. "We're blessing each member of this union separately to pray that they lead a holy life, and even though they are doing it next to each other and are seemingly being blessed at the same time, this union is not endorsed by the Church, etc."

At this point, it may be best to just ignore Pope Francis. He seems to enjoy causing disorder, division and chaos. I can't tell you his motivations as he hasn't shared them with me. However, the role of the pope is to be a unifying force, someone who is clear on doctrine.

This is something I've thought about recently. Different people within the Church have different roles. Not everyone is meant to be the same. Some people are hard manual laborers, like St. Joseph. Others are intellectuals like St. Thomas Aquinas. Still others are more charismatic, and others are contemplative. You can't say any of these particular gifts or charisms are bad. But I feel that certain roles in the Church need some charisms or qualities more than others.

The pope's primary role is to be a "Rock", like Peter was the Rock upon which Christ built the Church. It's not the job of the "Rock" to question things, throw in monkey wrenches, stretch the limits of acceptability, etc. He has to be a strong unifying force. The pope should also be very clear and solid, not ambiguous and confusing like the current pope.

A good article on this situation can be found here.

The English version of the document issued by the CDF can be found here.

Catholics: Don't do this if you want to be welcoming!

How can we be more welcoming to people in the Catholic community? This is something I've thought about more recently because I think in a lot of ways, people with potentially good intentions can veer off into become unwelcoming to outsiders or even people who have been part of a group.

I've been involved in a group / groups of Catholics for quite some times with varying levels of involvement. I'm kind of known for not making frequent appearances and I'm at the point where those infrequent showings may become non-existent. I just don't feel I belong to the group.

In my experience, what ended up happening is that people have progressed in their lives and there is an implicit underlying idea that to really be part of the group you have to have certain qualifications. The group I am familiar with in my area is composed mainly of people in their 20s and 40s, so they are relatively young when it comes to Catholic groups. Many of those who are involved in a lot of activities and have a lot of friends share many things in common. One is having a large number of children. Others include women having a very traditional role, being involved in conversions of others, prayer life, etc. They seem to appear to have everything under control.

These things are amazing and beautiful and I would never discourage anyone from seeking those things. Our society needs them more than ever. But many people do not fit the mold.

People come from all kinds of different situations and all kinds of different lives. Nobody is a cookie cutter of the other person. We don't know where somebody might be in their spiritual journey or their journey of Catholicism. For example, someone may become interested in joining the church in their 60s. Other people have led lives of licentiousness for many years and perhaps don't have things together very well. Others may be very interested in Catholicism but perhaps struggle with many different vices and addictions and find it difficult to live a virtuous life. There are yet others who, although they are attracted in some way to the Catholic faith, have a great deal of difficulty in accepting many of the teachings. It could be that they're steeped in modern-day thinking and they find it hard to reconcile Catholic beliefs to some of the modernism that they have been exposed to their entire lives.

A lot of these people would not easily be accepted. There's an implicit idea that in order to be a part of the "real group" a person must implicitly accept all of these things without question and must go 100% in their pursuit of these things. But even beyond that there are many people who are in situations which perhaps they do not want to be in but because of various life circumstances it has been forced upon them. Yet I believe that many people see these things and immediately start to judge them.

Something that my wife and I have thought of and I've heard others say as well is that sometimes this judgment is masked in a pseudo-compassion or understanding. For example they will point out a major flaw or issue that somebody has or is undergoing and they will either tell that person or the group that we should pray for them. A lot of times it would not be appropriate for a random person to just tell you that they will pray for you unless you ask them to. It's kind of an implicit way of saying "I'm pointing out your flaws right now but I'm going to present it under the guise of me caring about you and trying to help you". Not too many people are open to unsolicited help from others like that.

Another issue that can occur is when members of the group speak theoretically about things that other people might be doing. For example they might derisively talk about people who are divorced or struggle with various sins or other such issues. It could even be things that are not necessarily sinful in and of themselves such as a couple that is childless. Sometimes people in the group will speak about these things in a theoretical way not realizing that perhaps somebody in the vicinity falls in one of those categories. That person would feel extremely judged and uncomfortable and perhaps would not say anything and so it would be assumed that nobody is in those categories and that it would be fine to talk about them.

This is a realization I had myself. I was helping lead a course and before we had begun I started talking about other people and how they may lead lives of immorality in some ways and how they may not be well-versed in Christianity and so on. However after I had said these, someone mentioned something about people waiting beyond their early twenties to marry and how people should marry young and things like that. But I myself wasn't in this category and so I felt like I was being somewhat rejected.  Obviously the person talking about this didn't mean to target me in any way and didn't know when I married but the feeling was still there.

One of the reasons I don't like to be around many of the people in these groups is because of the feeling that you have to be almost perfect in order to be accepted. You have to check a lot of boxes in order to be a part of that group. They seem to forget that the church is a place that sinners go to be purified and made holy.  One of the marks of the church is that it is Holy and the reason it is Holy is because it is the bride of Christ and that Christ is the head of the church and we are the body of Christ. The church is not holy because of us, it's holy because of Christ. Therefore we should not boast or feel that we are superior in some way.

I cannot confirm for certain but I know that many of the people who would not fall into the traditional categories I mentioned no longer attend any group meetings or events. Although sometimes these people are invited, in some cases there isn't even an invitation. Again I think much of it has to do with the idea that people who happen to not be living completely outwardly virtuous lives are seen as evil rather than as people who may be struggling with certain things or facing issues. There's also a great deal of unearned judgment that occurs. People who may know absolutely nothing about a particular situation will still judge the people as perhaps wanting those scenarios. Again, for example, if there is a childless couple they will assume that they have rejected children and and that they are violating tenets of the Catholic faith. But in actuality it's quite possible that despite their attempts they have not been able to conceive and give birth to a child.

I realized that I may have been doing much of the same things myself in many ways. I will now try to make more of an effort to be careful about the things that I say. If I ever feel the need to condemn or be negative about a particular aspect of things that people do I will always try to come at it from the perspective of being compassionate and actually caring about that person rather than seeing them as some part of an evil force that's trying to attack us and that I must condemn. There could be many ways to accomplish this.

Here are some ideas when speaking to others:

• Speak not just of the sin, but of the opposite virtue
• Speak as though people are "struggling" with various things as opposed to just talking about them as though they are evil individuals.
• Perhaps admit your own failings to show you are not coming from a place of pride.
• Don't offer to pray for an issue you may perceive someone as having unless they explicitly as you to.
• Have patience and listen to people, get to know them. Don't use various litmus test to determine their level of orthodoxy.

These are just ideas I thought of. If you have more, please feel free to share in the comments.

Michael Voris Resigns! Shocking News from Church Militant

In news that has come as a shock to me (and I'm guessing anyone who has followed Church Militant over the years), Michael Voris has been asked to resign. I have no idea why. Below this post you will see the official statement issued by Church Militant regarding his resignation.

They say he violated the "morality clause". Other than that it is not clear why Voris has been asked to resign. One of the reasons this is shocking is that Voris isn't just one person working at Church Militant. In my perspective, he IS Church Militant. I mean, how can you separate Church Militant from Michael Voris and him spiraling his pencil declaring that it is the place where "lies and falsehoods are trapped and exposed". In fact, I remember back in 2012 and prior when it was called Real Catholic TV. He was forced to remove the word "Catholic" from the title. There is hardly a Catholic out there, especially those who are media-aware, that are not familiar with Michael Voris. Some like him more than others obviously.

The released memo claims that the show will go on with Michael unabated, but this seems implausible. I can't even imagine what Voris must have done to cause this. Those who made this decision must have seen his breach as being rather egregious. As a Catholic organization, they would strongly believe in the Sacrament of Confession. So, whatever it was that Michael Voris is guilty of, they must think it is of such consequence that it would impede or destroy the reputation of the entire organization.

I remember a few years back, Voris came out and publicly gave details of his wayward past life because the Archdiocese of New York was going to expose him. So he decided to take the bull by the horns and come clean publicly himself. This was a very brave move on his part. However, he was obviously not asked to resign over this. So if even these admissions did not cause a resignation, what could have? I suppose in this older case, the sins were of the past and he rejected them, while perhaps these current violations were ongoing? I cannot say.

Let's all pray for Michael Voris and the organization that he founded. I cannot say if those responsible for his resignation are in the right or not in this case, but prayers never go to waste.

Here is the news release issued by Church Militant today:

Fellow Catholics,

Church Militant/St. Michael's Media was founded as a bastion of Catholic truth and a light to the faithful in hard times. This is why we are being fully transparent with you all.

Michael Voris has been asked to resign for breaching the Church Militant morality clause. The board has accepted his resignation.

We understand this is a shock to you all, but our founder and former CEO is stepping aside and focusing on his personal health.

The Board of Directors has chosen not to disclose Michael's private matters to the public. The apostolate will be praying for him, and we kindly ask you to do the same.

Church Militant/St. Michael's Media is just as positioned to save souls as it ever has been. There are more than 40 full-time employees on the cutting edge of Catholic truth moving forward with renewed fervor.

The apostolate will remain unwavering in its reporting and its commentary — defending Holy Mother Church from errors both inside and out.

We appreciate your continued support and prayers.

God love you,

Church Militant

Slovakia to declare Jesus Christ as King of the Country

In a move similar to what Poland has already done in 2016, the Culture Ministry in Slovakia wants to declare Jesus Christ as King of their country. I really love to see this! Kind of like how Christ is the head of the Catholic Church, it would be great to declare Him the King of every country on Earth. Also just as the pope is still the head of the earthly Church, these countries can also have an earthly leader. Makes sense to me!

Here's more information: https://europeanconservative.com/articles/news/official-make-jesus-christ-king-of-slovakia/

"Good person": Self-proclamation by modern-day moralists

Something I've noticed a lot more recently is people unilaterally declaring themselves to be good. They make no nuance about it or ever proclaim that they themselves have any issues or problems. They then proceed to name somebody else who they say is not a good person. I guess I just find this interesting because they seem to have made this absolute moral standard for other people and they compare them to themselves to decide if that person is good or bad.

I was listening to a talk by a priest named Fr Chad Ripperger recently in which he said something along the lines of if he was speaking to a room full of people he could say that nobody there was a saint and that nobody would object to that because the people who are far from being saints and are actually immoral in many ways would not consider themselves to be saints. And at the same time people who are in fact close to being saints would also not consider themselves to be saints because they know how sinful they have been in the past and how much they rely on God for their sanctity.

However this doesn't seem to be the case for how a lot of non-religious people speak nowadays.

A major example of this is what has been deemed "cancel culture". People will dredge up 20-year-old videos of somebody who said something a certain way, misspoke, or what have you and they will be lambasted and perhaps even lose their career because what they said is deemed to be inappropriate by today's standards. The people exposing them will then go on to declare that this is not a good person and that this person deserves everything they get. It doesn't matter if it was a minor foible or small error in judgment even for that time. The mob will be relentless and unforgiving of this person.

I just wonder where the people making these declarations have such gall to be able to declare themselves perfect while pointing out even the most minor flaws of other people.

Some people may listen to what I'm saying and respond by asking isn't that what religious people do all the time? In my experience, truly religious and spiritual people generally are not overly judgmental and they also acknowledge their own sins and failings. I rarely meet any religious person who declares themselves to be a good person as such and that they do everything perfectly. They admit their need for God's grace.

One last thing is the irony of some of these people being self-appointed moral authorities. You will often see this in some of the most wicked people around. People who commit all forms of evil. Yet they will not hesitate to pronounce their innocence while condemning others. Often they criticize people for things which are actually morally good.

Bottom line is pay no attention to modern-day moralists. They don't seem to have any knowledge or understanding of good morality no matter how much they puff our their chests.