|
Post by Young Ireland on Jan 5, 2018 19:53:23 GMT
Is he still not excommunicated? It's hard to understand why much more of this should be accepted by the Vatican, especially if he hasn't recanted previous heresies. X When I was young, it was impressed on me by our curate of the time, that those Catholics who got married in registry offices/ other religions were not married at all but were living in a state of mortal sin. When civil marriage for same sex couples was originally proposed here, Cardinal Sean Brady spoke out against it as being wrong in itself but Archbishop Martin of Dublin thought it had merit as it could be used to make provision for the material needs in justice for both parties. Pope Francis also takes this line afaik. Many women, whose husbands deserted them for another, kept their vows and didn't seek a replacement. We are told as part of the sermon on the mount that you cannot serve God and mammon. Also that Man does not live on bread alone. I am glad of clear teachers like Archbishop Burke. With people like him, the Church is renewed from age to age and the truth prevails. Annie, have you any evidence that Pope Francis supports civil unions? I know LifeSite claim that he does, but the cited paragraph here does not suggest support to me, in fact quite the opposite:
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Jan 8, 2018 17:53:48 GMT
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Jan 26, 2018 20:12:32 GMT
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on May 5, 2018 18:43:12 GMT
|
|
|
Post by assisi on May 7, 2018 19:47:07 GMT
What a cowardly fudge by the ACP. When Catholics are crying out for clarity they get pathetic offerings like this statement. Maybe the ACP should consider changing their name. Take out the ‘Catholic’ and ‘Priests’ and call themselves the ‘Association’, it would be a better reflection of their neutral goals. The ACP say: Also, as leadership of an association made up of men who are unmarried and without children of our own, we are not best placed to be in any way dogmatic on this issue.Anyone can surely recognise a sinful and evil action, you don’t need to be married or unmarried, male or female. Being dogmatic is exactly what is required in this situation. The finality of the killing of a child in the womb is as dogmatic an act as there is, the response should be similar. Surely many of the priests in the ACP have come from big families and have experienced hardship growing up in harder material times than we now live in. They will also have heard of many domestic arrangements and problems during their many years of taking confessions, perhaps much more than many laymen or laywomen. They are also well educated and well read and will know the consequences of sitting on the fence on these sorts of decisions. It’s almost comical in a way, it is easy to conjure up a picture of a group of ACP priests being discovered hiding in a darkened corner of a house and shouting ‘please don’t ask me any difficult moral questions, we’re only worthless little men, leave us alone..’ The statement goes on to say: A vote cast in accordance with each person’s conscience, whatever the result, deserves the respect of all.As Catholics our conscience needs to be informed, and what better places are there than scripture and the Catechism. Thou shalt not kill. And CCC (2270). There really isn’t any doubt in the matter for Catholics.
|
|
|
Post by Young Ireland on May 7, 2018 19:52:41 GMT
What a cowardly fudge by the ACP. When Catholics are crying out for clarity they get pathetic offerings like this statement. Maybe the ACP should consider changing their name. Take out the ‘Catholic’ and ‘Priests’ and call themselves the ‘Association’, it would be a better reflection of their neutral goals. The ACP say: Also, as leadership of an association made up of men who are unmarried and without children of our own, we are not best placed to be in any way dogmatic on this issue.Anyone can surely recognise a sinful and evil action, you don’t need to be married or unmarried, male or female. Being dogmatic is exactly what is required in this situation. The finality of the killing of a child in the womb is as dogmatic an act as there is, the response should be similar. Surely many of the priests in the ACP have come from big families and have experienced hardship growing up in harder material times than we now live in. They will also have heard of many domestic arrangements and problems during their many years of taking confessions, perhaps much more than many laymen or laywomen. They are also well educated and well read and will know the consequences of sitting on the fence on these sorts of decisions. It’s almost comical in a way, it is easy to conjure up a picture of a group of ACP priests being discovered hiding in a darkened corner of a house and shouting ‘please don’t ask me any difficult moral questions, we’re only worthless little men, leave us alone..’ The statement goes on to say: A vote cast in accordance with each person’s conscience, whatever the result, deserves the respect of all.As Catholics our conscience needs to be informed, and what better places are there than scripture and the Catechism. Thou shalt not kill. And CCC (2270). There really isn’t any doubt in the matter for Catholics. Agreed. Perhaps the bishops might consider excommunicating the ACP leadership, given the gravity of the situation.
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on May 8, 2018 20:38:47 GMT
"A vote cast in accordance with each person's conscience, whatever the result, deserves the respect of all". Somehow I doubt if the ACP would apply this to people whose conscience leads them to vote for neo-fascists, racists etc. Substitute "will" for "conscience" and this makes their underlying assumption much clearer.
|
|
|
Post by Alaisdir Ua Séaghdha on May 16, 2018 11:22:20 GMT
We have heard that the Church of England once was the Conservative Party at prayer. In regard to the ACPI, they don't do clerical collars, but if they did, they would be tucked untidily into a clerical blue shirt.
I just don't get how the ACPI breathe fire against the Church but they have been consistently defensive of secular political leadership since 2011. The threat to the seal of the confessional was the only exception. This referendum is quite different and the ACPI leadership have let down their membership.
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on May 16, 2018 21:35:30 GMT
Simple: they take the view that the course of modern civilisation is the will of God with which the Church should identify uncritically, and that it should never define itself in opposition to the broader culture. This, and their instinctive hostility to the concepts of hierarchy and church teaching, leads straight to Erastianism (the view that the state must control the church).
Part of Kingsley's criticism of Newman was for his view that the constituted authorities might become persecutors like Nero and Diocletian. (Kingsley was in some ways a decent man - he took some political stances in defence of the poor which could have damaged him severely - but he was also a virulent racist, in part because he thought racial differences were proven by modern civilisation. His views on "the poor Paddies who eat potatoes" and the necessity of the occasional genocide to establish imperial civilisation in Asia, have to be read before it is possible to believe that anyone could have taken them seriously.)
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Aug 17, 2018 21:25:08 GMT
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Jan 6, 2019 23:53:37 GMT
Looking back on the year, Fr Flannery explains that he voted YES in the abortion referendum- reluctantly - in reaction against what he calls the Church's history of oppressing women. He admits this will have regrettable consequences for some babies, but hopes abortion will be rare and pro-aborts can be persuaded to respect those whose consciences led them to support life. On this precedent, some of the following may be expected in the near future: (1) Fr Flannery jumps off the top of the O'Connell Tower in Glasnevin, expecting that he can float gently to the ground by flapping his arms. (2) Fr Flannery climbs into the lions' section of Dublin Zoo, expecting that the lions will engage him in respectful dialogue. (3) Fr Flannery embarks on implementing his theory that vultures can be trained to sing like nightingales if you address them politely. Just to be clear, I think Fr Flannery is perfectly sincere in his views - it's his naivete that's terrifying. www.associationofcatholicpriests.ie/2019/01/looking-back-on-2018-and-repeal-the-eight/
|
|
|
Post by maolsheachlann on Jan 7, 2019 1:43:36 GMT
Looking back on the year, Fr Flannery explains that he voted YES in the abortion referendum- reluctantly - in reaction against what he calls the Church's history of oppressing women. He admits this will have regrettable consequences for some babies, but hopes abortion will be rare and pro-aborts can be persuaded to respect those whose consciences led them to support life. On this precedent, some of the following may be expected in the near future: (1) Fr Flannery jumps off the top of the O'Connell Tower in Glasnevin, expecting that he can float gently to the ground by flapping his arms. (2) Fr Flannery climbs into the lions' section of Dublin Zoo, expecting that the lions will engage him in respectful dialogue. (3) Fr Flannery embarks on implementing his theory that vultures can be trained to sing like nightingales if you address them politely. Just to be clear, I think Fr Flannery is perfectly sincere in his views - it's his naivete that's terrifying. www.associationofcatholicpriests.ie/2019/01/looking-back-on-2018-and-repeal-the-eight/ He writes: "The traditional Catholic teaching of no sex before marriage is no longer the answer, and would, I believe, bring about more, rather than less, abortions." Not sure how he works that out, or even what he means. Does he mean that there would be more abortions if people refrained from sex before marriage? Hardly. Does he mean the Church continuing to teach this will lead to more abortions? That seems to exaggerate the influence of Church teaching. He seems to concede that abortion is the killing of babies but that this is justifiable because of some kind of institutional Catholic guilt. That's a bizarre stance. If he thinks abortion is the killing of babies there is no way he can be in favour of it, surely. Still, it is rather more nuanced than I would have expected. Perhaps members of the ACP are beginning to realize that the new Ireland they dreamed of is not going to be quite what they hoped for. "Love and do what you will" doesn't always work out like one would wish, in reality.
|
|
|
Post by assisi on Jan 10, 2019 20:04:22 GMT
Looking back on the year, Fr Flannery explains that he voted YES in the abortion referendum- reluctantly - in reaction against what he calls the Church's history of oppressing women. He admits this will have regrettable consequences for some babies, but hopes abortion will be rare and pro-aborts can be persuaded to respect those whose consciences led them to support life. On this precedent, some of the following may be expected in the near future: (1) Fr Flannery jumps off the top of the O'Connell Tower in Glasnevin, expecting that he can float gently to the ground by flapping his arms. (2) Fr Flannery climbs into the lions' section of Dublin Zoo, expecting that the lions will engage him in respectful dialogue. (3) Fr Flannery embarks on implementing his theory that vultures can be trained to sing like nightingales if you address them politely. Just to be clear, I think Fr Flannery is perfectly sincere in his views - it's his naivete that's terrifying. www.associationofcatholicpriests.ie/2019/01/looking-back-on-2018-and-repeal-the-eight/ Fr Flannery says: ....in the end I came down on the Yes side because of the fact that I am part of an organisation, the Church, which has over its history oppressed and sidelined women when it came to making important decisions effecting their lives. So I voted for freedom of choice for women, knowing full well that some of the choices that would be made would go against some of my fundamental beliefs.This is an excuse to ease a conscience that knows deep down that it has done wrong. I have seen many marches for life with tens of thousands of women in attendance, young and old, and they don't seem to conflate the killing of the unborn with oppression. If they have the ability to see abortion as a standalone wrong, why would a man feel he has to hide behind a cliched historically weak excuse?
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on May 23, 2019 18:51:37 GMT
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Jul 16, 2019 21:39:40 GMT
|
|