Vatican Bans Further Editions of Book on Viganò

 

Many decades ago, the Catholic Church banned Franco Zeffirelli’s film of Romeo & Juliet because the director showed the couple in bed after they had been married by Friar Lawrence and because audiences got a brief glimpse of Romeo’s rear end and split-second glimpse of Juliet’s breast. The ban was essentially toothless since it was more of a signal of displeasure from the Holy See but otherwise something that couldn’t prevent Catholics from seeing the film. My late father, a huge fan of the film, who was fluent in Italian, quite knowledgeable about Catholic theology and who converted to the faith during WWII, was incensed by the Church’s pronouncement. The film has stood the test of time and is a classic not merely for Shakespeare’s insightful and beautiful rhyming couplets but for the way in which Zeffirelli handled the material and his choice of actors, locations (in Verona, Italy where the legendary story of the star-crossed lovers is actually set), costumes, music (Nino Rota) and cinematography.

Fast-forward 50 years to the Catholic Church of What’s Happening Now where predatory homosexual priests, bishops, and cardinals who have raped children, sexually groomed seminarians, and engaged in drug-fueled orgies are protected and promoted and very rarely punished or defrocked; and where a militant gay clergy continues to aggressively push the Church (with a nod and a wink from Francis) to openly embrace an active gay lifestyle that runs counter to almost two thousand years of Church teaching.

This is also the new, more permissive Church that now wants to curtail further publication of a book by Vatican reporter Aldo Maria Valli that relates the story of Archbishop and former papal nuncio, Carlo Maria Viganò who blew the whistle on predator homosexual Cardinal Theodore McCarrick. McCarrick, as Viganò points out in his first and subsequent open letters (here and here), had been removed from active duty and restricted from traveling by now Pope-emeritus Benedict XVI but who was later restored and sent to China as a papal emissary by Pope Francis despite hearing from Viganò in a face-to-face meeting that McCarrick had been sexually grooming seminarians for generations.

From ChurchMilitant.com (emphasis mine):

Fede & Cultura, the publishing house for Valli’s Il Caso Viganò, was compelled to restrict further editions of the book. It was the first time Valli had worked with Fede & Cultura, whom he called “courageous” for their publishing choices. Fede & Cultura confirmed with Church Militant that they were put under “irresistible pressure from within the Church not to publish anything else that would depict the Pope in a bad light.” Perhaps Pope Francis’ next surprise motu proprio will announce the reform of the Index librorum prohibitorum (the “List of Prohibited Books”). 

Over the years, many authoritarian regimes have burned books, banned them, imprisoned their authors or declared them insane and confined them to mental institutions or quietly took them away never to be seen or heard from again. Since late August, when Archbishop Viganò published his first letter, blowing the whistle on Pope Francis’ restoration of McCarrick and the others in the Church’s hierarchy who have defended and protected McCarrick over the years; a letter that sent shock waves around the world since in it he called for Francis to resign the papacy – the archbishop has been in hiding. He really should have nothing to fear for speaking the truth to ‘men of God’. Men masquerading as ‘men of God’, of course, is another matter.

My sense is that demand for Valli’s book may begin to build because of the Vatican’s move to smother it. Never underestimate the power of a book to bring down an authoritarian regime. 

This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s growing community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Get your first month free.

There are 77 comments.

  1. 1
  2. 2
  3. 3
  1. Member

    You should also be aware that the document approved by the bishops at the recent “Youth” Synod contained a paragraph calling for “certification” of Catholic websites so fake news (aka orthodox teaching) is not spread.

    As you cautioned us previously, read it and weep.

    https://novusordowatch.org/2018/10/synod-certification-system-fake-news/

    And you must also be aware of the restrictions placed on Cardinal Burke and Bishop Athanasius Schneider:

    http://wdtprs.com/blog/2018/11/fr-z-muses-repression-of-catholic-speech-and-what-we-can-do-about-it/

    Good times in the Church.

    But as I’ve said before, this all strengthens my faith in the Church. She has survived for 2000 years and not even Francis and his sycophantic gang of gay men can destroy her (although they sure seem to be trying to do so).

    • #1
    • November 10, 2018, at 2:52 PM PDT
    • 11 likes
  2. Coolidge

    I don’t think there is a middle ground–a bishop can either be helping the cleanup or hindering it. I do think the safest course of action is to fire every bishop over 55 years of age.

    • #2
    • November 10, 2018, at 3:07 PM PDT
    • 3 likes
  3. Member

    It will be interesting to see the manger scene this year in Rome and how everything plays out. It is a season of unrest on many fronts – this is just one, but an important one. Thank you for your good reporting.

    • #3
    • November 10, 2018, at 3:54 PM PDT
    • 4 likes
  4. Coolidge

    Your story about Zefferelli’s “Romeo and Juliet” being banned reminded me of how in the early 1960’s, my mom subscribed to some Catholic weekly newspaper. It always contained a list of films that were deemed too indecent for any Catholic to view. (Unless they wanted to blot their soul with a mortal sin.)

    I mentally made note of one such film – “God Created Woman” featuring Bridget Bardot. I promised myself that when I grew up, I would definitely watch the movie, mortal sin or not.

    I didn’t get around to it until three years ago. I was amazed at how mild anything in this “damned” piece of film footage was, especially since some fifty years or more had transpired since I promised I would watch it.

    Still and all, Bardot was one gorgeous woman. I have read that she had been mistreated by most of the men she was involved with, probably due to her beauty and their jealousy. And that she was in her later life, devoted to animal rescue.

    Trailer for the movie:

    • #4
    • November 10, 2018, at 5:23 PM PDT
    • 2 likes
  5. Member

    DonG (View Comment):

    I don’t think there is a middle ground–a bishop can either be helping the cleanup or hindering it. I do think the safest course of action is to fire every bishop over 55 years of age.

    Burke and Chaput are both likely over 55, no? Maybe a different measure other than age, then, to determine who goes and who stays. That said, we could get rid of most of the current crowd and be better off.

    • #5
    • November 10, 2018, at 5:34 PM PDT
    • 2 likes
  6. Member

    CarolJoy (View Comment):

    Your story about Zefferelli’s “Romeo and Juliet” being banned reminded me of how in the early 1960’s, my mom subscribed to some Catholic weekly newspaper. It always contained a list of films that were deemed too indecent for any Catholic to view. (Unless they wanted to blot their soul with a mortal sin.)

    I mentally made note of one such film – “God Created Woman” featuring Bridget Bardot. I promised myself that when I grew up, I would definitely watch the movie, mortal sin or not.

    I didn’t get around to it until three years ago. I was amazed at how mild anything in this “damned” piece of film footage was, especially since some fifty years or more had transpired since I promised I would watch it.

    Still and all, Bardot was one gorgeous woman. I have read that she had been mistreated by most of the men she was involved with, probably due to her beauty and their jealousy. And that she was in her later life, devoted to animal rescue.

     

    Why would watching that film be under the category of a “mortal sin”? I think your concept of what constitutes mortal sin is off.

    • #6
    • November 10, 2018, at 5:37 PM PDT
    • Like
  7. Coolidge

    Painter Jean (View Comment):

    CarolJoy (View Comment):

    Your story about Zefferelli’s “Romeo and Juliet” being banned reminded me of how in the early 1960’s, my mom subscribed to some Catholic weekly newspaper. It always contained a list of films that were deemed too indecent for any Catholic to view. (Unless they wanted to blot their soul with a mortal sin.)

    I mentally made note of one such film – “God Created Woman” featuring Bridget Bardot. I promised myself that when I grew up, I would definitely watch the movie, mortal sin or not.

    I didn’t get around to it until three years ago. I was amazed at how mild anything in this “damned” piece of film footage was, especially since some fifty years or more had transpired since I promised I would watch it.

    Still and all, Bardot was one gorgeous woman. I have read that she had been mistreated by most of the men she was involved with, probably due to her beauty and their jealousy. And that she was in her later life, devoted to animal rescue.

    Why would watching that film be under the category of a “mortal sin”? I think your concept of what constitutes mortal sin is off.

    Oh no it isn’t. Once a year, we had to stand up as a congregation and promise our pastor that all of us would abide by the Catholic Church’s decree as to which films could be watched. The pastor would then remind us that watching any films that the Church’s League of Decency had decreed as banned would be risking our immortal souls.

    • #7
    • November 10, 2018, at 5:51 PM PDT
    • 2 likes
  8. Member

    CarolJoy (View Comment):

    Painter Jean (View Comment):

    CarolJoy (View Comment):

    Your story about Zefferelli’s “Romeo and Juliet” being banned reminded me of how in the early 1960’s, my mom subscribed to some Catholic weekly newspaper. It always contained a list of films that were deemed too indecent for any Catholic to view. (Unless they wanted to blot their soul with a mortal sin.)

    I mentally made note of one such film – “God Created Woman” featuring Bridget Bardot. I promised myself that when I grew up, I would definitely watch the movie, mortal sin or not.

    I didn’t get around to it until three years ago. I was amazed at how mild anything in this “damned” piece of film footage was, especially since some fifty years or more had transpired since I promised I would watch it.

    Still and all, Bardot was one gorgeous woman. I have read that she had been mistreated by most of the men she was involved with, probably due to her beauty and their jealousy. And that she was in her later life, devoted to animal rescue.

    Why would watching that film be under the category of a “mortal sin”? I think your concept of what constitutes mortal sin is off.

    Oh no it isn’t. Once a year, we had to stand up as a congregation and promise our pastor that all of us would abide by the Catholic Church’s decree as to which films could be watched. The pastor would then remind us that watching any films that the Church’s League of Decency had decreed as banned would be risking our immortal souls.

    I have never heard of such a thing. That pastor was perhaps a bit over the top…. Nevertheless, saying that watching movies deemed indecent would be risking your souls is not the same thing as saying that it categorically would be a mortal sin. We are advised to avoid “the near occasion of sin“, and yes, for some that might include indecent movies, but it is not necessarily the same thing as committing a mortal sin. I don’t think you’re clear on this.

    • #8
    • November 10, 2018, at 9:16 PM PDT
    • 2 likes
  9. Coolidge
    TBA

    CarolJoy (View Comment):

    Your story about Zefferelli’s “Romeo and Juliet” being banned reminded me of how in the early 1960’s, my mom subscribed to some Catholic weekly newspaper. It always contained a list of films that were deemed too indecent for any Catholic to view. (Unless they wanted to blot their soul with a mortal sin.)

    I mentally made note of one such film – “God Created Woman” featuring Bridget Bardot. I promised myself that when I grew up, I would definitely watch the movie, mortal sin or not.

    I didn’t get around to it until three years ago. I was amazed at how mild anything in this “damned” piece of film footage was, especially since some fifty years or more had transpired since I promised I would watch it.

    Still and all, Bardot was one gorgeous woman. I have read that she had been mistreated by most of the men she was involved with, probably due to her beauty and their jealousy. And that she was in her later life, devoted to animal rescue.

    I would suggest that there is more to the film than we can see with our modern eyes. 

    There is the fear of bongos and dancing with black men, the fear of unleashed female libido, nakedness, the ‘fulfill your every expectation’ line. 

    This film would have been reviewed by a virgin priest inculcated in ideas of temptation that hark back to medieval times, ideas that we can hardly fathom in our pornographic age. 

    • #9
    • November 10, 2018, at 9:34 PM PDT
    • 1 like
  10. Member

    TBA (View Comment):

    CarolJoy (View Comment):

    Your story about Zefferelli’s “Romeo and Juliet” being banned reminded me of how in the early 1960’s, my mom subscribed to some Catholic weekly newspaper. It always contained a list of films that were deemed too indecent for any Catholic to view. (Unless they wanted to blot their soul with a mortal sin.)

    I mentally made note of one such film – “God Created Woman” featuring Bridget Bardot. I promised myself that when I grew up, I would definitely watch the movie, mortal sin or not.

    I didn’t get around to it until three years ago. I was amazed at how mild anything in this “damned” piece of film footage was, especially since some fifty years or more had transpired since I promised I would watch it.

    Still and all, Bardot was one gorgeous woman. I have read that she had been mistreated by most of the men she was involved with, probably due to her beauty and their jealousy. And that she was in her later life, devoted to animal rescue.

    I would suggest that there is more to the film than we can see with our modern eyes.

    There is the fear of bongos and dancing with black men, the fear of unleashed female libido, nakedness, the ‘fulfill your every expectation’ line.

    This film would have been reviewed by a virgin priest inculcated in ideas of temptation that hark back to medieval times, ideas that we can hardly fathom in our pornographic age.

    “Medieval times”? The “ideas of temptation” the priest would have been “inculcated” in go back to the beginning of Christianity, and some go even further back within Judaism. 

    • #10
    • November 10, 2018, at 9:41 PM PDT
    • Like
  11. Member
    Brian Watt Post author

    Will all respect, even though I mentioned Zeffirelli’s Romeo & Juliet as an example of what the Vatican had banned in the past, I did so to juxtapose what the Church deemed offensive with the more recent history of child rape, sexual grooming of seminarians, homosexual predation, and the cover-ups, defense and promotion of predator clergy and the Church’s push to promote LGBT lifestyles as acceptable behavior even within the clergy. This post isn’t about the Church banning indecent films some 50 years ago. If you’d like to wade into that topic, please start another post.

    • #11
    • November 10, 2018, at 9:42 PM PDT
    • 5 likes
  12. Thatcher

    The Church officials live in a bubble, so do it’s clergy. It seems to them they can do no wrong.

    • #12
    • November 10, 2018, at 10:00 PM PDT
    • Like
  13. Member

    Fake John/Jane Galt (View Comment):

    The Church officials live in a bubble, so do it’s clergy. It seems to them they can do no wrong.

    And since Catholics contracept, abort, and divorce at the same rates as the rest of society, clearly the laity think they can do no wrong as well. They match their shepherds quite well.

    • #13
    • November 10, 2018, at 11:03 PM PDT
    • 5 likes
  14. Coolidge
    TBA

    Fake John/Jane Galt (View Comment):

    The Church officials live in a bubble, so do it’s clergy. It seems to them they can do no wrong.

    I imagine leadership forms a bubble the way nacre accrues around a grain of sand in an oyster. 

    • #14
    • November 11, 2018, at 10:43 AM PDT
    • 1 like
  15. Coolidge

    Painter Jean (View Comment):

    Fake John/Jane Galt (View Comment):

    The Church officials live in a bubble, so do it’s clergy. It seems to them they can do no wrong.

    And since Catholics contracept, abort, and divorce at the same rates as the rest of society, clearly the laity think they can do no wrong as well. They match their shepherds quite well.

    I am pro-life, I accept the Church’s teaching on contraception, and I have never been divorced. I think you are missing something here: contraception, abortion, and divorce are almost always sins of weakness and ignorance. There is a huge difference between a terrified young Catholic woman who gets an abortion out of fear, and a conference of Catholic Bishops who help to fund pro-abortion organizations because why? If members of the clergy reach a point where they feel they just can’t handle celibacy anymore, and leave the clergy-as some do-that is one thing. When they decide to stay in leadership positions and have cocaine fueled orgies, that is something else. When those who call them out on this feel that they must go into hiding or else risk being murdered, that is something else altogether. I share your frustration with Catholics who do not follow Catholic teaching, but however bad the laity may be, we do not match our shepherds. At all. If we did, our shepherds would not be banning books.

    • #15
    • November 11, 2018, at 1:40 PM PDT
    • 6 likes
  16. Coolidge

    Painter Jean (View Comment):
    And since Catholics contracept, abort, and divorce at the same rates as the rest of society, clearly the laity think they can do no wrong as well.

    Also, I am very leery about statistics about abortion: the Guttmacher institute may tell us that Catholics and Evangelicals get abortions just as often as anyone else, but why should anyone believe the Guttmacher institute on anything? I don’t believe a word they say. All abortion statistics are compiled by pro-abortion organizations. The statistics exist to push their agenda.

    • #16
    • November 11, 2018, at 1:54 PM PDT
    • 3 likes
  17. Member

    JudithannCampbell (View Comment):

    Painter Jean (View Comment):

    Fake John/Jane Galt (View Comment):

    The Church officials live in a bubble, so do it’s clergy. It seems to them they can do no wrong.

    And since Catholics contracept, abort, and divorce at the same rates as the rest of society, clearly the laity think they can do no wrong as well. They match their shepherds quite well.

    I am pro-life, I accept the Church’s teaching on contraception, and I have never been divorced. I think you are missing something here: contraception, abortion, and divorce are almost always sins of weakness and ignorance. There is a huge difference between a terrified young Catholic woman who gets an abortion out of fear, and a conference of Catholic Bishops who help to fund pro-abortion organizations because why? If members of the clergy reach a point where they feel they just can’t handle celibacy anymore, and leave the clergy-as some do-that is one thing. When they decide to stay in leadership positions and have cocaine fueled orgies, that is something else. When those who call them out on this feel that they must go into hiding or else risk being murdered, that is something else altogether. I share your frustration with Catholics who do not follow Catholic teaching, but however bad the laity may be, we do not match our shepherds. At all. If we did, our shepherds would not be banning books.

    I’m not saying that the laity are the equivalent of the worst offenders in the hierarchy. I am saying that the average Father Joe Shmoe would rather get along and be liked than to ruffle any feathers by actually teaching what the Church teaches and why she does. And the pews are largely filled with people who likewise want to get along with the culture at large, and don’t want to ruffle feathers by having unpopular views on same-sex marriage, divorce, abortion, etc. – who wants to be hassled, and anyway it’s more compassionate to be for those things, right? When quiet, unchallenged dissent becomes a comfortable way of life for most of the Catholic laity, it has an effect on the Body of Christ. How could it not? This goes both ways: holy, fervent shepherds are more likely to inspire the laity. And a holy and faithful laity are going to be more likely to expect – and get – holiness and faithfulness from the shepherds. Dissent in small matters will lead to corruption in large matters. What we have now is decades of dissent in matters great and small, by laity and hierarchy. 

    • #17
    • November 11, 2018, at 2:14 PM PDT
    • 3 likes
  18. Member

    JudithannCampbell (View Comment):

    Painter Jean (View Comment):
    And since Catholics contracept, abort, and divorce at the same rates as the rest of society, clearly the laity think they can do no wrong as well.

    Also, I am very leery about statistics about abortion: the Guttmacher institute may tell us that Catholics and Evangelicals get abortions just as often as anyone else, but why should anyone believe the Guttmacher institute on anything? I don’t believe a word they say. All abortion statistics are compiled by pro-abortion organizations. The statistics exist to push their agenda.

    I take your point, but I don’t see any particular reason to doubt the stats that much. Most Catholics use contraception, and contraception requires abortion as a back-up method. 

    • #18
    • November 11, 2018, at 2:16 PM PDT
    • 3 likes
  19. Coolidge

    Painter Jean (View Comment):

    JudithannCampbell (View Comment):

    Painter Jean (View Comment):
    And since Catholics contracept, abort, and divorce at the same rates as the rest of society, clearly the laity think they can do no wrong as well.

    Also, I am very leery about statistics about abortion: the Guttmacher institute may tell us that Catholics and Evangelicals get abortions just as often as anyone else, but why should anyone believe the Guttmacher institute on anything? I don’t believe a word they say. All abortion statistics are compiled by pro-abortion organizations. The statistics exist to push their agenda.

    I take your point, but I don’t see any particular reason to doubt the stats that much. Most Catholics use contraception, and contraception requires abortion as a back-up method.

    Yeah, I have heard that argument, and am skeptical of that argument too. There is no question that large numbers of Catholics completely disregard Church teaching on contraception, but the Catholics I know who use contraception are still very much against abortion. From what I can tell, their attitude isn’t, “I refuse to have a child and will use any means necessary to avoid it”, their attitude is that hopefully the contraception will work, and if it doesn’t, then you suck it up and have the baby. I know and am related to cafeteria Catholics who vote liberal, see no problem with divorce, use contraception, do not want to get into arguments about abortion, but even so, would never have one themselves,and several of them went to heroic measures to not have an abortion.

    Of course, I am just going on the people I know, who may not be typical, but I don’t believe anything the pro-aborts say about abortion, ever. When they say abortion rates are going down, I don’t believe it: I don’t believe anything they say about anything, ever.

    • #19
    • November 11, 2018, at 2:25 PM PDT
    • 3 likes
  20. Member

    JudithannCampbell (View Comment):

    Painter Jean (View Comment):

    JudithannCampbell (View Comment):

    Painter Jean (View Comment):
    And since Catholics contracept, abort, and divorce at the same rates as the rest of society, clearly the laity think they can do no wrong as well.

    Also, I am very leery about statistics about abortion: the Guttmacher institute may tell us that Catholics and Evangelicals get abortions just as often as anyone else, but why should anyone believe the Guttmacher institute on anything? I don’t believe a word they say. All abortion statistics are compiled by pro-abortion organizations. The statistics exist to push their agenda.

    I take your point, but I don’t see any particular reason to doubt the stats that much. Most Catholics use contraception, and contraception requires abortion as a back-up method.

    Yeah, I have heard that argument, and am skeptical of that argument too. There is no question that large numbers of Catholics completely disregard Church teaching on contraception, but the Catholics I know who use contraception are still very much against abortion. From what I can tell, their attitude isn’t, “I refuse to have a child and will use any means necessary to avoid it”, their attitude is that hopefully the contraception will work, and if it doesn’t, then you suck it up and have the baby.

    That’s no doubt true of most married Catholics. But their single daughters, on the other hand, who never heard Church teaching on these matters and whose parents don’t follow Church teaching….

    I know and am related to cafeteria Catholics who vote liberal, see no problem with divorce, use contraception, do not want to get into arguments about abortion, but even so, would never have one themselves,and several of them went to heroic measures to not have an abortion.

    Of course, I am just going on the people I know, who may not be typical, but I don’t believe anything the pro-aborts say about abortion, ever. When they say abortion rates are going down, I don’t believe it: I don’t believe anything they say about anything, ever.

    People who think unborn children should be sacrificed on the altar of Womyn’s Empowerment are not trustworthy. We agree.

    • #20
    • November 11, 2018, at 2:42 PM PDT
    • 1 like
  21. Coolidge

    Painter Jean (View Comment):
    That’s no doubt true of most married Catholics. But their single daughters, on the other hand, who never heard Church teaching on these matters and whose parents don’t follow Church teaching….

    Actually, most of the people I was talking about who went to heroic measures-ok, that might be an overstatement-were single daughters. They put themselves through great inconvenience and discomfort to have their babies.

    Like I said, I am pro-life, and I don’t believe in contraception, especially chemical contraception. But I really question the Catholics who push this theory that there is a strong link between contraception and abortion: I think such Catholics don’t understand the mindset that most people are operating with. Yes, there definitely are a few people out there who are so dead set against having children that they will use any means necessary to avoid it, but I don’t think those people are typical. If they were typical, the pro-aborts wouldn’t need to lie they way they do.

    I will be the first to say that contraception is a bad thing, but we need to understand the mindset that most people in our audience are operating with if we want to reach them. When some very conservative Catholics start claiming that it’s just a small leap from using a condom to having an abortion, they lose me, and they probably lose a lot of other people too. There are a few people out there who are so rigid and inflexible and dead set against having children that for them, it really is a small leap, but that isn’t true of most people.

    • #21
    • November 11, 2018, at 3:00 PM PDT
    • 2 likes
  22. Member

    JudithannCampbell (View Comment):

    Painter Jean (View Comment):
    That’s no doubt true of most married Catholics. But their single daughters, on the other hand, who never heard Church teaching on these matters and whose parents don’t follow Church teaching….

    Actually, most of the people I was talking about who went to heroic measures-ok, that might be an overstatement-were single daughters. They put themselves through great inconvenience and discomfort to have their babies.

    Like I said, I am pro-life, and I don’t believe in contraception, especially chemical contraception. But I really question the Catholics who push this theory that there is a strong link between contraception and abortion: I think such Catholics don’t understand the mindset that most people are operating with. Yes, there definitely are a few people out there who are so dead set against having children that they will use any means necessary to avoid it, but I don’t think those people are typical. If they were typical, the pro-aborts wouldn’t need to lie they way they do.

    I will be the first to say that contraception is a bad thing, but we need to understand the mindset that most people in our audience are operating with if we want to reach them. When some very conservative Catholics start claiming that it’s just a small leap from using a condom to having an abortion, they lose me, and they probably lose a lot of other people too. There are a few people out there who are so rigid and inflexible and dead set against having children that for them, it really is a small leap, but that isn’t true of most people.

    Doesn’t contraception promise consequence-less sex? Of course it does! The Sexual Revolution requires contraception. So what do you do when the contraception fails? What do you do when the popular culture views sex so casually? 

    Let me put it this way: If chemical contraception did not exist, and other methods were unreliable, do you think we would have the attitudes towards sex that we do in the popular culture now? I doubt it. Contraception separates sex from procreation, and legal abortion on demand is the entirely predictable result.

    • #22
    • November 11, 2018, at 3:42 PM PDT
    • 1 like
  23. Coolidge

    Painter Jean (View Comment):
    Let me put it this way: If chemical contraception did not exist, and other methods were unreliable, do you think we would have the attitudes towards sex that we do in the popular culture now?

    Of course not, and if guns and knives didn’t exist, there would probably be less violence. What do you propose we do? Like I said, I will be the first to say that contraception is bad, but if it was the sure fire route to abortion that some say it is, our out of wedlock birth rate would not be what it is. Plenty of people-most people,possibly-believe that contraception is fine but abortion is wrong. I am just acknowledging what most people think, which I think is different from what you seem to think most people think. I don’t agree with most people, but the mindset they operate with is not the mindset you think they operate with.

    Look: I think that abortion should be illegal, and in a perfect world chemical contraceptives that can cause an abortion should also probably be illegal. But I am willing to make condoms illegal? No, I am not. The best way to prevent abortion and to end abortion is to tell the truth about abortion: if I could just get people to agree with me about that one thing, that’s enough for me. You seem to be saying that there is no hope until and unless the whole world turns Catholic, or something. You want me to speak out against contraception? Done, but really, what else would you have me do? Are you saying that condoms should be illegal? What do you want us to do?

    • #23
    • November 11, 2018, at 4:01 PM PDT
    • 1 like
  24. Member

    JudithannCampbell (View Comment):

    Painter Jean (View Comment):
    Let me put it this way: If chemical contraception did not exist, and other methods were unreliable, do you think we would have the attitudes towards sex that we do in the popular culture now?

    Of course not, and if guns and knives didn’t exist, there would probably be less violence. What do you propose we do? Like I said, I will be the first to say that contraception is bad, but if it was the sure fire route to abortion that some say it is, our out of wedlock birth rate would not be what it is. Plenty of people-most people,possibly-believe that contraception is fine but abortion is wrong. I am just acknowledging what most people think, which I think is different from what you seem to think most people think. I don’t agree with most people, but the mindset they operate with is not the mindset you think they operate with.

    Look: I think that abortion should be illegal, and in a perfect world chemical contraceptives that can cause an abortion should also probably be illegal. But I am willing to make condoms illegal? No, I am not. The best way to prevent abortion and to end abortion is to tell the truth about abortion: if I could just get people to agree with me about that one thing, that’s enough for me. You seem to be saying that there is no hope until and unless the whole world turns Catholic, or something. You want me to speak out against contraception? Done, but really, what else would you have me do? Are you saying that condoms should be illegal? What do you want us to do?

    I’m not sure there is anything that can be done. Contraception is here to stay. I think that means abortion is too, though we can regulate it to varying degrees in some states.

    • #24
    • November 11, 2018, at 7:28 PM PDT
    • Like
  25. Member
    Brian Watt Post author

    The voices of orthodox Catholics who are called upon by Canon Law to criticize the Church’s hierarchy or individual members of the clergy who stray from Catholic teaching may recede further in the background not for lack of trying but for social media sites like Twitter that characterize any criticism of the militant push for acceptance of active gay lifestyles in the Church as hate speech as Vox Catholica recently found out:

     

    Orthodox Catholics should anticipate that Facebook and YouTube aren’t far behind in censoring and eventually banning any criticism of LGBT militancy as it pertains to the Catholic Church, if they haven’t already begun to do so.

    • #25
    • November 11, 2018, at 7:42 PM PDT
    • 6 likes
  26. Member

    Brian Watt (View Comment):

    The voices of orthodox Catholics who are called upon by Canon Law to criticize the Church’s hierarchy or individual members of the clergy who stray from Catholic teaching may recede further in the background not for lack of trying but for social media sites like Twitter that characterize any criticism of the militant push for acceptance of active gay lifestyles in the Church as hate speech as Vox Catholica recently found out:

    Orthodox Catholics should anticipate that Facebook and YouTube aren’t far behind in censoring and eventually banning any criticism of LGBT militancy as it pertains to the Catholic Church, if they haven’t already begun to do so.

    I’m afraid you’re probably right. The way this is progressing, I can easily imagine some orthodox priests of my acquaintance, who do in fact present the Church’s teaching on homosexual acts, being hauled into court for hate speech.

    • #26
    • November 11, 2018, at 7:52 PM PDT
    • 2 likes
  27. Member
    Brian Watt Post author

    Painter Jean (View Comment):

    Brian Watt (View Comment):

    The voices of orthodox Catholics who are called upon by Canon Law to criticize the Church’s hierarchy or individual members of the clergy who stray from Catholic teaching may recede further in the background not for lack of trying but for social media sites like Twitter that characterize any criticism of the militant push for acceptance of active gay lifestyles in the Church as hate speech as Vox Catholica recently found out:

    Orthodox Catholics should anticipate that Facebook and YouTube aren’t far behind in censoring and eventually banning any criticism of LGBT militancy as it pertains to the Catholic Church, if they haven’t already begun to do so.

    I’m afraid you’re probably right. The way this is progressing, I can easily imagine some orthodox priests of my acquaintance, who do in fact present the Church’s teaching on homosexual acts, being hauled into court for hate speech.

    It might happen in Canada and Great Britain first.

    To wit – from the article link above…(emphasis mine):

    John Keenan, Bishop of Paisley sent a letter to the director of BBC Scotland, Donalda MacKinnon, outlining his concerns of the corporation’s treatment of Catholics in a recent short film titled Homophobia in 2018, Time for Love.

    In the letter, he accused the film, which was published on the BBC’s digital platform ‘The Social’, of blaming hatred toward gay people on Catholics, citing Catholic teachings and liturgy.

    The film also includes a clip which says the Catholic Sacrament of Holy Communion “tastes like cardboard and smells like hate”.

    Bishop John wrote: “In the current climate of growing hostility to Catholics I would appeal that the BBC guard against adding fuel to the fire. In that regard I would ask that the corporation now reach out to Catholics to understand their concerns, that they are being portrayed in a prejudicial way.

    “When it comes to important public debates about the wellbeing of the human person and the truth and meaning of human sexuality Catholics feel their views are becoming increasingly marginalised, almost criminalised“.

    • #27
    • November 11, 2018, at 7:54 PM PDT
    • 5 likes
  28. Coolidge

    Painter Jean (View Comment):
    I’m not sure there is anything that can be done. Contraception is here to stay. I think that means abortion is too, though we can regulate it to varying degrees in some states.

    There is a great deal that can and should be done. One of the reasons that I question the whole birth control leads inevitably to abortion mentality is that it leads to hopelessness and a defeatist attitude. We just gained two votes on the Supreme Court who could very well vote to overturn Roe V Wade, and we will probably gain another: young people who grew up seeing ultrasounds are far less accepting of abortion than older people, young doctors who grew up seeing ultrasounds are far less willing to perform abortions than older doctors. There is so much reason for hope, and yet you are willing to throw in the towel on abortion because you can’t get rid of contraception? That doesn’t make sense to me, especially when it is so obvious that so many people-including many conservative Jews and Evangelicals who vote pro-life, are ok with contraception but are against abortion. Your theory may be true about a small number of strange people, but it isn’t an accurate description of the way most people view things.

    • #28
    • November 11, 2018, at 8:32 PM PDT
    • 3 likes
  29. Member
    Brian Watt Post author

    Brian Watt (View Comment):

    Painter Jean (View Comment):

    Brian Watt (View Comment):

    The voices of orthodox Catholics who are called upon by Canon Law to criticize the Church’s hierarchy or individual members of the clergy who stray from Catholic teaching may recede further in the background not for lack of trying but for social media sites like Twitter that characterize any criticism of the militant push for acceptance of active gay lifestyles in the Church as hate speech as Vox Catholica recently found out:

    Orthodox Catholics should anticipate that Facebook and YouTube aren’t far behind in censoring and eventually banning any criticism of LGBT militancy as it pertains to the Catholic Church, if they haven’t already begun to do so.

    I’m afraid you’re probably right. The way this is progressing, I can easily imagine some orthodox priests of my acquaintance, who do in fact present the Church’s teaching on homosexual acts, being hauled into court for hate speech.

    It might happen in Canada and Great Britain first.

    To wit – from the article link above…(emphasis mine):

    John Keenan, Bishop of Paisley sent a letter to the director of BBC Scotland, Donalda MacKinnon, outlining his concerns of the corporation’s treatment of Catholics in a recent short film titled Homophobia in 2018, Time for Love.

    In the letter, he accused the film, which was published on the BBC’s digital platform ‘The Social’, of blaming hatred toward gay people on Catholics, citing Catholic teachings and liturgy.

    The film also includes a clip which says the Catholic Sacrament of Holy Communion “tastes like cardboard and smells like hate”.

    Bishop John wrote: “In the current climate of growing hostility to Catholics I would appeal that the BBC guard against adding fuel to the fire. In that regard I would ask that the corporation now reach out to Catholics to understand their concerns, that they are being portrayed in a prejudicial way.

    “When it comes to important public debates about the wellbeing of the human person and the truth and meaning of human sexuality Catholics feel their views are becoming increasingly marginalised, almost criminalised“.

    And…

    http://www.ncregister.com/daily-news/britain-forges-ahead-with-anti-extremism-commission

    • #29
    • November 11, 2018, at 8:47 PM PDT
    • Like
  30. Coolidge
    TBA

    Painter Jean (View Comment):

    Most Catholics use contraception, and contraception requires abortion as a back-up method.

    You lost me here; why would contraception require abortion as a back-up method? Surely lots of women go to term after their contraception fails. 

    • #30
    • November 11, 2018, at 8:49 PM PDT
    • 3 likes
  1. 1
  2. 2
  3. 3