Catholics Protest Outside Tim Kaine’s Church: You Can’t be Catholic and Pro-Abortion | LifeNews.com

MICAIAH BILGER   AUG 29, 2016   |   5:48PM    RICHMOND, VA

A small group of Catholics protested peacefully on Sunday outside the Catholic Church where Hillary Clinton’s vice presidential running mate attends.

Tim Kaine, Clinton’s vice presidential pick and a U.S. Senator for Virginia, often says he is a Catholic and “personally pro-life,” but his actions show otherwise. Kaine has a 100-percent pro-abortion voting record from Planned Parenthood so far in 2016.

WTVR 6 reports about a dozen people held signs on the sidewalk outside St. Elizabeth’s Catholic Church in Richmond, Virginia, where Kaine has attended for about 30 years. Among other things, the protesters said they were there to expose Kaine’s pro-abortion position, which is contrary to Catholic Church teachings.

“He is not America’s dad at all,” protest organizer Frances Bouton told the local news station. “If people just scratched the surface, he’s really, all I can say, is evil.”

SIGN THE PLEDGE: I Pledge to Vote for a Pro-Life Candidate for President

One protester’s sign read “You can’t be Catholic and pro-abortion,” while another described him as a “CINO,” or Catholic in name only.

Kaine’s church reportedly gave him a standing ovation after Clinton officially nominated him as her vice presidential running mate. Despite evidence to the contrary, Kaine’s priest, the Rev. Jim Arsenault, told NPR that Kaine is “personally pro-life.”

However, the Virginia politician is on record as trying to have it both ways — saying he is both a “traditional Catholic” and a strong supporter of abortion. As LifeNews previously reported, Kaine said he is a “strong supporter of Roe v. Wade.”

He also has refused to say whether he would vote to force taxpayers to fund abortions – a goal both for his running mate and the whole Democratic Party.

As a U.S. Senator, Kaine voted to allow government funding of abortion providers, and he voted against legislation to require an abortionist to notify at least one parent before performing an abortion on a minor girl from another state.

Kaine took his most extreme pro-abortion action yet with his recent co-sponsorship of the so-called “Women’s Health Protection Act” (S.217), known to pro-lifers as the “Abortion Without Limits Until Birth Act.” This bill would nullify nearly all existing state and federal limitations on regulation of abortion, and prohibit states from enacting meaningful pro-life laws in the future. This revamped version of the long-stalled “Freedom of Choice Act” is a priority of the pro-abortion forces in Washington, D.C.

Recently, Washington, DC-based Fr. Thomas Petri sent out a series of tweets addressing the Catholic candidate’s pro-abortion views — with one saying Kaine should not present himself for communion in his church. That was after a Catholic bishop admonished Kaine, saying that he can’t reconcile his Catholic faith with abortion.

His running mate Hillary Clinton’s position is even more extreme. Clinton has said in various interviews that an unborn child just hours before birth has no Constitutional rightsIn February, Clinton defended the gruesome partial-birth abortion procedure. She also said she wants to overturn the Hyde Amendment and force taxpayers to pay for abortions, including late-term abortions.

Read more here: Catholics Protest Outside Tim Kaine’s Church: You Can’t be Catholic and Pro-Abortion | LifeNews.com

My Time Among the Evangelicals.

During my ventures blogging, I have come across a blog or two created by Evangelicals looking to inform others about the horrors of Catholicism. In fact, one in particular often tags his post as “Catholic” for those to stumble upon the dribble searching out Catholic posts. What is most absurd and peculiar about this particular gentleman is mind-numbing contradictions. For example, the gentleman will either misrepresent scripture to fit his motif of slander and if someone objects and provides refutation against his novice theology he simply censors their comments from the site, all while attempting to make known about Catholics Index of Forbidden Books. Ha!

Of course, as a cradle Catholic it would be assumed that I haven’t had much experience with Evangelicals, but in my particular case, I have spent some time in their company. It was during my time as a youth of about sixteen years of age. I was dating a Evangelical girl during those days–who sadly has fallen for secular world hook line and sinker since those days. The girl’s parents were very strict and any night that was considered a school night–which would include Sunday—we were not allowed to spend any time together. Of course, She determined a way to get around this because Sunday night is when her Church had youth group for her Church. She convinced me to go for at that time I thought, “Well, we believe in the same God, what could it hurt?” Oh how a fool I was at the time!

Every Sunday I would show up at the youth minister’s house, it was during a period of construction for their new gigantic Morton shed church, and it was nice to be able to talk about the Gospel in what appeared to be generally innocent conversations. However, after some time had passed and I developed a friendly relationship with the youth minister; here came his need to “convert” me from the evils of Catholicism. I didn’t notice it at first, it has been subtle, but he did have disdain for Catholicism, even so much so, that a girl—who was friends with a Catholic that I knew from school—asked him if disliked Catholics. The minister went on and on during a session at his house, unfortunately I don’t remember the particulars, how he didn’t dislike Catholics, it was a misunderstanding. All the while mostly looking at me when he spoke on the topic.

It wasn’t long after that time that a kid at my school committed suicide. Our community was a small community, so it had been a pretty shocking tragedy. Again, I found myself at the youth minister’s house as he discussed the event. The minister addressed the topic whether the teenager committing suicide was now in Hell. Although even upon looking back to realize that is analogy was a false equivalent, it also appears that the youth minister had a lack of understanding between mortal and venial sins. Nonetheless, he began to describe how if he was in the act of committing adultery and suddenly died, he would not be in Hell because there are no such sins that disconnect us from God. He spoke these words as he made eye contract with me, I said nothing being but a child.

One of the most shocking occurrence during my time amongst the Evangelicals was when I found myself again at the youth minister’s house, but this time, it was different. He told us that we needed to take a look at something at the almost complete Morton shed Church. When we arrived at the facility, we entered the building in complete darkness. The minister led us up to a top floor around a spiraling ramp of sorts. When the group arrived to the top of floor what set before us still disturbs me to this day. The room was filled with burning candles, maybe even some torches, I remember that it was dark and the only light was that of a warm glow of flame. I figure in a white hooded robe sat in front of us at a Judge’s bench with his face veiled. We were told to sit and await our turn. The youth minister then called each person’s name to sit on what more or less would have been the witness stand, and a figure who was portraying Satan read to us all of the sins that the youth minister thought or had heard each person committed. Personally, when it was my turn, my sins listed were not intimate but generic due to the youth minister not knowing me that well coming from the Catholic faith. However, some were so detailed that it left children in tears as this man dressed them down in front of all of our eyes. At the end of the mock trial, a figure who portrayed Jesus came in and said none of these sins matter, feel better. When the mock trial ended the Youth Minister told us how sorry he was for putting us through this ordeal, and gave us free pizza…

A couple years went by and at this time I must have been a senior in highschool because I do not remember the girlfriend being at these events. At the time the Morton shed church was complete and the Church started to have bonfires after football games. The community, again so small, of course all the kids went for the smores, pizza, and to hang out with their friends. Of course, this enticed us to come to other events at the church like lock-ins, but there’s always a catch. At this time the Youth Minister was finally going to make his play at me. He told me, “You need to be baptized.”

I replied, “I have already been baptized.”

The response he gave me was puzzling to me at the time, “Being baptized as an infant doesn’t count, you have to be submerged for it to count.”

Thankfully, during this period of time, my family had finally gotten a computer with the internet, so I began to research what this guy was telling me. I was finally older and more confident, so much to his surprise, I defended my faith when for so long I had been sitting quietly just there to spend time with the girlfriend. My research at the time led me to illustrate how the early Church Father’s practiced infant baptism, and that Christ in the Gospel of Matthew declared his followers to baptize in the name of the trinity: “19 Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,”[1] Unfortunately, we kept going around in a circular debate on the topic.

In many ways, the Grace of God and the challenges of this minister led me to a deeper belief in other facets of my faith, for example, transubstantiation. As we continued to discuss theology I questioned his church’s position on the discourse of the Bread of Life found in the Gospel of John chapter Six. I explained that if he fundamentally believed that the Bible to be the infallible word of God, why didn’t he follow Christ’s commands:

54 Then Jesus said to them: Amen, amen I say unto you: Except you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you. 55 He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath everlasting life: and I will raise him up in the last day. 56 For my flesh is meat indeed: and my blood is drink indeed.[2]

After successfully refuting his challenges to my own faith, it was most unfortunate but the Youth Minister ostracized me and withdrew his friendship. Eventually, I no longer attended these after school events at this Church. Some time after, I came home from college and stopped to help at an ecumenical summer Bible School within the community—my friend’s mom was the director—and my ole’ priest was giving a talk, but I noticed something. I asked my friend’s mom where some of the community’s kids were and she said very sad, “Oh, that particular church didn’t want to send their kids where there were Catholics.”

Remember when the Youth Minister insisted on not disliking Catholics? It appears the Church only liked ones they felt they could convert. I do value the time spent with Youth Minister, he made me a better Catholic.

[1] Mt. 28:19 RSV

[2] Jn. 6:54-56 DRA

Taking on the Homosexual Movement – Crisis Magazine

“As international pressures and heroic actions of dissidents within the Soviet Bloc—along with “little old ladies praying the rosary for seventy years,” as a priest-professor of mine said at the time—were essential elements in communism’s collapse, so the intelligent, persistent, coordinated efforts of the defenders of sound culture—along with, to be sure, much prayer and sacrifice to the Almighty—can bring Western secular humanist leftism to heel.”

Readmore via Source: Taking on the Homosexual Movement – Crisis Magazine

Water and Wine: The Two Wills of Christ

Jan_Cossiers_-_The_wedding_at_Cana,_Jesus_blesses_the_water

Dear Charity of Christ,

I have been meaning to write this post for some time, only to lack sufficient time to put pen to paper, or rather, finger to keyboard. Of course, those words of choice fall short in the poetic prose of times gone past. Nonetheless, the topic of discussion here is the two wills that are manifested within the Incarnation our dear Lord and Savior.

I first came across a great explanation on the topic from Pope Benedict XVI in his Jesus of Nazareth series. It was in his second volume, Holy Week: From the Entrance into Jerusalem to the Resurrection, that Pope Benedict explored the role the two wills played in Christ during his prayer in the garden of Gethsemane. Pope Benedict explored the events of Gethsemane and deciphered their meaning for his work with a concise explanation of the established Christological doctrine of Christ’s two wills. For our proposes here, as well as using Pope Benedict’s work to illustrate another event in the Life of Christ by the Venerable Fulton Sheen, we will explore Pope Benedict’s explanation of Christological development, the events of Gethsemane, and how the two wills of Christ were present at the wedding of Cana.

Pope Benedict explains, “The Council of Nicea (325) had clarified the Christian concept of God. The three persions—Father, Son, and Holy Spirit—are one, in the one “substance” of God…The Council of Chalcedon (451)…the one person of the Son of God embraces and bears the two natures—human and divine—“without confusion and without separation.” [1] Pope Benedict explains that after these two councils had created a “formula” for explaining the nature of God it remained rather undeveloped. Pope Benedict writes, “many bishops after Chalcedon said that they would rather think like a fisherman than like Aristotle. The Formula remained obscure.”[2] The obscurity led to what Pope Benedict calls “the last of the great Christological heresies, known as ‘monotheletism’. There can be only one will within the unity of a person, its adherent maintained…Yet an objection comes to mind: What kind of a man has no will? Is a man without a will really a man?” [3]

Pope Benedict explains that fundamentally in the garden of Gethsemane is where in scripture one can see this theological explanation in action. “Thus the prayer ‘not my will, but yours (Lk 22:42) is truly the Son’s prayer to the Father through which the natural human will is completely subsumed into the “I” of the Son.”[4]

Of course, Pope Benedict’s explanation is greatly more detailed then my Catholic school days when the teacher explained to us that Jesus, being human, did no want to die out of fear and if he there was some other way he would take it. It’s a simple explanation that suffices for the minds of children, but yet, it is so simple it rings almost the most depth in truth on the topic. Christ is God who is fully human if Christ cannot feel fear in the same manner as us, would he be truly man? There answer as explained is No.

For many years after my Catholic school days, I must admit that I thought this event was the only one of its kind in the Gospels. The type of event that expressed a clear distinction from Christ’s human will and his divine will. However, recently through my readings of Life of Christ by the Venerable Fulton Sheen, I had come across another event that illustrates Christ’s human will during the wedding at Cana. Sheen explains that during the wedding at Cana when “His mother was asking for a miracle; He was implying that a miracle worked as a sign of His Divinity would be the beginning of His death. The moment He showed Himself before men as the Son of God, He would draw down upon Himself their hatred.”[5]

If one takes a look at the text prior the miracle at Cana, it illustrates a human hesitation from Christ because of his knowledge, as Sheen explains, that it will lead to his death.
“Woman, what is that to Me and to thee? My Hour is not yet come.”[6]

Sheen explains, “’What is that to Me and to thee?’ This is a Hebrew phrase which is difficult to translate into English. St. John rendered it very literally in Greek, and the Vulgate preserved it literalism…Know translates it freely, ‘Why dost thou trouble me with that?”[7]

An almost natural question from a Christian, or even someone who is aware of the nature of Christ, would ask, “Why would Christ respond in such a way?” As Sheen alludes to in his explanation of the events of Cana it’s because “He was telling His mother that she was virtually pronouncing a sentence of death over Him.”[8]

Christ knew the miracle of turning water into wine would lead him to the garden and later to the cross, however, just as he did at Gethsemane, He submitted to the divinely will of God within the Incarnation of his being for the purpose of redeeming the sin of mankind. The only sacrifice, a Godly one, that would suffice for man’s betrayal. He administered his first miracle knowing that it was the purpose of his Incarnation to be the lamb to atone for the sins of mankind.

Praise to you Lord, Jesus Christ.

[1] Pope Benedict, Jesus of Nazareth: Holy Week: From the Entrance into Jerusalem to the Resurrection (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 2011), 157-58.

[2] Ibid, 158.

[3] Ibid, 159-60.

[4] Ibid, 161.

[5] Fulton Sheen, Life of Christ (New York: Doubleday, 2008), 89.

[6] Jn. 2:4

[7] Sheen, 88.

[8] Ibid, 90.

Dear Archbishop Chaput: Trump is Clearly Better than Hillary

STEPHEN HERREID ON AUGUST 22, 2016

Archbishop Charles Chaput of the Diocese of Philadelphia has written an eloquent column about the current presidential election. His article seems intended more to comfort than to prescribe, and serves mostly as a kindly exhortation to prayer and careful deliberation during a dark time. I recommend readers click through and read it here—it is full of very good advice.

But I respectfully disagree with one point the good archbishop makes: He writes that Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump are both “so problematic” that “neither is clearly better than the other.”

In fact, the candidates differ immensely. Consider how they differ on just the issues of marriage, religious liberty, and abortion.

Marriage and Religious Liberty

Hillary Clinton:

Last year, in a speech to the Human Rights Campaign (the most moneyed and powerful LGBT lobbying group in the nation), Clinton proposed a “Lengthy Agenda for LGBT Equality,” according to the gay rights magazine The Advocate:

In her speech, Clinton promised that as president she will sign the Equality Act, which amends the 1964 Civil Rights Act and other parts of federal law to outlaw discrimination in housing, employment and everywhere in everyday life where LGBT people are still vulnerable.

Translation: The bill she promises to push through would be the last nail in the religious liberty coffin of Obergefell, criminalizing the rights of religious employers to, say, refuse to hire gay rights operatives as Catechism teachers.

Donald Trump:

While Hillary is promising to restrict religious liberty more, Trump has pledged to repeal one of the major restrictions that already exist: The Johnson Amendment. For an excellent analysis of the Johnson Amendment and what it would mean to repeal it, I recommend the article “Trump’s biggest religious freedom proposal is about 20 years late,” by Nate Madden at the Conservative Review.

“The Johnson Amendment is a change to the federal tax code in 1954 … that prohibits all nonprofit 501(c)(3) organizations from engaging in political campaigns or even endorsing candidates,” Madden explains. To many of us this sounds familiar and harmless, but since the Amendment was passed “the government has muzzled houses of worship and stands to ruin them financially if they step outside the state’s prescribed bounds.”

Given the fact that the government has lately shown itself capable of overt hostility to Christian morality, the repeal of the Amendment would be more than timely: it would be, as Madden argues, “late.”

The Unborn

Hillary Clinton:

The first speech Clinton delivered as the official Democratic Nominee was to a roomful of Planned Parenthood staffers and supporters. Abortion magnate Cecile Richards stood at the podium to introduce the presidential candidate, and praised Clinton as “our friend” and “our leader” in her opening remarks.

NPR later reported that the “love was mutual — Clinton addressed the organization as ‘family.’” As Lifesitenews’s Ben Johnson reports, Clinton even went so far as to say her campaign “belongs to” Planned Parenthood: “It belongs to the staff, the donors, and to the providers,” she said:

[Clinton] specifically mentioned Dr. Amna Dermish, an abortionist in Texas who was caught on video laughing as she said that removing a baby’s skull and brain intact is a goal she would “strive for.”

Finally, the platform of the party Hillary will represent is universally hailed (or decried) as more radically pro-abortion than ever, written in unblushing language which is echoed in the Washington Post’s horrifying recent puff-piece on Cecile Richards:

Gone is the vaguely conciliatory mantra of the past, the ideal of keeping abortion “safe, legal and rare” once advocated by Bill and Hillary Clinton. Today’s activists are bringing the passionately debated procedure into the light, encouraging women to talk openly about their abortions and giving the movement an unapologetic human face.

And they aren’t stopping there. Heading into a high-stakes presidential election, Planned Parenthood’s political arm and its supporters are rolling up their sleeves to help elect Hillary Clinton — who has done an about-face on the issue with a party platform that is pushing, for the first time, for full Medicaid funding for abortions. [Emphasis added]

Donald Trump:

In contrast, the Republican platform is arguably the most uncompromisingly pro-life it has ever been—as indeed it should be in the year following the Center for Medical Progress’s historic video exposé of the abortion industry’s gruesome side-business of baby parts trafficking. As for the candidate himself, Mr. Trump has promised to appoint pro-life judges to the Supreme Court if he wins the presidency.

Also reassuring is Trump’s hire of Kellyanne Conway as his campaign manager. During the Republican primary, Conway actually worked to defeat the shifty Trump and ensure the nomination of the solidly pro-life Texas Senator Ted Cruz.

Conway is a longtime friend of the pro-life movement. Of Trump’s simultaneous hire of Conway and Breitbart’s Steven Bannon, Pro-life leader and Susan B. Anthony List president Marjorie Dannenfelser remarked, “I have known and trusted Kellyanne Conway my entire professional life,” and “No two could be better positioned to help Donald Trump to take on and expose Hillary Clinton’s extremism in this general election.”

Even staunch “#NeverTrump” commentator Ben Shapiro, who has nothing but harsh words for the “sinister” Steven Bannon, seems impressed with the direction of the campaign in the last week, sharing several of Conway’s insights with his followers on social media. Washington Examiner’s Jim Antle went so far as to comment that, while everyone is “focused on Bannon,” the last two “Trump speeches feel more influenced by Kellyanne Conway.” Shapiro retweeted the remark.

Read more here: Dear Archbishop Chaput: Trump is Clearly Better than Hillary