Catholics For Choice

You guys crack me up. You’re clearly putting a crap-ton of money into your Facebook ad campaigns, enough for me to get treated to them every freaking time I log on to poke my friends. And I’ll admit it — I was proud of you at first. You’ve got beautiful pictures of young, lively minorities, giving me the pleasant impression that Catholics for Choice are a far more inclusive and joy-filled bunch than Us Normal Catholics. Good stuff. But forgive me friends, for I’m a curious kid. So I took one of the pictures you’ve been using for your ads, one currently housed on your Facebook page,

and did a quick Google Image search on that bad boy. Guess what I found? Not Catholics for Choice, as hip and with it as you are. No, I found this:

Now I’m left with two possibilities. You’ve either got an on-the-side and raving passion for the R&B of the 80′s (who doesn’t, right?) or you’re using stock photos of minorities to give people the impression of inclusiveness and diversity, because you can’t get real pictures. My suspicions were confirmed after I found this puppy:

Aaaaaawkward.

But on the bright-side, finding this out has helped me pinpoint the whole problem with your organization: It’s a joke. There’s a reason fewer people are calling themselves pro-choice than ever before, and it’s thanks to organizations like Catholics for Choice, desperately pretending to have anything remotely amounting to youth, joy and — oh yes — diversity. That’s right:

I was going to use a stock photo of a young Asian woman, previously featured on the cover of "Best Clean Rap of the 90's," but then I remembered how much you love Church hierarchy.

As it turns out, advocating the choice of killing children in the womb just ain’t as appealing as it used to be. So if I were you, and since you’ll only get so far on stock photos, I’d switch up your campaign. Go for a Lost Cause approach, full of serious-looking old people saying, “No matter if all the youth of the world begin to associate themselves with that filthy adjective, “pro-life”, we know what’s right. We’ll hold on to the truth.” You know, some sort of righteousness over popularity thing? (At least practice being the fringe opinion, because after that Gallup poll, you’re not allowed to pretend that only a few Bishops think the title “pro-choice” is evasive and whack, and are subsequently suppressing all dissent.)

But after trolling your Facebook wall for a few minutes, I realized you’re much more interested in informing the world that 98% of Catholic women use birth control, a stat which only stodgily conservative institutions like The Washington Post would say is blatantly ridiculous. Since that doesn’t have anything to do with “Choice,” might I suggest a change of name? Catholics for the Results of the Sexual Revolution Which Was Fun Where’d It Go?

Though I’m not sure about the “Catholics” part. Being Catholic means — of course — believing the teachings of the Catholic Church. (As you and I both know, it’s a religion, not an abstract wallowing in the “accepting message of Jesus.”) The Catholic Church teaches the following:

“Therefore We base Our words on the first principles of a human and Christian doctrine of marriage when We are obliged once more to declare that the direct interruption of the generative process already begun and, above all, all direct abortion, even for therapeutic reasons, are to be absolutely excluded as lawful means of regulating the number of children. Equally to be condemned, as the magisterium of the Church has affirmed on many occasions, is direct sterilization, whether of the man or of the woman, whether permanent or temporary. Similarly excluded is any action which either before, at the moment of, or after sexual intercourse, is specifically intended to prevent procreation—whether as an end or as a means.” (Humanae Vitae 14-16).

…and you — stop me if I’m wrong — don’t believe it. This makes you, quite specifically, not Catholic. (No one’s mad, just letting you know what’s up.) And then there’s the whole issue of Canon Law:

“The Church encourages the Christian faithful to promote or sustain a variety of apostolic undertakings but, nevertheless, prohibits any such undertaking from claiming the name Catholic without the consent of the competent ecclesiastical authority (see canon 216 of the 1983 Code of Canon Law).”

I’m gonna go out on a limb here and guess that you don’t have the “consent of competent ecclesiastical authority”. (From what I understand, this means you can be sued by Canon Lawyers. (Who, from what I understand, are badasses. (A few of whom who follow my blog. (Who should feel absolutely free to contact me to discuss the establishment of a Canon lawsuit against Catholics for Choice at any point.))))

So, back to your new name: People With Subscriptions to Shutterstock.com for the Results of the Sexual Revolution Which Was Fun Where’d It Go Don’t Sue Us Please.

Alright, enough fun, let’s get to business. I know you are not some abstract entity. You are a group of human beings — living, breathing, made for total communion with He Who Is Love Itself. I sincerely, seriously, and whole-heartedly desire to see you in Heaven. As such you should be aware that you’re living in heresy — “the obstinate post-baptismal denial of some truth which must be believed with divine and catholic faith” (Code of Canon Law c.751) — and are thus risking the salvation of your souls. (If you’re claiming the title Catholic, you should know this.)

I’m not judging you without judging myself — I often risk the salvation of my eternal soul, trading it willingly for some pleasure or convenience. So hear me as your brother and fellow sinner: Repent, repent, repent. Believe what Christ told Peter, that “on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.”

The Holy Church has bound the issues of contraception and abortion here on earth — do not expect to find them loosed in Heaven.

  • http://livingthesacrament.com/ Kristin Detloff

    I wish you could hear applause through your computer screen because I might just start clapping. :)

    • MotherSetonsDaughter

      OMG I did! (The clapping part, not the hearing…)

  • Fisherman

    I kind of want to send them an email saying “Are you serious?”

    But actually.

  • Amk8064

    I absolutely LOVE reading your blogs! Bravo on another well informed, while thoroughly entertaining, blog!

  • Bethany

    BRAVA!

  • http://profile.yahoo.com/E7UC2LQMDWDXUPYC5PVXIFOQHQ Joshua

    Amazing…

  • Bryan Holt

    Whoomp, there it is.

  • Olivier Coutant

    “Judge not, lest you be judged.”
    You’re doing it right, I think.

    • Martha

      Why do people always quote this line, but but no one ever uses the one where we are supposed to tell our brother if he sins, and if he doesn’t listen bring another to talk to him and if he still doesn’t listen to bring him to the church and if he still doesn’t listen then let him go on and have nothing to do with him?

      • Abadilla

        Martha, That’s because in our society we are supposed to be “nice” to one another and that means, don’t be impolite and tell someone the truth. On top of that we are not supposed to be judgmental, get it?
        Lots of Catholics and even some priests misused “Judge not, lest you be judged,” and it is convenient for them because that way, they don’t have to be judgmental!

  • http://www.facebook.com/balf11 Brian Formica

    I’m going to troll the comments while they’re still few and say:

    “I’d still love to see a Marian post? Plz? K tks bye!”

  • http://www.facebook.com/balf11 Brian Formica

    Also. Nice job on this one. :)

  • Mark Nel

    Excellent!!!!

  • Max Potts

    Catholics for Choice banned and deleted me after one post. Those middle aged white women may lack much in sound argumentation and theology, but they sure are diligent.

    • Kelly

      I got banned as well.

      • KP

        Heh. Me too. All I said was, “Bold-faced truth can be painful, but for your own sake, beloveds.” with a link to this article. Hum.

      • http://coffeeandacardigan.blogspot.com/ Louise

        I got banned after I suggested they become Episcopalian instead of being a part of this Catholic “boy’s club.” How I’ll miss them!

    • Tom

      Lol, I just posted “Hey I just met you. And this is crazy. But you’re not Catholic. So ban me, maybe?” Awaiting the b& hammer.

      • Tom

        Lol, I can’t post anymore, so I’m assuming I’m banned. Am I cool now, guys? lol

        • musiciangirl591

          very cool :)

      • musiciangirl591

        i got banned too, for stating the truth :P

      • KP

        that’s hilarious lol

    • Marina S.

      Yep, me too. All I did was reply to a comment that was mocking our bishops…. It needed replied to, though.

      • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=831768216 Shannon Conson Wendt

        WOW that was fast! I got banned after 2 comments! I was hoping those old ladies would be sleeping by now! Darn! I had a great comment too about Margaret Sanger promoting birth control to solve the ‘black problem’ and that other great Sanger quote about it beign the most merciful thing to do, for a large family to murder it’s infant members… Well, maybe they’re already Sanger experts…

    • musiciangirl591

      i got banned too, after i told them that they couldn’t be for choice and Catholic too lol

    • Kelly

      Hey, you can still write a recommendation even after they block you.

      • Kelly

        Well, I wrote a recommendation after being banned… And now I can’t even see recommendations. Have I been super-banned?

        • musiciangirl591

          maybe, there should be a facebook group besides Catholics Against “Catholics for Choice” called I was banned from CFC, millions of people would like that ;)

          • Kelly

            I can see recommendations again… Facebook is just trying to confuse me… I agree, that would be a fun group.

          • musiciangirl591

            they banned me from recommendations lol

    • Abadilla

      Hi. Max,

      You have the courage and patience I don’t have. I simply could not go in there for a nano second without having an anxiety attack!

  • Amanda

    I’ve always disliked “Catholic for Choice” because their name does not coincide with their description and I always felt it to be extremely misleading. Well, thanks for sealing the deal for me aha

    • musiciangirl591

      as i once saw on facebook, vegetarians for meat eating!

  • Proud Catholic

    I think you consistently move me to Proud Catholic tears.

  • http://twitter.com/CaffdCatholicMa Karianna

    80s R&B= Catholic Diversity. Bwahahahaha! (and yes, I am a Catholic woman who happens to be bi-racial (black and white.)) That’s just plain old lazy.

  • Jessie

    GREAT!!

  • http://doubleplusundead.com/ AliceAitch

    Maybe they’re trying to say that it’s the minority Catholics who get abortions. Kinda like putting Planned Parenthood in minority neighborhoods.

  • QDefenestration

    Euurrrgghhh they claim thomas’ proposition of delayed ensoulment as proof that the church’s teaching about abortion has changed over time. That’s. That’s really. Bleeehhhhhrrrrkkk

    • http://twitter.com/oh_kait Kait Bertrand

      Fr. Pacholczyk, from the Nat’l Catholic Bioethics Center, has a really great article about why delayed ensoulment is not a valid defense, summed up here:

      “The human person, then, even in his or her most incipient form as an embryonic human being, must always be safeguarded in an absolute and unconditional way, and speculation about the timing of personhood cannot alter this fundamental truth.”

      Here is the full article for those who care to read why. It is a grave matter, very beautifully laid out. (http://www.ncbcenter.org/Page.aspx?pid=305)

  • Betsy Rheaume

    Every time I see it in the sidebar I click on the link. When I bought a facebook ad, it cost me .20 per click. I figure if they won’t listen to reason, maybe they’ll listen to their pocketbook.

  • MK

    I posted this on another thread only to find out that it was a year old…so I’m reposting it here.

    When I grow up I want to think like Augustine, sing like Bette Midler and write like you.

    That was after reading the last thread. Now you’re just rubbing my face it.

    Thanks.

  • Jane Hartman

    I was banned, too.

  • http://oxyparadoxy.blogspot.com/ The Ranter

    You should have brought up the fact that they’re being funded by Playboy. Whaaaaaaaa??????

    Link to source: http://www.dianedew.com/CFFC.htm

    • Clarissa

      wow….absolutely horrific!

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100001837523704 Matt LaMar

    Awesome! My friends have been trolling it the past few days. I was blocked rather quickly (chickens!).

    I wish I could take credit for showing you this page, but I think you saw it before I posted it on your wall last night ;)

    • Marc Barnes

      I saw it before, but you inspired me. Thank you!

  • http://backoftheworld.com/ Ryan M.

    Fact: canon lawyers are indeed badasses… thanks for another great post!

  • http://www.facebook.com/stizzle Scott Foshizzle Thompson

    I think it’s time for the Holy See to get serious about excommunications…

    You cannot be Catholic and pro-choice. period. There’s no excuse.

    • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

      Sure there is — lots of us Catholics are pro-abortion, but it just never comes up in conversation. Maybe you should bother to ask some of the people who sit next to you at mass on Sunday, instead of just assuming that all of us are “pro-life.”

      • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

        And how exactly would you “get serious” about excommunications? Make us sign a pledge before we get into the communion line, or even cross the threshold of the church?

        But again, as I said in another comment here, I don’t understand the group “Catholics for Choice,” and what they’re trying to do. The Church isn’t going to change — you either accept it all, you accept some of it and be a cafeteria Catholic, or you accept none of it, and don’t waste your time.

        • JoAnna Wahlund

          And of those 3, option (b) is the worst, and the one that puts your soul in the most jeopardy.

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            Yes, I’m definitely a (b). And I don’t lose any sleep over it.

          • JoAnna

            Yet here you are, reading an orthodox Catholic blog…

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            Yep — because a friend of mine linked to it on Facebook, and it’s an interesting post, and I bookmarked the site. I don’t just read sites with which I agree, I read all kinds.

            And I’m not even here “trolling,” to take pride in being banned, the way lots of folks here seem to be doing over on the “Catholics for Choice” FB page. Go figure!

          • http://twitter.com/CaffdCatholicMa Karianna

            I will share that I mentioned a few of the health risks associated with contraception with cited journal links, and I was banned. I don’t know if I would consider that trolling per se, more like offering additional information for which I was banned. How are women to make an informed choice when information is being withheld?

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            Ha, shall I post links to pregnancy/childbirth complications, so women can make an equally informed choice to avoid them?
            There are some commenters above who are delighting in being banned, and I somehow guess they did more than just post links there.

          • http://twitter.com/CaffdCatholicMa Karianna

            In a perfect world, both men and women would be fully aware of the risks associated with sex and, as an extension, pregnancy. Perhaps we will cease to be so laissez faire about sex. Right now, for many sex and pregnancy are so removed from each other that the latter is seen as a surprise result of the former. But I am of the opinion that one cannot truly make an informed choice without information. I can’t tell you the number of well-educated women I have spoken with who have NO CLUE how their bodies work or what contraception does.

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            Also, I want to say, I am enjoying commenting here. Most people are very civil, even though I know my opinions aren’t popular, to say the least.

          • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=831768216 Shannon Conson Wendt

            Wow L! My heart is aching that you are so hard hearted! I’m certain that 98% of the 98% of Catholics on BC, don’t have any idea that it causes the death of a newly formed baby. And that if people talked about BC being abortifacient, then they wouldn’t use it anymore… But you, have no problem with killing innocent life? You don’t have to like babies, but to want them dead? That’s really sad…
            Sex outside of marriage isn’t good for you. If you really searched your soul, I’m sure you would find out that you know, it’s not what your heart truly desires. Sex is designed to create lifelong bonds! That’s how are bodies are designed! We release oxytocin which creates a real bond with the other person. When you keep breaking that bond that was created, you leave scars… This is why the Church teaches what it does. Because the Church loves you! And wants what is the best and most healthy thing for you! I know it seems counter intuitive to deny yourself of something that seems so good. But it’s good only in the right context, outside of that, it’s only a shadow, a counterfeit of what it was created to be. You have bought a counterfeit that the world has sold you! And it will cost you your life! Christ set up the Church and promised us He would guide it! And if you look at why the Church as been so strong on these issues, it’s because it’s SOOO important to who we are as human beings.

            I”m glad that you still consider yourself Catholic, and you’re right, once a Catholic, always a Catholic! Even if you decide to leave ;) You ARE Catholic, and if you are also a seeker of Truth, then I encourage you to read JPII’s writings on the Theology of the Body (Or Christopher West’s writings or talks on it. He is a little less heady and easier to read.) You’ll be shocked to hear the Pope talk so much about good sex :) It’s true! The Pope wants you to have good sex! That’s what God created sex for, to be enjoyed! But it can only truely be enjoyed in a relationship of total self donation. Without that, sex becomes a lie…

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            I don’t believe I said anything about sex outside of marriage — that’s a different subject all together. How did it come up?

          • Maria

            You said you had a “partner” rather than husband, which usually implies non-marriage. Unless you’re British.

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            Civilly married since 1991, not married in the Church. I prefer the term “partner” most of the time.

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            Also, Shannon’s comment predates my first reference to my partner.

            Maybe she just assumed that all people who are not pro-life probably are on the pill and have multiple sexual partners?

          • BeckyN

            “I know your deeds, that you are neither cold nor hot; I wish you were cold or hot. So, because you are lukewarm, neither hot nor cold, I am about to spit you out of My mouth.” Rev 3:15-16

          • Martha

            You should. Jesus said he would vomit the leukwarm out of his mouth. Cafeteria catholicism is being leukwarm.

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            I will enjoy picturing myself being vomited out of Jesus’ mouth.

          • Cwgoode

            woh!! This comment right here… I will enjoy picturing myself being vomited out of Jesus’ mouth. that is the equivalent of saying I enjoy picturing seeing myself thrown into an eternal lake of fire….. Please examine your conscience….

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            Fire, vomit – different.

          • Catholic Minnesotan

            yeah, one is where you come from, the other is where you go.

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            You lost me there…

          • Popeye

            if you believe in the Eucharist then you must believe it’s connection with salvation that Jesus pointed out. “unless you eat my flesh and drink my blood, you will not have life within you.”

            is that not a priority for you? if you’re going to exist for eternity either in heaven or in hell, it’d behoove you to give up a little now to get a whole lot later on. it’s not easy, and it’s not always enjoyable, but it is worth it.

            one doesn’t simply deny oneself God because one morally objects to something the church says. it’s done out of admission for living in a state of sin. if i commit a mortal sin, and i don’t go to confession for it, i should not receive communion. if i commit venial sin and am unrepentant for such, i should not receive communion. although venial sins are forgiven at the beginning of every mass, you can’t be forgiven for something you’re not sorry for.

            and remember, he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood and does not believe, eats and drinks a judgement upon himself.

            a good audio thing to look up with regards to the mass and the eucharist is called the mass explained by fr larry richards. it’s worth a look see.

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            I think the Eucharist is for devout Catholics, and I am not one.

            However, I don’t believe receiving it is the only way to salvation. Nor do I waste much time thinking about the concept of “eternity” — I am focused on living an honest, productive life in this world.

          • SpokaneCatholic

            It sounds like maybe you have also rejected the Church’s teaching on the afterlife…? If so, what do you think happens to you after you die?

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            I look forward to finding out, hopefully after a productive life.

          • SpokaneCatholic

            And then you’ll find out that Catholic teaching – all of it – is, indeed, correct, while you spend the rest of eternity in great discomfort. Are you sure it’s worth trading the eaternal Beatitude for your as-Catholic-as-I-wanna-be here on earth? Last time I checked, eternity was a really long time to be wrong.

          • Badass MF

            SNORT re: as-Catholic-as-I-want-to-be

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            heh!

          • Abadilla

            You stated, “Nor do I waste much time thinking about the concept of “eternity” — I am focused on living an honest, productive life in this world.” Nothing wrong with focusing in living an honest productive life in this world, but since taxes and death are for sure for all of us, if I were you, I would also worried about your eternal destination, since “eternal” is much, much more longer than our lives on this planet.

          • JAGreene86

            Eucharist is for everyone who loves God. It is GOD OFFERING HIMSELF TO US! He desires to be one with us…the merge of humanity and divinity. To miss that is to miss 99%, if not the whole 100%, of what God’s love is all about.

          • JAGreene86

            Correction, it is 100%. All God’s love is centered around the Eucharist. Everything else outside of it is the effect of it…but without the Eucharist, the world would not know God’s love for us.

          • musiciangirl591

            father larry! i know him! i worked a retreat with him! he yelled at me a couple of times!

          • Howard

            Why are all of you bothering replying to L.? She’s obviously a feminist of the religious variety — a new religion.

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            I am indeed a feminist. The Vatican no doubt would call me a “radical” one, too.

            I imagine that people bother to reply to me for the same reason that they enjoy getting “banned” on the Facebook site.

            Or maybe they are honestly offering their deeply held views as I am offering mine, in an exchange of ideas, which is what blog comment boxes are for?

          • http://coffeeandacardigan.blogspot.com/ Louise

            Please keep posting, L! These discussions are so important. Odd question perhaps, but do you believe in the Eucharist?

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            I refrain from communion out of respect for it, and out of acknowledgement that what is truly in my heart puts me outside the so this suggests that I do.

            I am humbled by all that I do not know and understand, and transubstantiation
            is certainly in this category.

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            missing word above (don’t know why it did that):

            “…puts me outside the DEVOUT…”

          • musiciangirl591

            i’m a feminist too! pro life, like elizabeth cady stanton and susan b anthony!

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            While I am not pro-life, I do admire the group “Feminists for Life.” Are you familiar with it?

          • musiciangirl591

            yes i am! :)

          • Popeye

            because if you really want the good of another simply for their sake, then you’ll lay it all out there for them to hear. shed light on everything you can; and if they still reject it, THEN you can shake the dust off your feet and be on your way.

          • Abadilla

            Many of us reply to her because deep down we hope to make her think twice about her shaky belief system. We have two options. 1. Be harsh with her and she will disappear, or 2. Engage her on her arguments even when some of her arguments can be very infuriating!
            See, ultimately, we don’t know what is going on in her mind.

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            My intent is not infuriate, but I admit that nothing I have seen here has made me think twice about what is in my heart. One’s opinions should be able to stand up to the test of other’s questions.

            And I will repeat, I am impressed with the civility and compassion of the commenters here.

        • Maria

          Can we get some vocabulary straight? A baptized person who obstinately rejects some truth of the faith is a heretic, not a “cafeteria catholic” or any other euphemism. See quote in the original article, Canon Law 751.

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            I wasn’t aware that “cafeteria Catholic” was a euphemism. I thought it was intended as an insult, actually.

            “Heretic” is fine, though.

      • http://www.facebook.com/people/Curtis-Bratcher/1391444053 Curtis Bratcher

        if you are pro-abortion, then you are not Catholic!

        • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

          “Cafeteria” Catholics and dissenting Catholics are still Catholics — even excommunicated Catholics are Catholic. it’s baptism that defines a Catholic, not actions/heretical opinions.

          • JoAnna Wahlund

            So, why be Catholic if you believe that the Church teaches error? What’s the point?

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            What’s the point? I dunno. I honestly don’t. It would be far easier to turn my back on ALL of it, instead of just some teachings about sexuality.

          • JoAnna

            The fact that you’re reluctant to do so might just be your conscience, trying to get your attention…

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            Somehow, I don’t think so. I am human and have moral failings that trouble me greatly, but I am thoroughly at peace with my views on abortion/contraception.

          • JoAnna

            And yet, you remain in a Church that teaches these things are intrinsic moral evils. Why?

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            It teaches other things I admire, with which I agree, and to which I aspire.

          • Ursa

            So you’re saying that in your short life, in comparison to the life of the Church, you have accurately disproved what hundreds of scholars, priests, Saints, and millions of others have concluded. Christ allowed all of those people to be deceived? Not one Pope figured out what you have figured out? There is a reason that the Church needs infallibility on teachings and that is so that its members can TRUST its teachings that have been established for 2000 years.

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            Yes, I do believe I know what’s best for me more than the Church does. But this comment is turning into a tapeworm….

          • Geoffrey Miller

            I am the tapeworm of the Walrus!

          • Carmelite

            tapeworms are hidden in the buttocks of the ill…if this is a tapeworm to you, then your conscience is ill.

          • JoAnna

            Such as?

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            Honesty, integrity, humility, service to the poor — I could go on, but this comment space is shrinking too much.

          • JAGreene86

            This is a sign of lack of faith in God. I would encourage you to meditate on this passage:

            “Trust God with all your heart and lean NOT on your own understanding…”

            Proverbs 3:5

          • ms

            Yes, L.: you listed humility as a teaching of the Church that you admire. Do you understand what the word means?

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            I do. I am humbled before all I do not know. But I know what is in my own heart.

          • ms

            “humbled by all [you] do not know”? You do not know what’s in store for you when you die. (Hint: It could be really bad.) And “what is in [your] heart”? For one thing, we so easily deceive ourselves. Also, our hearts are changeable. With prayer and obedience, our hearts can be formed to God’s will. Relying on what is in your heart – when it is so opposed to the Church’s teaching – is the definition of pride (the opposite of humility), with potentially eternal consequences.

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            I have no fear of Hell.

          • Carmelite

            then you will be very comfortable being tortured for eternity by demons who are the most hideous of all creation, whilst your eatten by hellish insects day in and day out pleading for God’s mercy.

          • Carmelite

            “The heart is deceitful above all things. Who can know
            it?” (Jer 17:9).

          • http://www.facebook.com/matthew.rice.d Matt Rice

            Hey L,
            I didn’t always completely agree with the Church’s teachings about sexuality either, but then again I had never really thought about it too much. I’d really encourage you to do some research. Humanae Vite is a great place to start. Although I still consider people who disagree with the Church to be Catholicsm, disagreeing with the Church is no trivial matter. Research the issues you disagree with the Church about. Read the Church’s own stuff. Often, I’ve seen arguments that are supposedly the Chuch’s circulating that are not the actual reasoning presented in Church documents. I Challenge you to really look into the Church’s position and pray about it.
            Good luck and God bless,
            Matt

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            Thanks — I’ve read Humanae Vitae itself, and other Catholic doctrinal materials based on it.

            I also thought this was interesting:
            http://www.amazon.com/Ratzingers-Faith-Theology-Pope-Benedict/dp/0199207402

          • Abadilla

            L. Let us say you believe Christ is truly present in the Eucharist. If so, that is a “truth” you believe from the Church, right? So, why would you believe that particular truth but you reject the truth that abortion is evil? Why would you believe that the same Church that teaches us the Eucharist is truly Christ is wrong about abortion being evil? See, all dissenters must come to the realization that it is untenable to say that a Church can teach us all some truths but other tenets are simply false. The Church teaches “all” that it teaches is true, whether it be in the moral, doctrinal, or social order.
            Now, if you were to say, “I have a problem with certain teachings and I struggle with them,” I would say, “welcome to the club, we all struggle with certain truths, but we are not denying or dissenting from some truths merely because they are difficult for us to accept intellectually.”

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            I am not entirely sure that Christ is present in the Eucharist. I don’t disbelieve it, but I have no way to empirically prove it, one way or another. It is a matter of faith, and where faith fails, reason prevails.

          • CatholicMinnesotan

            That is not entirely true. I currently have a belief that there is a God. Were I to lose the faith I have in that belief, my reason would not be capable of determining whether or not there is a God, as is proved by the number of “intelectual” atheists

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            I believe the only reasonable answer to the question of, “Is there a God?” posed to someone who lacks faith is, “I don’t know,” since one can’t be proved.

          • Abadilla

            Hi L. You stated among other things, “Where faith fails, reason prevails.”
            Thomas Aquinas would say, “There is no conflict between reason and faith, between religion and Science, for “all” religious and scientific truth comes from one source, God.” God is the source of all truth.
            There are truths that can be verified empirically, and some that can’t be verified empirically, but it does not follow that those one can’t verify empirically do not fall under the category of “truth.” I’m sure your parents love you, but that love is a truth that can’t be verified empirically in a scientific lab yet, it remains the truth. It was Christ on the sixth chapter of St. John who told us he remains in the Eucharist. Since He is God and the source of all truth, why would you or I or anyone doubt that He taught us the truth?

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            I don’t believe in the “truth” that God could possibly be against abortion.

          • Meyer Wil

            Then you are not, by definition, Catholic. Being Catholic is not about selections on a menu — it’s a package deal.

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            I am, by definition, a classic “cafeteria” Catholic.

          • JAGreene86

            So the Catholicism is not from God then. If what you said is true, then anything that is opposite that Truth is not from God…so, in essence, you are following a heretical religion, based on your own belief on what is True. God will never contradict Himself. Either you’re wrong, or the Catholic Church is wrong. By believing that and still remaining in the Catholic Church is living a contradiction.

          • wrking twrds hvn

            Why do you think God would be ok with people wanting to kill those he has created? Psalm 139 is a wonderful one to meditate on for this topic.

          • http://www.facebook.com/joshua.carias.54 Joshua Francis Peter Carias

            Do you believe that God is against murder? Presuming that you do, how do you rationalize abortion as anything but murder?

          • Carmelite

            John 10:3 To him the porter openeth; and the sheep hear his voice: and he calleth his own sheep by name, and leadeth them out.[4] And when he hath let out his own sheep, he goeth before them: and the sheep follow him, because they know his voice. [5] But a stranger they follow not, but fly from him, because they know not the voice of strangers.

          • Kristen inDallas

            I’ve seen a lot of posts about whether or not you are “Catholic.” I think it’s important for folks to realize that many people on their jouney into, out of, or returning to the church go through a period of not being completely “in communion with” the church, but still identify with the label as a goal (if not a completely accurate description of the self). We need to allow room for that.
            While I totally disagree with you on abortion, there are plenty of teachings that I don’t completely agree with or understand. But I don’t take communion. That is the first teaching of the Church I learned in grade school that resonated with me in a way that none of the other stuff did. Taking communion means you accept the fullness of the faith, taking it without doing so is like a lie to God. So when everyone goes up to take mass, I sit in the pew and pray – tell Him that I’m sorry, but that there are some crucial things that I still don’t understand, and for help getting my head staight with my heart. I don’t believe He’s going to change His mind on any of it… but I do believe He can be patient on me changing mine.

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            I don’t take it, either.

          • JAGreene86

            Faith should never fail. Reason fails.

            Another passage for you:

            “Blessed are those who believe but yet have not seen.”

            John 20:29

          • Skitch

            I don’t think this is correct. Baptism seals us as Christians not Catholics. The Church recognizes most baptism performed in other denominations as valid, provided the proper form and matter are used.

            If an individual has procured an abortion or assisted another to have an abortion then that individual has in fact excommunicated yourself. I know this to be true as I speak from experience. Until this is confessed and correct steps are taken each and every time a person in such circumstances receives the Eucharist, they do so in a serious state of mortal sin.

            I am deeply grieved sorry that you do not lose any sleep over your pro-abortion position. In this day and age there is no intelligent reason to deny the person hood of the fetus. Eternity is eternity, we are on this earth for just a mere second in relationship to eternity. Our choices will determine where we spend eternity at this point your choices seem clear. Please I beg you to reconsider. Please re-examine who you are as a creation of a living God who loves you so completely that nothing you or I could do would ever impede that love. He is also a just God whose love and mercy demands pure justice. There are real and eternal consequences for our choices.

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            Skitch, “excommunication” is not synonymous with “no longer Catholic.” Look it up if you don’t believe me.
            All I know is what is in my heart, and I simply don’t agree with the Church about certain things, and can’t pretend that I do. Doing so means I would be a hypocrite, and I think it’s better to be an honest dissenter.

          • Sarah in Missouri

            Dear L and JoAnna,

            I would just like to mention how much I appreciate your open and humble conversation. I don’t mean to appear condescending. I side with JoAnna’s views on the matter, but it gives me hope to see you discuss your opposing views with such civility. Thank you.

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            I, too, greatly appreciate the civility here.

            My tone/sense of humor is naturally snarky, and I am trying to restrain here that because I admire the spirit of good will in the vast majority of responses to my comments here.

          • Abadilla

            An “honest dissenter would leave the Church for a church he or she feels confortable in. Now, if a dissenter doesn’t mind dissenting, then what is his purpose for staying in a Church he clearly believes does not teach him the whole truth?

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            As I said above, I was born into the Church, and although I came to reject some of its teachings, I don’t reject all of it, so here I have stayed.

          • CLCali13

            All Catholics are Christians, but not all Christians are Catholics. A Catholic Christian is one who is by Baptisim AND belief in full communion with the Holy See. If you have a diffrence in moral belief on a subject as clearly defined (by the Holy See) as Abortion, then you do not desire to be in full communion with them. That does not (of course) revoke your Baptisim, but does bring you out of communion with the Church. To publically profess that you are a Catholic, while also professing beliefs contrary to church teaching, brings scandal on the church (and grave sin upon yourself) I would suggest getting with your parish priest to discuss why the Church is teaching what it is, before you make hard claims to disbelief. I, for one, simply did not fully understand the Church teachings. Best wishes and God Bless.

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            You would suggest getting together with my parish priest?
            It’s uncanny, how many people here believe I have never talked to priests about my views.
            I have.

          • Shawn

            What did your priest say then?

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            See above. I don’t claim that my views align with the Church’s teachings. If I did, that would be a problem.

            Also, I think maybe some people are reading arrogance into my written words that isn’t really there.

          • ms

            Did your conversations with priests go about like your posts on this blog? Where you keep asserting your view, as if you have intellectual and moral superiority over the entire Church?

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            Yes, I do indeed keep asseting my views. The vast majority of priests with whom I have spoken respected my views and my honesty. Only one stood up and opened the door for me to leave his office when I told him I disagreed with the Chruch’s teachings on aborttion and homosexuality.

          • Lux et Veritas

            L

            Have you ever considered that you may also be “shown the door” by God on judgement day? So many individuals on this thread have lovingly and charitably shown you the truth, yet you continually reject everything out of hand that you have been taught in this forum.

            Why not prayerfully and humbly open your heart to Jesus and ask Him to fill your heart with truth? Are you able to set aside pride and stubbornness and submit yourself in total humility to his tender mercies? Are you woman enough to approach the Lord and pray …not my will, by Thy will be done?

            You say that you like going to mass so stepping inside a church should not be a problem. Challenge yourself to go sit in a pew when there is silence in church, during Eucharistic Adoration is ideal (but not necessary). You can even ask our Mother, Mary to help you. Ask Jesus if what you believe about abortion and sexuality is true -just lay it all out for him and be open to his answers.

            Remember what JP II said: “Be not afraid”!

            (And, BTW…take your fingers out of your ears first)
            Remove your fingers from your ears

            L, you apparently have no problem being in a church- you say that you like being there.

          • Lux et Veritas

            Sorry about the repitions – comboxes are challenging for iPad users

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            Response to the “tapeworms” below – I guess I am not “woman enough,” because I have prayed long and hard, over many decades, and did not get the answers that the Church insists are the only correct ones.

          • BADBECKY

            You go on about being a dissenter and bringing a ‘scandal’ on the church, to take ourselves to a priest to get right with the church with priests and bishops who publicly yammer about those poor nuns who are too big for their britches and need to be reined in. Puhleez! Rome is operating like any other dictatorship, but is a burocratic mess. Acting as though the Church is impurvious to change is to deny that the history of the Church does in fact include women of power at one time. I have the right to express my sorrow in what my Church is becoming.

          • Carmelite

            Women do have the power but this power is very different in the scope of how women should conduct themselves in the church. “True renewal” comes from “repentance” and “conversion, rather than with a change of structures.”

          • JAGreene86

            Will God accept someone who says “I don’t agree with all the of the commandments, but I agree with some of them, can I get into Heaven?”?

          • Maryberry1998

            I have connected strongly with the church; Pro-Life is almost a necessity. You cannot simply be Catholic and believe in murder.

          • wrking twrds hvn

            I suggest you research relativism. I pray that you get back on to the path that will lead you to heaven. Unbind your heart.

          • Carmelite

            because you are born into a faith does not make you Catholic.

          • Latinhadin

            I, I, I, I. It’s about what Our Lord requires. Don’t get me wrong, all of us have this issue on different things.

            Have you talked to your spiritual director or priest about this?

            Have you ever looked at the history of the church and what society was before Christianity spread?

            The exposure of children, etc.

            When one is unworthy of life, all are.

            I’ve seen it… you don’t want it.

            Trust in the Lord in what’s right; You’ll never go wrong.

            I’ll remember you at Mass. God bless.

          • http://profile.yahoo.com/EZ5UJBPOWKRH26IRAXP33BLT4Y John

            Baptism brings you into the Catholic Church. Excommunication separates you from the Catholic Church. Supporting abortion incurs latae sentenciae excommunication. There is no need of a formal action from the bishop. Baptism leaves an indelible mark on your soul. Dissenters and Cafeteria Catholics who are not subject to excommunication are still Catholics but Catholics who are very likely in mortal sin assuming the conditions have been met. Their salvation is in jeopardy if they do not repent. Baptism cleanses your soul and puts you in a state of Sanctifying Grace. Mortal sin removes that Sanctifying Grace and leaves you spiritually dead. You cannot be clever with God.

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            The thing is — I CAN”T repent, for what I am truly not sorry for.

            I’ve never had an abortion, I just decided in my heart that they aren’t wrong.

            If this is what I believe, any “repentence” would be false and hollow. I can SAY I am pro-life, and yet, I can’t force my heart to believe it. Believe me, when I was a devout teenager, I did try.

          • Abadilla

            Hi. L,

            You stated, “I’ve never had an abortion, I just decided in my heart that they aren’t wrong.” How does one “objectively” decide that? Anyone who has witnessed one of the several types of abortion can’t possibly say, “they aren’t wrong.” Many in the pro-life movement are accused of being “propagandists” and worse when they show, in pictures or movies, what an abortion looks like, yet, I can’t believe anyone with a conscience can see the destruction of the unborn, and say “they aren’t wrong.” I teach a course on the Holocaust and a thousand words of mine can never say what a single picture of the Holocaust can say to my young people. When I talk about the Armenian genocide or the Cambodian genocide I show pictures. Once on a T.V. interview with a Pro-Choice lady I volunteered to show pictures of abortion and she threatened to leave the stage because she knew all her arguments would come to nothing once the public could see with their own eyes what an abortion looks like. I’m sorry L, I just can’t believe my eyes when you state that you decided in your heart abortions are not wrong!
            This is precisely why you need the Church, to guide you through life because secular society would simply react to your words by saying, “O.K, you are O.K., I’m O.K. and everyone is happy!”

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            It was actually a pro-life video, shown to my CCD class when I was 15, that made me think about abortion seriously for the first time ever — and decide that I would have one, in some circumstances, and therefore I was not pro-life.

            I have never had an abortion, but I do know exactly what a 7-week old embryo looks like because I had a miscarriage once.

            So I do know something of what I speak.

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            In fact, I should add, the war analogy is very apt.

            Abortion and war are best AVOIDED. It would be best if neither ever happened, because the circumstances that brought them about didn’t happen.

            I admire the pro-life view the way I admire the pacifist view – I don’t share either belief, but both are principled and (usually) compassionate.

            But I believe making laws against abortion would be as pointless as making laws against war.

          • Kristen in Dalals

            I am also a “practical” pacifist… meaning I think it would be nice, but…

            The difference between war and abortion though is that one involves violence between two grown men whohave made a choice (if war is done “right) the other involves violence between a baby and it’s (usually young and vulnerable) mother. You’re absolutely right that there are some perfectly good reasons to justify a woman’s choice to have an abortion (rape, incest, etc)… none of them can make the act “good.” If a person kills someone in self defense, or to defend his country, or under durress, we forgive the PERSON who had to make that tough choice. But the fact that there are sometimes tough choices doesn’t mean that killing in general is somehow not wrong.

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            It is worth avoiding situations in which killing is an option.

          • LAS

            I totally agree.

          • http://andrewensley.com/ Andrew

            I agree with you in that both war and abortion are terrible and must be eliminated. However, where one involves at least one guilty party that must be stopped and sometimes there is no other way (war), the other involves an innocent child being killed who would be gladly accepted by millions of loving parents waiting to adopt (abortion).

            For this reason, they are not morally comparable.

          • Abadilla

            Hi. L, so, let me see if I understand you correctly. Even after seeing a video of an abortion you still think in certain circumstances you could do the same, right? Now, if I didn’t get you before, now is harder to understand your line of reasoning even more.
            You even went so far, by your own admission, through the pain of a miscarriage, an spontaneous abortion the Church does not judge as anything but an accident. However, you got offended when I wrote about abortions being “the butchering of children,” but I did not use the term first, Blessed Mother Teresa of Calcutta used it first at a Prayer Breakfast right in from of pro-choicers Bill and wife.
            L. if you see a picture of a Holocaust victim would you be able to say, “I find nothing wrong with that?” I’m trying to figure out how your reasoning works. For the life of me, I don’t get you and I’m an old man with lots of experience about life.

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            Correction, I did not go through the “pain” of a miscarriage — as I said, it was an unwanted baby, so I felt only happy relief to be free of a burden I didn’t want to bear.

            I did not say I DESIRED an abortion, just that confronting the reality of what an abortion really is , I was forced to admit to myself that I, too, would have one, in some circumstances.

            As I said, it is this knowledge based on self-reflection that made me an ardent supporter of legal abortion — and I have remained so, many decades later.

          • JAGreene86

            I don’t know how any parent would feel “relief” after having a miscarriage. That scares me.

            I think that was a sign from God saying to you “see how callous your heart is? I took your own flesh and blood from you, and you’re ‘relieved’.”

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            Had it been a wanted pregnancy, I imagine my reaction would have been different. But the experience gave me a lot of insight into why somewomen seek abortions, and reinforced my beliefs.

            Not every baby is a wanted baby.

          • JAGreene86

            That is sad.

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            Actually, I was quite HAPPY. My prayers were answered!

          • JeanMarie

            Ma’am, my mom prayed for me to die. I was unwanted. I was almost aborted. This comment just hurts me. Every child is wanted by God. Think about how many parents are waiting to adopt. Every child is wanted. Every child is loved. My mom now loves me. I’m so happy she didn’t make that “choice.”

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            Good for her, and you, but I am not your mom.

          • musiciangirl591

            all the women that i know who’ve experienced a miscarriage (my two grandmas and my friend monica), when they talk about their babies, they don’t refer it as a “relief”, that scares me a little bit how you would describe it as that

          • ms

            Repentance is not just about sorrow for one’s sins. We are called to metanoia (this is the Greek word used in the New Testament, which is translated to the word “repent”). Metanoia means turning around, changing oneself. We are called to mold ourselves to Christ. Once we are truly making the effort to be Christ-like, we can start to see the errors of our ways, and we can start to see the reasons our actions/opinions/former ways are sinful (harmful to others and/or ourselves), then we can begin to be sorry for them.

            But, as long as we cling to ourselves as The Ultimate Authority on moral issues, we are blinded to the Truth.

            Our loving Father wants only the best for us. He’s much smarter than we are. He gave us what we need to know to live out our lives in the best way: the Ten Commandments, His very Son, and the Church – to teach us what is best for us, which will lead us to true Joy, not merely temporary happiness.

            But without that metanoia, you can’t see any of it. So I recommend that you pray for the help (grace) you need to overcome your blindness, that you might be able to start the process of metanoia – turning to God.

            It isn’t easy. But it is worth the effort. Nothing is more important. I pray that you will make the effort.

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            I believe I was blind before, when I was pro-life — but now I “see” very clearly, what is in my own heart.

          • ms

            So, no metanoia – no turning to follow Christ. Just navel-focus on what’s in your own heart. (I love mixing metaphors.) Trading metanoia for myopia will limit you to just yourself. For all of eternity, if you’re not careful. Looking to Christ and following Him leads to a much richer life. For all of eternity, if you want.

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            It is indeed what I want – to follow what I truly believe in my heart, rather than dishonestly mouthing the words I just could not force myself to believe.

          • ms

            “There are none so blind as those who will not see.” (No clue who to credit for that quote.)

            “If you were blind, you would have no guilt; but now that you say, `We see,’ your guilt remains. ” – John 9:41

            You might consider reading all of John 9, and try to understand what Jesus is trying to say.

          • Claire Robson

            Those who support abortion do not qualify for latae sentenciae excommunication: only those who procure an abortion.

          • gailallenmills

            Not so Claire, Murder is one of Four Sins that Cry Out to Heaven for Vengeance and there are nine ways to be part of that.
            In how many ways may we either cause or share the guilt of another’s sin?
            We may either cause or share the guilt of another’s sin in nine ways:

            By counsel;
            By command;
            By consent;
            By provocation;
            By praise or flattery;
            By concealment;
            By being a partner in the sin;
            By silence;
            By defending the ill done.

          • SDG

            gailallenmills: Claire is correct about the canonical criteria for excommunication. If you wish to contradict her, you must cite canon law. I am unaware of any canon providing that anyone culpable in any sin that cries out to heaven by any of nine criteria is liable to excommunication.

          • Luxetveritas

            Canon Law makes it clear that anyone having an abortion or knowingly participating in an abortion is under automatic excommunication.

            Can. 1398 A person who actually procures an abortion incurs a latae sententiae excommunication.

            Can. 1329 §2 In the case of a latae sententiae penalty attached to an offense, accomplices, even though not mentioned in the law or precept, incur the same penalty if, without their assistance, the crime would not have been committed, and if the penalty is of such a nature as to be able to affect them; otherwise, they can be punished with ferendae sententiae penalties.

          • teigitur

            None of us are perfect Catholics, but supporting abortion, killing the innocent, is the gravest of sins, and immediately distances you from God and his Church. Curtis is correct.

          • c matt

            Cafeteria and dissenting, maybe – but ex-communicated – baby, at that point you are out the door.

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            Ah, no, Google it and see for yourself. Being excommunicated doesn’t even get you out of being required to attend mass.

          • musiciangirl591

            it means that you can’t receive Holy Communion and if you do… well, you know

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            Yep. And that’s okay with me.

          • Carmelite

            no such word as “cafeteria Catholics”…your nothing and faithless.

      • JoAnna Wahlund

        In other words, you’re a Catholic Butt.

        • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

          Yes!!!! You know, I have called myself a “Catholic butt” before. I should have copyrighted the term, and put it on tee-shirts.

          See, I just don’t believe “a woman’s bodily autonomy ends where her baby’s body begins.” I can’t in my heart believe that.

          • JoAnna

            Why not? What do you have against babies?

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            I am not fond of them, I admit. And I certainly don’t want any more of them growing inside me.

            Yet I do not want to lead a celibate life — and thanks to my contraception, I don’t have to.

          • JoAnna

            Perhaps it should be about what God wants, not about what you want. But you didn’t quite answer my question… why do babies deserve be denied their human rights just because the circumstances of their conception weren’t ideal?

            Moreover, there are plenty of non-religious reasons to be prolife… see secularprolife.org. It’s really a human rights issue.

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            JoAnna, I respectfully disagree that all of my own children had a right to be born.

            This is why I am a pro-abortion Catholic — though not a “Catholic for Choice.”

          • JoAnna

            You believe that some human beings do not deserve human rights? Why?

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            JoAnna, I don’t believe my children had any rights when they were inside my body — my wishes to do whatever I chose, with my body, trumped their right to life. I realized you disagree with this, and that you are one of those people who told me it was exactly like strangling them in their stroller (which someone actually said to me once, about my IUD). We have a fundamental disagreement over whether my babies have a right to life — you say yes, I say N-O.

          • Tally Marx

            So how do you decide which humans have human rights and which ones do not?

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            Easy: They have rights as soon as they leave my body. They can be taken away from me.

          • Sesquipedalian80

            So, L., are rights intrinsic to the human person or are they dependent on his/her physical location and source of nourishment?

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            Location!

          • Erin

            And which ones would you get rid of? And if they have no rights to life, why haven’t you done so?

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            I mean, I got rid of the ones I prevented from being born, with my contraception (and abstaining at times, solely for the purpose of taking no chances of creating any life).

            And I would not have hesitated to abort a baby with birth defects incompatible with life, which is why I had pre-natal testing in all of my pregnancies.

          • musiciangirl591

            as a disabled person, i consider the “oh i’ll abort if the baby has defects” argument to be very cruel, let me pose you this question, you’re pregnant with me, you get tested to find out if i’m disabled (i’m epileptic) and it turns out that i am, would you abort me, i’m interested in your answer…

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            No, because epilepsy is not incompatible with life – plenty of people (hopefully you, too) lead very happy lives with it. I would not have aborted a Downs baby, either. But in some circumstances (rape, etc), I would abort even a healthy baby.

          • Max Potts
          • anna

            If you say their rights are based on location, on what are you basing that moral standard?

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            Location: As in, my absolute right to control what happens in my body, as only I see fit. To legally compel a woman to retain something/someone in her body is tantamount to the state deciding that it has a right to determine how she uses her internal organs — and I will NEVER believe that this is the case.

          • mouse

            Set aside, for a moment, the state’s interference (a straw-man). But just between you and God: Are you not responsible for your actions? Pregnancies almost always require some action on your part before they “happen”. And that action is almost always voluntary. You have choices in your behavior. The Church teaches us to behave ourselves so that we don’t end up with an unwanted pregnancy.

            If you eat too much, you gain unwanted weight, so you really don’t have absolute control over your body, in that you can’t eat everything without gaining weight. Like an unwanted pregnancy, it is completely within your control to not end up there. But people don’t go demanding lipsuction.

            Responsibility. It’s an adult thing, really. (Not just a Cathoic thing.)

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            Yep – which is why I never had more than that one unwanted pregnancy — I know the mechanics, and make sure I won’t concieve (unless I’m raped).

          • Popeye

            celibacy is not the same as chastity. as christians we’re called to chastity while clergy are called to both chastity and celibacy. you can be having sex with your husband all the time, and not be chaste if it’s done in a way that is not wholesome. you can simply think dirty thoughts and become unchaste. any man who looks upon a woman with unclean thoughts has already committed adultery with her in his mind.

            sexual deviancy is a serious mortal sin that immediately wipes away any sanctifying grace you may have in your soul and prevents you from receiving more.

            at the same time, don’t think that you must be celibate in order to avoid having children. look in to NFP. my sisters have all used it to great success in controlling when they have kids. granted, yes they want lots of kids, but they want them spaced just so, and they’re doing just that.

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            I’ve looked into NFP, but I prefer the odds of combinations of methods that are more effective in preventing pregnancy, since I am not open to children.

          • JAGreene86

            [Insert "Most Interesting Man In the Universe" Picture here]:

            “I don’t always use contraception, but when I do, I prefer unnatural and unhealthy contraception”.

            Although there is a debate that NFP is truly contraception, but for the sake of the argument, let’s say that NFP is contraception.

            NFP doesn’t “insert” anything in your body that is unnatural and/or unhealthy. Most contraceptive pills have toxic chemicals and/or lead to long-lasting side effects.

            NFP, when done “correctly” (as those who make the argument about artificial contraception), has a 99% prevention rate. The reason why people roll their eyes on NFP is because most people don’t practice NFP 100%. They sort of cheat and say “I’ll take my chances” and get pregnant and then claim that NFP doesn’t work.

            Also, I’ll say this: those who have been “on the pill” won’t have a regular menstrual cycle because the pill has thrown off their body’s natural rhythm and timing. This is another reason why women who have taken the pill and try NFP fail, because their cycle is all thrown off. Really, it’s better to never take the pill in the first place, but for those who have started taking the pill, they need to get off of it, wait for their body to start having a consistent cycle, and then use NFP if necessary.

            If contraception was never invented, abortion would not be as heated of an argument as it is now. Contraception has opened the door to our “lax” view on abortion. 40 years ago, the idea of having an abortion was out of the question. Now, we’re missing a third of our generation to it without society even taking a second look at it.

            Societies “right” has chosen that 40 million of God’s children shouldn’t get the chance to live beautiful lives because of our selfish decision, much less countless lives negatively effected by abortion.

            Read Abby Johnson’s book, “Unplanned”, and you’ll get a sense of what it’s like to be “on the battle lines” of abortion, and what’s really going on inside Planned Parenthood and inside a genuine “pro-choice” mind.

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            There are MANY other forms of contraception besides the pill. (I also use NFP contraceptively.)

          • musiciangirl591

            how do you use NFP contraceptively? i’m guessing you use a condom as a barrier? i’m just legit interested

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            In the past, I studied NFP to understand my cycles/fertility better, with the idea of avoiding pregnancy. It was the intent that made me say “contraceptively.” But we have also used various barrier methods over the years.

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            Clarify: Not open to MORE children.

          • A friend

            I felt that way for a while…. but judging how you’ll feel about a baby of your own by how you feel about “other people’s babies” is not generally a good comparison. When you see your dad’s chin and your lovers nose and your own eyes staring up at you it’s just not the same thing at all.

            I read earlier that you had a miscarriage, and I’m trying to be gentle here… but speaking as someone who was in a similar situation, I know that I went a long while with some self-invented beliefs in order to protect myself from pain. I’m not asking you to grieve right here and now… I’m not asking you to abandon your beliefs based on a string of blog comments (I doubt that you would). I’m just asking you to tuck this and a few of the other posts into the back of your mind. Because I do believe that because you believe you are a Catholic and clearly have an open heart to God that someday he will SHOW you what everyone here is trying to TELL you… and when He does I hope you’ll let Him, because it is a truly awesome thing to be a mother.

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            Thanks – the miscarriage was a long time ago, and since then, we’ve had three kids, two of whom are already in high school.

          • musiciangirl591

            chastity is awesome! i’m chaste right now and dating an awesome guy who respects that! :)

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            Good for you — seriously, good for you.

            Not everyone is you, though. Chastity is not right for all. It has never been right for me and my partner.

          • Popeye

            a woman’s body ending where her babies begins isn’t much of a matter of faith. it’s rather easy to scientifically define the exact physical boundary, actually. for starters, they have separate and unique genomes and although their blood vessels intertwine and mingle within the placenta and it’s junction to the uterus, there is no exchange of blood. granted, there is some exchange of hormones, nutrients, waste products, and proteins between a baby and it’s mother, this is comparable to the same kinds of exchanges that take place between you and your environment, your mate, and the food you eat on a regular basis. eat a vegetable, and complete proteins and DNA fragments from it will circulate through your body for a very long time. an incredible amount of information in the form of hormones and other bio-indicators are exchanged with potent effect in something as simple as a kiss. to say mother and child are one body and one being is a gross over-simplification born and demonstrates a need for education.

            with regards to autonomy, the woman’s body is in no way dependent on the babies’. the babies’ is dependent on the mother’s only in as much as it needs a supply of nutrients and a place to get rid of waste. her body, though influenced, is autonomous and self sufficient. a miscarriage does not kill the mother without fail. the mother’s death, however, will definitely kill the baby without the intervention of society. the same can often times be said of young children. how long will a 2 year old survive if their parents died and society did not intervene? there are teenagers who wouldn’t make it a month. are their bodies not autonomous?

            dependence, mutual interaction, and influence does not denote a lack of autonomy.

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            Society can intervene if I don’t care for children outside my body — but inside is a different story, and I get to call the shots with what gets to stay in and what I take out.
            You don’t see any difference, whereas I see a crucial one.

          • Tally Marx

            Let’s say there is a set on conjoined twins: Twin A and Twin B.
            Twin A does not want to be stuck to Twin B anymore, and so opts for a surgery that would separate them. After an assessment, the doctors say that Twin B is not strong enough to survive the surgery, but in nine months will be. Would it be right for Twin A to insist on the operation, knowing it will end in the death of her twin?

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            Conjoined twins are not analogous to a pregnancy. You are already assuming that a woman and her baby have an equal right to life, just by proposing this metaphor.

            I would say this. If you, Tally, were suddenly in my womb, and the only way you could survive would be for me to keep you in there for nine months and then give birth to you, and removing you prematurely would likely result in your death, then I believe I would be within my rights of bodily integrity and self-preservation to remove you. Sorry.

            Hey, I might gestate you just to be nice, but I don’t believe I, or any woman, should be legally required to do so.

          • Popeye

            and yet children have survived outside the womb at as early as 21 weeks. that’s earlier than the legal limit on abortions in most states.

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            But the vast majority of abortions are carried out in the first trimester, when survival is impossible. You and I both know this.

          • Popeye

            and how long do you think it will take for doctors and scientists to be able to replicate a womb? science will continue to advance and the possibility of babies being brought to term entirely outside of their mother’s body is not too far fetched.

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            That would be great, and would solve lots of problems for a lot of people – but I imagine it might create a few new ones as well.

          • Popeye

            that’s not quite what i’m getting at.

            i’m not condoning growing babies in test tubes or saying it will solve people’s problems.

            i’m attempting to make a distinction between the baby and the mother in regards to their biological functions. they are each self-contained, self-directing, self-sufficient individuals. the only difference is their respective environments and how they interact with them.

            a womb is an environment, just like your house is, and person-hood and human rights are not contingent upon one’s environment.

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            My womb is not an objective “environment.” It’s part of my body, in which I — not the state — calls the shots.

          • A.

            Dear L, just letting you know a little something, in love. When you say it would be “within your rights of bodily integrity and self-preservation to remove you” While I realize that this situation is hypothetical, what I think you fail to realize is that you’re taking it for granted that God has put this person at your mercy. Being completely at the mercy of another does not take away a person’s rights. A person is a person and they are a specially created and loved soul made by God our creator from the moment of their conception. That is the moment when He called you out of nothingness and into existence, it’s when He calls us all. You can evade this with what you ‘feel’ is right, but you’re wrong and the truth doesn’t change just because you’ve learned to accept what is false. I will pray for you :)

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            As I said before, and will say again, I know what is truly in my own heart, and I let this guide me.

          • JAGreene86

            Your heart can be deceived…as with all of us. That is why there is the Church, because “none are righteous on their own”.

          • Ellen

            That’s ridiculous! Unborn babies don’t just “appear” in your womb, 99% of the time, you must willingly engage in a specific activity (one that isn’t done by accident) for a child to be conceived. If you don’t want babies, don’t have sex (no contraception, not even sterilizations, are 100% effective), it’s that simple. We are co-creators of life with God. It’s preposterous to believe that He would be hunky dory with purposely killing one of His creations just because you don’t want to be pregnant, you just want to engage in that oh-so-fun activity that causes pregnancy. Why don’t you just join the Episcopal Church USA? They have all the stuff the Catholic Church has, but none of our pesky rules about sexuality, and you get to decide whether or not Christ is even present in their Eucharist. Sounds like the perfect place for you. Staying in the Catholic Church when you refuse to even consider that you might be wrong about these teachings makes you a hypocrite.

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            Why don’t I just join the Episcopal Church? Because I see no need to. I don’t believe I need to accept all of the teachings of my religion, but that doesn’t mean I reject it outright.

            A “hypocrite” was what I was when I pretended to be pro-life.

          • Popeye

            i see that you don’t consider an unborn baby to be a human being, and if you do, then you’re acting incredibly selfishly. do you fear the effects of bearing a child to term on your body? where does the need to completely control everything in your body come from?

            although contraception and abortion mitigate potential damage to your body that is caused by the stress of child birth, the suppression of the bodies’ natural functions will have a net detrimental effect on a woman’s health that far exceeds the damage caused by child birth.

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            Where does the need to completely control everything in your body come from? Common sense — I control it as much as I can. To do otherwise would be a disservice to myself, I believe.

          • Popeye

            then you have to ask yourself some questions.

            at what point does serving oneself become a disservice to God?

            how can you know what is the best ultimate end towards which to guide your body? in other words, how can you know that the ends towards which you exercise control are in fact what’s best for your body and soul, and are the means you’re using actually going to get you there?

            what sort of effects will this body-controlling action have on my mind, soul, and relationships with others, including my spouse, peers, and children?

            does this bring you closer to God, or is it just vanity?

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            I fail to see how any benevolent supreme being would require me to bear any unwanted babies, at the expense of my physical and mental health. For me, that’s the bottom line.

          • Popeye

            well then you’re missing the entire point of christianity.

            God wants you to accept His will as superior to your own, and abide by it.

            in so doing, He will give you everything that you need. anything that you lose in your trials and tribulations caused by following Christ and submitting to God’s will will be given back to you 100 fold. this includes family, friends, riches, health, etc.

            Suffering plays a huge role in this, as it is the means by which we come to know love and God.

            Your body tells you that you want sex without consequence and good health forever. Yet, both are impossible to achieve and it is blatantly, empirically obvious. Sex, separated from the act of procreation, becomes a means of self satisfaction wherein the partner becomes objectified as a an animate sex toy. secondly, contraception actually hurts you. a single abortion increases your risk of breast cancer by 40% and the pill affects your bodies capacity to properly respond to your mates’ pheromones, which affects your mind and your relationship.

            a healthy attitude about sex that includes openness to God’s gift of children is actually better for your spiritual, physical and mental health than a program of contraception.

            I’d recommend you look up the actual health effects of pills and abortions in regards to your physical and mental health. you may be surprised what you find.

            Lastly, this comment system needs to be redesigned so as not to squeeze posts like this… it’s getting ridiculous.

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            I am not on the pill, I’ve never had an abortion, and I have a very healthy sex life with my longtime partner. I am grateful for this, and also grateful I have avoided pregnancy.

            But this comment is again turning into a tapeworm….

          • musiciangirl591

            you’re not going to want to hear this, but from one of my favorite priests (Father Larry Richards during his Confession talk) said “the song that people sing in hell is I did it my way”

          • Debbrunsberg

            Spoken like someone who has already eliminated their child or children and want to continue to justify the murder to themselves. When conception occurs, new life is created, that life is human. To destroy it is murder. To sanction it, approve of it and not try to stop it, is accessory to murder. Now, you may convince yourself that you yourself is a better judge than the Church or God himself, but you are living in delusion. See, those who will kill unborn children are either coerced into it or are incapable of loving anyone or anything other than themselves. They are so selfish and so incapable of sacrificing anything of themselves, that murdering an child of God becomes acceptable. Then, they convince themselves with the same exact empty words that you have used. I do feel sorry for you and I will pray that the Lord will give you time to convert in this life. But, you can call yourself anything you want. You arent Catholic, it is a false identity you use.Why don’t you share your feelings on abortion with your pew mates on Sunday. Ask them what they think. Your receiving the Eucharist saddens me beyond all telling. Such sacrilege.

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            I explicitly said I do NOT receive communion, so you can come down off your high horse now.

            I have indeed shared my opinions with my pew mates, which is how I know there are many other pro-abortion/contraception Catholics just like me.

          • SpokaneCatholic

            “I just don’t believe “a woman’s bodily autonomy ends where her baby’s body begins.” Completely different DNA, often different bloodtype. And, oh yeah: a unique soul. God had a hand in deciding A) whether the egg would be fertilized, and B) which sperm got to the honor. And He infused that new human being with an immortal soul. But you want to override His decision. The Bible says again and again that children are a blessing, but you refuse that blessing. How do you think God will react when you come knocking on Heaven’s door? If you refuse His blessings now… He might be disinclined to bless you with entry into His Kingdom. Doesn’t that frighten you?!??

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            It doesn’t frighten me at all. I don’t understand why people are frightened and base their actions on this fright, but I will take their word for it that some do.

          • SpokaneCatholic

            St. Padre Pio said: “Remember this forever; it is a healthy sign if the devil shouts and roars around your conscience, since this shows that he is not inside your will”. If one loses the very sense of sin, then the devil is no longer outside.

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            No devils has ever shouted/roared around me, even when I’ve sinned.

          • SpokaneCatholic

            Ummm… that’s the point! St. Pio said it is HEALTHY if the devil shouts and roars.

            The devil tempts me, and sometimes I fail to resist. When I do something sinful, my conscience bothers me. I wish I hadn’t done that evil thing. So, the devil is not inside my will. Do you see?

            Pope Pius XII said: “The greatest sin of our generation is that it has lost all sense of sin.”

            One thing that sin does is darken the intellect. So, in our heart of hearts, we think we’re doing OK. Because repeated sin numbs us to sin.

            JPII wrote about it: http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/apost_exhortations/documents/hf_jp-ii_exh_02121984_reconciliatio-et-paenitentia_en.html (esp. starting at #18)

            See also John 3:19-21

            Still praying for you, L. – with sincere hope for your soul – thru the intercession of St. Padre Pio.

          • musiciangirl591

            trust me, Satan when he’s silent is terrifying, trust me, this is coming from the girl who was almost killed in a car accident on the way up to a retreat planning meeting, he doesn’t stop at anything to get at you

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            That is creepy. Be careful!

          • Abadilla

            Hi L,

            You stated, “See, I just don’t believe “a woman’s bodily autonomy ends where her baby’s body begins.” I can’t in my heart believe that.” At the risk of sounding too personal, what if your mother had the same attitude when you were in her womb? Apparently, she believed her autonomy took a second place to your right to be born, and that’s why here you are telling us about a way of thinking that would have made your own existence impossible!

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            I honestly believe my mother would have been better off, both physically and mentally, if she had not subjected her particular body to childbearing. So yes, I do support my own mother’s theoretical abortion and therefore my own non-existence — though I also think if God intends for a particular person to be born, then they are, one way or another.

      • http://profile.yahoo.com/EZ5UJBPOWKRH26IRAXP33BLT4Y John

        To L. – You might find yourself in attendance at Catholic Mass, but you are not Catholic if you are pro-abortion. You have undergone a latae sentenciae excommunication. No need to ask. The Catholics are pro-life. Those who are pro-abortion are not Catholic. They have just parked themselves inside a Catholic Church. God knows who you are. No need for me to ask.

        • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

          Multiple priests have told me that one only undergoes latae sentenciae excommunication if one obtains or procures an abortion — believing in abortion in principle is not the same.

          • Gabriel Austin

            I like “multiple” priests. Who? How many? How many were Jesuits? Have you asked Fr. Curran? Fr. McBrien?
            You are not discussing. You are merely affirming the same thing; and no amount of discussion will get you to begin to think about the arguments against your position. It is called hardening your heart.

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            Ha, I do love me some Jesuits!

            But I now belong to a Franciscan parish, and have also known many Dominicans.

            I am quite sure of what I know, what I sincerely believe in my deepest heart of hearts. If this is what you insist on calling “hard,” then I accept it.

          • Claire Robson

            You’re right.

        • FatherOfFive

          @ John and Howard: You are both absolutely right. “L” likes the attention she is getting here. She enjoys infuriating Roman Catholics. She is standing by her American legal right to say that she belongs to whatever religion she likes. She doesn’t have to prove herself in this forum because she already proved her cafeteria religiosity by cherry picking the morality that appeals to her as befits a real patriot—a patriot, not a Roman Catholic. As we differ with her and show our indignation, she manages to appear demure and composed—the old sensible stateswoman routine, keeping her cool while her opponents become emotional, and she continues to bait and bait. Interestingly, in her earlier posts she was relatively timid, her modest words betraying a confusion and shame. However, the inconvenient truths that we have opposed her with have made her cling to the life raft of reason and the senses—not of faith. She has realized that human reason cannot prove that an unborn child has a soul; however, human reason can prove that abortion is moral because the world equates convenience and pleasure with happiness. Sure, she will probably make a comeback against me that we are not supposed to judge others (all of these pro-choicers use Matthew 7:1 against us). But this is not a judgement, but a warning and a reprimand of “L.” Christ said, “Be on guard! If your brother sins, rebuke him; and if he repents, forgive him.” (Luke 17:3-4) A sadness about blogging is that you cannot witness a person’s penance, and thus forgiveness remains a blind operation as regards a lost person who has denied herself the joy of self-sacrifice. So in a nutshell, I infer that our intense exhorting of “L” has failed and has led to her becoming more fatuously shackled to her worldy view about birth and the murder of unborn children. She is doubtless laughing up her sleeve with every posting, and it is now better to leave her to pick up the Cross that she keeps dropping. When the idea of self sacrifice being the main purpose of Christianity dawns on her, and the “spiritual gluttony” that St. John of the Cross discussed no longer drives her to seek a quaint and comfortable version of Catholicism, then perhaps she will abandon her self-serving position. Until then, as Christ said in Matthew 10:14, “Whoever will not receive you or listen to your words—go outside that house or town and shake the dust from your feet.” (Matthew 10:14) If you don’t like the things she says, just pray for her. If she remains a lukewarm (Revelations 3:15-16) proponent of child murder, getting rejected by Roman Catholics will be the least of her troubles because eventually, Jesus will leave her to her sinfulness. Christ said through John, “Let the wicked still act wickedly, and the filthy still be filthy. The righteous must still do right, and the holy still be holy.Behold, I am coming soon. I bring with me the recompense I will give to each according to his deeds.” (Revelations 22:11-12) Until then, forgive “L” continually, and pray for her. Ironically, she is more in need of God’s mercy than the persons whom she mercilessly infuriates.

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            You lost me here: “…her modest words betraying a confusion and shame.”

            When it comes to the issue of abortion/contraception, I have none of either.

            But you are correct in that I have enjoyed commenting here — primarily because of the civil tone with which my opposing views were addressed, most of the time.

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            Also, John, you claim, “She enjoys infuriating Roman Catholics.” I don’t see many furious responses to my comments. Most have been quite civil, even kind.

            I don’t “enjoy” infuriating anyone. If I did, I would be leaving very different comments.

          • SpokaneCatholic

            FatherofFive, that was spot on! I started to notice the change in L.’s tone, and also noted which posts she chose not to respond to. Very telling, that.

            I am hereby shaking the dust from my feet, though I will continue to pray for her. Poor thing. Mind darkened by sin, heart hardened against the Truth. I have a brother like that. Very sad. And the more they deny the Truth, the farther from it they are… which means, it’s a long way back. And I wonder if they’ll ever turn around. Our Lord taught us to seek the narrow way, yet such as these are pretending to be happily skipping down the wide and easy path – purposely in defiance. Yet they aren’t expressing the deep joy that Christ alone can give. Very sad.

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            I have tried to reply to ALL of them — have I missed some? If so, please point them out to me, and I’ll address them.

            I believe your pity for me is entirely wasted, but that’s just my opinion.

            I have no desire to “turn back,” because I firmly believe I am walking toward light, not darkness, and I wish you peace, and hope you find light, too.

          • JAGreene86

            Be careful, because the Devil will disguise himself as good, and paint certain “hot button issues” with a gray paint brush.

            There is only one way to Heaven, and that is through Jesus Christ, and Jesus said Himself, “those who follow me, obey my commands”. If we are to believe that the Catholic Church is, indeed, being lead by the Holy Spirit, therefore, having the same commands that Christ Himself installed through Scripture and Tradition, then we must conclude that the only way to Heaven is through these commands via the Catholic Church. It is possible to follow these commands without being Catholic, mainly because they have not had the opportunity to know and learn the Catholic Church. However, God judges intention, and if He knows a person’s intention is to find Truth, and will stop at nothing to find Truth, and to Love God with all their heart, mind, strength, and soul and to love their neighbors as themselves, then God will honor that…if they maintain that. But those who are exposed to Truth and Love, but reject any sense of it, is greatly frowned upon in the Bible.

            Read:

            Job 4:17
            Ezekiel 3:20-21
            Ezekiel 18:24-26
            Ezekiel 33:13-18
            Matthew 21:32
            Matthew 23:28
            Romans 2:13
            Romans 3:20
            Romans 10:3
            2 Peter 2:21

            I know that’s a lot to read, but I think many people fail to realize what “following God” is all about. We need to be righteous and REMAIN righteous through the Law.

            If you are sincere on following and loving God, everything about God will excite you, including His Just Law.

            Matthew 5:19
            Mark 7:8-9
            John 14:15
            John 15:10
            1 Corinthians 7:19
            1 John 2:3-4

            I would ask that you meditate on the above passages. Obviously take your time with it, and since I have no way of knowing if you will or not, it’s between you and God anyway…but He is Universal, and His Just Commands are Universal. I just pray that your heart will be open to Truth, and not just what you want to be true.

            God be with you.

          • musiciangirl591

            praying for you! i’ll offer my midnight prayers for you!

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            Thanks — well-intended prayers always appreciated, whether I see eye-to-eye with the person or not.

          • ms

            Looks like Spokane has bowed out, but I am very curious: I don’t see where you responded to Spokane’s posting about St. Padre Pio. The post starts out with: “Ummm… that’s the point! St. Pio said it is HEALTHY if the devil shouts and roars…” and I would like to see what you have to say to that. Thank you.

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            I believe I answered it when I honestly said, no devil has ever shouted at me. I have done my share of sinning — hurt people, made amends and tried to seek forgiveness — and no devil has ever shouted.
            I took this literally, not metaphorically, in light of what I know about Padre Pio’s life.

          • ms

            Quoting Spokane:
            “Pope Pius XII said: ‘The greatest sin of our generation is that it has lost all sense of sin.’ One thing that sin does is darken the intellect. So, in our heart of hearts, we think we’re doing OK. Because repeated sin numbs us to sin.”

            Since you are apparently devoid of even any twinges of conscience re: sexual matters and abortion, the devil is not outside of you, but in you.

            The great value that the authority of the Church brings us is the clarity about what we need to do and not do in order to align ourselves with God’s will. It takes some effort: prayer and fasting/sacrifice over time – to rid ourselves of our selfishness and self-reliance, and come to see things as God sees them. Then we are able to recognize the gravity of our sins.

            By rejecting the Church’s teaching, you are separating yourself not only from the Church, but from the One Who established it. By refusing the metanoia – turning to Him – you are keeping your immortal soul on the path to Hell. Since you cannot hear the devil, you are likely a lot closer to Hell than to God. I urge you, for the sake of your soul, to reconsider this obstinate defiance. Pray for enlightenment and the strength to take the right path. You will likely need to start by praying for the grace to want to take the right path.

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            Thank you for what appears to be your genuine concern, but after decades of prayer, study and careful consideration, I believe very deeply that I am not on the wrong path.

          • ms

            St. Augustine said: “If you believe what you like in the gospels, and reject what you don’t like, it is not the gospel you believe, but yourself.”

        • Claire Robson

          Again, latae sentenciae excommunication is for those who procure an abortion, not for those who are pro-choice.

      • Gooodhobo

        Its a sad situation if your pro choice and Catholic… You can’t change true doctrine… Most pro choice individuals are haters and angry,,,,

        • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

          I have no anger in my heart. I just don’t accept in my heart that all of the Church’s teachings are true. However, I am unwilling to reject the ones that are.

          • Abadilla

            Hi L,

            I meant to reply to you but your comment was getting as thin as a noodle and I could not find “how” to reply to you.
            You stated “Yes, I do believe I know what’s best for me more than the Church does.” Then my “logical” question is, why do you belong to the Church? Why not just become your own Church and sing like Bob Marley, “Don’t worried, be happy”

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            I was born into the Church, Abadilla, and I don’t reject all of it, even as I came to reject some of it. Perhaps it would be easier to walk away (particularly since my long-time partner is not a Christian), but I stay.

          • Abadilla

            Hi L.
            You stated, “I was born into the Church, Abadilla, and I don’t reject all of it, even as I came to reject some of it.” I was also born in the Church, but I accept all of her teachings, even though at time I struggle with some of her teachings, but I know one thing for sure, I can never be my “own” church since the human mind can’t grasp all that is necessary for salvation or even those things that are necessary to do God’s will. After all, at Mass, don’t we pray the “Our Father” and say “thy” will be done? We don’t say “our” will be done, do we?
            BTW L. do you think when we pray “thy Will be done,” it is God’s will to butcher children in the wombs of their mothers? Is that the kind of God we pray to?

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            Okay, I see we’ve moved on to “butchering children,” so I sense I have worn out my welcome here.

            Yes, I believe any benevolent supreme being would understand why a mother would want to remove a child from her womb, or prevent conception in the first place (the latter being preferable), and why not all women should exclaim, “Thy will be done!” and be legally required to gestate all babies.

            It is a matter of what I would do myself, which, as I say, I know in my own heart.

          • SpokaneCatholic

            You seem to be operating under the false understanding of Catholic teaching on sexual relations that pervades our culture – which usually boils down to “women have to just keep cranking out babies”. By rejecting it, you conclude that you have rejected Church teaching, and are thus free to make up your own rules. But you didn’t actually reject Church teaching: you never understood Church teaching in the first place. What you rejected was this society’s charicature of Church teaching. Here’s a primer on what the Church actually teaches: http://www.beginningcatholic.com/christian-sex.html

            Properly undestood, God’s will for marriage and childbearing is good and beautiful. (Of course! God would only plan the best for us!) That is what you have rejected. At your peril.

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            I have indeed rejected it, partly because my long-time partner is not a Christian, and does not want to live according to Christian ideals.

          • musiciangirl591

            well, that doesn’t mean that you have to out and out reject it! my boyfriend doesn’t go to adoration with me (he doesn’t really fully understand it, but he’ll get there!), but i still go!

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            I reject it in our home.

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            I don’t believe it is for everyone, and I love and accept my partner the way he is.

          • musiciangirl591

            so just because somethings hard, you shouldn’t do it? well i guess my dreams of running a marathon are crushed…

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            ….actually, I do admit to a little anger in my heart when people call me “troll,” “fool,” “liar,” “fraud,” etc.

            But most people here were quite civil, even kind.

      • Abadilla

        If they are pro-choice and going to Mass, they obviously do not know what Mass is. They are only fooling themselves and being dilusional is not good!

      • http://natewinchester.wordpress.com/ Nate Winchester

        L == one of the more creative trolls I’ve seen in awhile. “By their fruits you shall know them” and by L’s fruits, she’s clearly just a Protestant sitting in a Catholic pew. (and I’m not even Catholic)

        • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

          What is your definition of “troll?” I don’t believe I am one.

          I link to my blog, which is anonymous (to protect my family’s privacy) but contains past links to pages in which I have revealed my real name. I am also trying not to be argumentative here, and appreciate the civility of most commenters.

          • ms

            Nate is correct: you are a very clever troll. You are not posting here in order to contribute to the conversation about the farce that is “Catholics for Choice”. You are here to defend your version of Catholicism, which includes whatever you want it to. You’ve rejected the Church’s teachings, set yourself up as Pope & Magisterium, and are now using reasonable-sounding responses to those who are trying to show you the error of yours ways. But you aren’t listening, and have clearly decided not to re-evaluate your position at all. Rather, you continue to defend it, in the face of all logic and reason. You seem to be aware that the Church will not change its teachings, so why are you here? Do you think anyone will start agreeing with you and follow your example to make their own version of Catholicism to follow their own wills? (Not likely, considering the reasership and responses on this blog.)

            My theory: you are employed by the fictional “Catholics for Choice” (I say “fictional”, because they are clearly not some grass-roots groups of honest Catholics, but rather, an arm of the pro-abortion lobby effort), trying to undermine the message of true Catholicism. That makes you a troll. And a fool.

            Repent, L,: the Kingdom of God is at hand, and the gates of Hell will not stand against it.

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

            Your conspiracy theory is AWESOME! I’m glad I checked to see if there were any new comments.

            It’s true that I haven’t read anything here that has led me to rethink my position in any way. That makes me a troll? If you say so!

        • JAGreene86

          Very true.

      • JAGreene86

        A Catholic who is “pro-choice” (in the political term) is a (pardon the pun) Bad Catholic. They’re still Catholic, because they have entered into that “covenant” with God, but they’re not adhering to their side of the covenant. Since we serve a forgiving God, there is always a chance for them to adhere their side of the covenant (through Reconciliation), that’s why they’re still Catholic. However, someone who doesn’t “agree” with the Doctrine of the Church is like someone who is married and saying to their spouse”you know those vows that I said to you at our wedding day? I don’t really agree with those…meaning, I think I don’t have to be faithful to you and such…are you ok with that?” And/or says that with their actions as well (aka. having an affair, beating their spouse, etc). Would society say “well, it’s their choice to do that, so it’s ok” or would they say “they’re being a bad spouse…the other should divorce them!”.

        When we become Catholic, we enter into that “covenant” with God through the Holy Sacrament of Confirmation. When we do not adhere to the teachings of the Church, we are violating that “covenant” that we made to God right before our Confirmation.

        Next time, read the fine print before entering into a “covenant” with God…if you don’t like the Catholic Church, don’t become Catholic! It’s as simple as that.

        • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

          I changed my mind on many teachings AFTER I was confirmed at 13. So for me, it was a false covenant. I would not be confirmed now — in fact, my younger son just decided he didn’t want to be confirmed (the only kid in his CCD class who refused), and I supported his decision.

          • JAGreene86

            So. that would be like getting married, agreeing to the vows, an then one day, waking up, and saying “nah…I don’t want to follow my marriage vows anymore”. How do you think your spouse would feel?

            The thing is…there is no “false covenant” with God…there is no such thing. A “covenant” is an everlasting promise to God that we will seek Him and praise Him, all the days of our lives. We cannot have a “covenant” with other people…”covenant” only applies with God, because it’s greater than a promise.

            If you’ve ever had a friend break a promise to you, you know what it’s like when people betray your trust then. When we break our covenant to God, we betray Him. This is what Jesus was talking about when He gave the parable of the stewards in the vineyard…the Jewish people betrayed God, over and over and over again. We serve a very Merciful God, so He kept giving them chance after chance after chance, but when Christ Himself came to Earth, most of the Jewish people betrayed God one final time, and then God was like “these people are not worthy”, thus, opening up the doors to Jews and Gentiles.

            It’s also like the parable of the wedding feast. The master of the feast sends out invitations, but no one accepts, so he invites anyone who wants to come (but he also turned down one that is not properly dressed, meaning, he will not accept those who do not put on the “cloak of God”). God will not invite those who have betrayed His trust.

            Also, believe it or not, but I believe that God, since He has infinite knowledge and gives us the gift of free will, sometimes He will allow evil to come into our life (even if we ask for it) to give us the opportunity to learn how evil it is. If the devil wasn’t as strong as He is, God wouldn’t look stronger. If we didn’t have the evil of abortion, we would take for granted how valuable life is.

            I don’t believe that we live in a Relativistic world. The reason I say that is because almost every single person commenting on this blog (including the blogger himself) will all agree that all of their experience and knowledge points to the Catholic Church being right (all of it, not just some of it). If you are to continue to say “my experience and knowledge say otherwise”, then we are going into the realm of “Law of Contradiction” (and, although the Catholic Church is not right because majority says it’s right, it’s teachings are fundamentally right or wrong). In the issue of morality, abortion, if it is murder, is wrong. In order for this to be true, we have to understand, first, is murder always wrong, and secondly, what makes abortion murder? This is where the Law of Contradiction comes into play, because if God says that murder is wrong, and God is all-Goodness, then murder is wrong.

            Here’s your scenario: Suppose you do get pregnant, and you don’t want to get pregnant. You have a decision to make: keep the child, abort the child, or adopt the child. Lets say you abort the child…nothing happens. It’s almost like it never happened. Let’s say you adopt the child…and there have been a couple who cannot have children, praying to God to bless them with a child. By adopting your child, you are answering God’s prayer unknowingly. Let’s say you raise the child yourself, and although children are hard to raise, I have never seen a parent who loves their life hate their child. I have a friend who is 21 and has a 3-year-old son. She has matured far faster than I have ever seen anyone (she’s more mature than people I know in their 30′s!). Her love for life has greatly increased, her love of God has greatly increased, and, it can be argued, that her life itself has greatly increased, however difficult it has gotten.

            This is what I’m saying to you: You don’t know what you’re missing…you are missing a greater joy that you could possibly imagine. Your views aren’t liberating you, they’re chaining you…chaining you to your own selfish desires. St. Paul says that when we are slaves to ourselves, we are free from the orders of God…however, St. Paul proudly announced that he was a slave to Christ Jesus. He often said that he is a prisoner of Christ Jesus and of no one else, including himself. He also said “let no one boast, except in their sufferings for the Lord”. He believed that it was the best thing for us (and for all) to become slaves for Christ and to suffer for Christ. However, Christ knows who wants to follow Him and who doesn’t want to follow Him. For those who don’t want to follow Him, He gives them exactly what they want…a world without Him. He won’t accept a “maybe” or “I don’t know Lord”…He wants full desire. We indeed serve a very selfish God, as He should be; He is the only One in which rightful Pride and Selfishness are justified. Those who make themselves out to be “Greater than God” are disobeying the first commandment, which is the greatest offense to God.

            Consider this a warning…not by me, but by God. God is calling you home. You may think you’re home, but all you have done is made a shack on sand. God is calling you to the big beautiful mansion on solid ground. You may visit that mansion when you go to Church, but because God knows you’re hearts true desire (and it’s not Him), He will only show you the first room. When you open your heart to Him, He will then, slowly but surely, reveal to you how beautiful the mansion is. Even so, your eyes might be blind, because as Christ says, the spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak.

            Come back home. He’s calling you…you deserve better than what you’ve made yourself to be…

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            You undoubtedly mean well, but “you deserve to be better” does come off as condescending. I was raised and confirmed in the Church and used to accept all of the teachings, so I am very familiar with the way of life you describe. It wasn’t for me. I was living a lie.

            And getting back to the first paragraph of your post — I don’t believe that marriage vows are sacred and eternal. If one day I woke up, and said “nah…I don’t want to follow my marriage vows anymore,” that would be the end for me.

            And if I ever reached that point, I don’t imagine I would particularly care how my partner would feel about it.

      • gailallenmills

        To be pro abortion is to be excommunicated and that is not what people who attend Church should choose to be. It is a false state of religion, masquerading as genuine. Prince of Darkness, Father of Liars is your master.

        • SDG

          gailallenmills: It is true that to be pro-abortion is a false state of religion in some way compromising one to the Prince of Darkness. But it is not true that to be pro-abortion is to be excommunicated. Automatic excommunication is incurred by those who are personally materially involved in procuring an abortion—and even then the penalty only applies if you do so knowing the penalty—but there is no automatic excommunication merely for holding a pro-choice position, or even voting for a pro-choice politician, etc. That’s not the way canon law is written.

      • http://www.facebook.com/stizzle Scott Foshizzle Thompson

        There is no excuse. I have read through this entire thread and you have yet to provide one shred of compelling evidence to back up your stance. You need to not only examine your beliefs, but your conscience as well. You calling yourself mass-attending Catholic is about as effective as standing in a garage and calling yourself a car. I am not being condescending, only real. You sound like you believe only what you want to believe and hear only what you want to hear.

        Why should I have to ask if you are pro-life if you are sitting in the pew next to me? If you are practicing the same rites and partaking in the same ceremony, I would assume that you believe in the same thing. If you do not, then maybe you do not need to be practicing in the same church. You should find a church that has beliefs that more closely resemble yours, like the Universalists.

        • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

          I am quite happy where I am, and feel no need to seek anything else.

      • Debbrunsberg

        No, then you are just someone who calls themselves Catholic, goes to Mass, receives the Eucharist, by your own admission–unworthily–and doesn’t believe what the bible says about doing that either. When you recite the creed or receive in communion,you are stating that you believe all that the Church teaches. So, you are a liar and a fraud too. You do understand that you have to face a judgement day, before the Lord, right? Did you get that part of the teaching? What do you believe because it does not appear to be anything you couldn’t be okay with believing at the big box churches.

        • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

          I never said I receive the Eucharist — I said I do NOT receive it. Perhaps you have me confused with someone else? In any case, calling someone a “liar and a fraud” is never appreciated, you know.

      • Pete

        HEY L PLEASE LEAVE, FIND A CHURCH THAT AGREES WITH YOU; START YOUR OWN. IF YOUR GOING TO PROTEST THEN BE AN HONEST PROTESTANT AND LEAVE. WHATEVER YOU DO JUST GET THE L OUT OF HERE.

        • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

          “Get the L out of here?” How clever! Ya gotta love that schism humor!

          Sorry, I am staying right where I am.

      • Latinhadin

        No, you’re not a man; Men know their roles, which includes responsibility. BTW, how many have you asked at Mass? Do you go to troll and how did you happen to bring it up?

        Get it together or stop being a coward and go full speed towards Satan and the world; We don’t need fence sitters.

        I’ll pray for you and ask that you pray for me.

      • Carmelite

        Your not Catholic habouring these sort of thoughts….anyone who thinks this way is not Catholic, their nothing.

  • Alan

    Hi Mark,
    I have enjoyed reading your posts for a while now…educational and entertaining. Good work.
    Alan R

  • JoAnna

    They’re on Twitter, too! @Catholic4Choice 

    • musiciangirl591

      i tweeted them this article :P

  • Garrett

    Ignorance is bliss seems fitting for them. Honestly, how can they understand that all forms of contraceptive take God out of the situation? What can we do to help them understand that it is intrinsically wrong? Is it from a sociological standpoint- a re-framing of the mind? Because, theology doesn’t seem to work for individuals seeking contraceptives, sterilization, or abortions. I mean, even with JPII, who was great at helping us conceptualize the deep theology of this, they can’t understand. I really just don’t know how people can see this as an okay thing. If we keep going down this road, as I said before, pack your bag kids! We’re going on a fun vacation to Sodom and Gomorrah. This is frustrating! I mean I am just as much of a sinner as anyone else, but ignorance is bliss to them, I guess… May the blessings of the Lord be upon you all!

  • Annie

    Just got banned too! Yay! :)

    • musiciangirl591

      yay! high five!

  • Abbie Beck

    What a necessary and encouraging post! Thank you SO much Marc. Going on “Catholics for Choice’s” page is just spirit crushing and the whole page entirely misrepresents Jesus. Not that they really bring up His holy name very often in their rants about “equality and rights”

  • Brenda Becker

    You have achieved the impossible: making me feel bad about being a cafeteria Catholic on contraception because I’m missing all the fun.

    • Marc Barnes

      You should consider the other side! There’s natural methods of family planning more effective than the Pill…and from what I understand, way more fun: http://www.fertilitycare.org/

      • Emily

        agreed, Marc, NFP is amazing.

    • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

      I second that. I am a cafeteria Catholic, and never quite understood the whole point of the “Catholics for Choice” group.
      If I were devout, I imagine I, too, would take perverse pride in being banned by them.

      • http://jethrohiggins.tumblr.com/ Jethro

        L. you are right. You are a Catholic. Nobody can be made unCatholic even if they want to (see atheist anti-baptism) . You’re just a really bad Catholic. You have a fundamental misunderstanding of what it means to be Catholic. Catholicism is not a democracy. Your opinion about what “should be” is wrong. The end. Even if you get 99% of Catholics to agree to your perverse pro-death point of view – guess what!? Catholicism would still be pro-life. You don’t get a say in the conversation about what the Church believes. And if you think long and hard you would realize that by claiming to be a pro-abortion Catholic you are in effect saying “I believe I am going to Hell.” Catholicism teaches that abortion is a mortal sin. Your wrong opinion doesn’t unbind you to that truth. Again Not a democracy.

        “Whoever listens to you listens to me. Whoever rejects you rejects me. And whoever rejects me rejects the one who sent me.” -Luke 10:16

        (speaking to the 72 (the church))

        You are not listening to the Apostles…ergo… You reject God. See flow chart:

        You –> reject Church –> Church = Succession of Apostles (the You Jesus was speaking to) ::You reject the Apostles:: –>You reject God.

        I can not make this any clearer. If you ARE Catholic (which we already established that you are) then you ARE wrong according to YOUR belief. And you must accept your wrongness and work to correct your error in your own heart. Your conscience is broken you should see to that before it gets any worse. I’m saying a prayer for you. God Bless sister in Christ!

        • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

          I do not accept my wrongness. I believe it is the Church that is wrong in many of its teachings, so I reject some of them, and live according to the ones I believe to be true.

          God gave me logic and reason, and I am using it, rather than following what I believe in my heart to be wrong.

          • Pattie, RN

            L, could claim that my corpulent body is a slim size seven, like it used to be. I could also challenge anyone who would dare disagree with me. None of which changes the objective truth of the situation.

            Likewise, you may claim to “be” whatever you wish, but Baptism and attendence at Mass not withstanding, you are not a Roman Catholic. Rejecting the True Presence in the Eucharist and value of life from conception to natural death is a whole-hearted rejection of the Church and the Faith.

            Delude yourself however you like….you and you alone will face the Almightly to account for yourself. There is a word for what you have chosen, and for those who are Catholic it is called “heresy”.

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            Sure, Pattie, I accept that. It’s why I don’t receive communion anymore, because I just can’t pretend to believe anymore, that I am pro-life.

            But it’s far from a “whole-hearted” rejection of the Church.

          • musiciangirl591

            so you don’t receive Holy Communion anymore? no offense or anything (which generally means something offensive is going to follow, i’m sorry), why are you going to mass?

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            Mostly, I go to honor my late grandmother’s memory, not out of any strong belief of my own.

          • musiciangirl591

            if you don’t believe in though, then don’t go, just saying

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            I admit I reject a lot of it, but I don’t feel as if I have to embrace it all, although others may insist otherwise.

          • Abadilla

            L wrote: “I believe it is the Church that is wrong in many of its teachings, so I reject some of them, and live according to the ones I believe to be true.” Now L, don’t you think this is a form of pride, the opposite of humility? How can any Catholic say, the Church is wrong, when this is the Church of Christ, the source of all truth, the Church of the Apostles, the Church of the Fathers, the Church of incredible saints, the Church of St. Anselm, St. Thomas a Becket, St. Ignatius of Loyola, St. Thomas Aquinas, St. Thomas More, St. Catherine of Siena, St. Teresa of Avila, St. Francis of Assisi, St. Anthony of Padua, St. Benedict, St. Bernadette Soubirous, St. Ignatius of Antioch, St. Ignatius of Loyola, just to name a few. None of these saints and great minds who used “reason” believe they knew better than the Church, but L does. Go figure! I don’t get it!
            Just reading papal encyclicals can lead any objective person to see the vast knowledge of Catholicism, a knowledge one can only grasp a certain percentage, so how does anyone say, “the Church is wrong?”

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            As I said before, I only know my own heart.

          • Abadilla

            L. “I only know my own heart.” But the heart can be very “subjective.” How do you know your heart is guiding you on the right path?

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            How do you know the Church is guiding you on yours? You follow what is in your heart, too, and what you believe is true.

          • musiciangirl591

            well, my heart is saying right now that i want to eat the pocky (which is Japanese biscuit candy) thats sitting right next to me, should i or should i save it for my boyfriend, my sister, and me to eat tomorrow?

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            I live in Tokyo, and I would say, there’s better candy than Pocky. Try the chocolate mushrooms, “Kinoko no yama.”

          • musiciangirl591

            i live in PA, we don’t have much of an asian food section at wal mart…

          • Seb

            Hey L. I got lost in all the comments. But wanted to reply to you and ask if you think truth is subjective? And if I am following my heart and you are following yours then is that okay and who is following truth? Just think “out loud” but if my heart feels something is true but I believe the opposite to be true, which one of those is true… Is what I choose not as definite as what I feel? In other words… which one is the trump card? Excuse the pseudo-philosophy-ish nature of this post.

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            I would say it depends on what that “something” is. I have always followed my gut instincts, and have never regretted it.

            And if there is such as a thing as absolute truth, I am quite sure there would be disagreement on what the description “absolute” applies to.

          • JAGreene86

            God gave me logic and reason too, and both have lead me to the Beauty of the Church…unless you believe in Relativism, which states “it may be ‘right’ for you, but certainly not ‘right’ for me” (which, if that was the case, I would use “logic and reason” on why Relativism is a poor excuse for a philosophical argument, therefore, disproving your belief).

            If we both have used “logic and reasoning”, but have come to different conclusions, then by the Law of Contradiction (saying that two objective truths that oppose each other cannot possibly both be True), one of us is wrong, or both of us is wrong. So, either both of us are not using logic and reasoning correctly, or one of us is not using logic and reasoning correctly.

            The best way to figure that out is to “formulate sound-proof” arguments, and find where the metaphysical evidence points to the most. I would argue and say that all metaphysical arguments would point to a God existing. The next question would be “which God”? For this, we would have to dive into theology…which theology creates the best environment, both physically and mentally, for humanity? Simple cause and effect. If there is something wrong with the theology, it will manifest itself under intense investigation, like a criminal under trial. However, an innocent person, even under the most intense investigation, will have no evidence against them. Only those who are guilty will have evidence against them.

            This is not to say investigate the people, but investigate the theology. Investigate all of it…not just parts. Do not use “assumptions” for your objective conclusions, but use only what the evidence shows.

            Finally, where logic and reason fail, faith needs to take over. Even the Devil and his demons know Christ to be the Son of God, and they tremble at their feet. Do we believe in the goodness of God? Do we desire to be one with the Goodness of God? Do we desire to decrease ourselves so that He may increase in us? Do we glorify Him through our actions and our words? This is the final step. From there, it is repeating the whole process again, and improving on both Truth and Love…for that is the beauty about not being perfect…we can always improve. If we are not improving, we are not searching for God, for God is infinite. The joy is in finding the bread crumbs…the discovering a new aspect, a new perspective, still in sync with all the other discoveries that we have made prior, making that puzzle that much more visible in our eyes, making the mystery of God that much more beautiful.

            “Fear of God is the beginning of Wisdom”

          • musiciangirl591

            faith, logic, and reason go hand in hand, st. thomas aquinas, st. augustine, check it out

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            Read ‘em. Don’t agree with all of them, but enjoyed them all.

  • Teresamerica

    Fantastic post! Thanks for standing up against the heretics and dissenters. Standing up for the faith is noble.

  • Garrett

    Thought this picture was great….

    • JoAnna Wahlund

      I actually created that graphic using the Despair.com meme generator for one of my blog posts. :) It originally appeared here: http://a-star-of-hope.blogspot.com/2012/05/catholics-for-choice-killed-strawman.html

      • Garrett

        To give credit where credit is due, that is the website/blog I got the pic from! I commented on your last blog…under Dr.SoulSaver…haha. However, I am not a Dr. in soul saving. I am still in med school for the saving of souls…lol. Always learning what God brings to my heart! Bless you! Pray for me as I discern the priesthood…again. I was in at one point, but left, because I wasn’t ready for that kind of commitment. For 8 years, God has kept tapping me on the shoulder. Thanks!

        • JoAnna

          Many prayers for your discernment, and thanks for visiting my blog!

          • Garrett

            Thanks! Keep writing and fighting and keep the hope alive!

  • Longinus

    Posted links to this article all over the Facebook page. Thanks for being so brilliant, Marc. God bless!

  • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

    I am Catholic, and pro-abortion (I don’t call myself “pro-choice” anymore), but I don’t belong to that group. I’ve never been quite sure what they’re trying to do.

    • Garrett

      How can one claim Catholicism as their faith and be “pro-abortion”? I am not trying to stir up the hornets nest and start an argument- or judge you for that matter! Truly, I am just curious, because this is such a hot topic and a frustrating issue. I need clarity. Personally, if I was female, I couldn’t fathom the idea.

      • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

        I used to be pro-life, and then decided I was a hypocrite for calling myself that, because I know in my deepest heart of hearts that I would have an abortion myself.

        • SpokaneCatholic

          I want to lose weight, but I must be a hypocrit, because I know in my heart of hearts that I will likely overeat again. So why bother trying? Let’s all just give in to our bodily passions, and forget about trying to please God.

          Praying for you, L.

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            Thanks! But can think of a few hundred thousand people who need prayers more than I do.

          • MEB

            Hey L, we can pray for you and all the others who need it too. That’s the great thing about prayer. Someone else isn’t missing out because we prayed for you! Prayer isn’t like a cup of sugar that gets all used up! It’s an honor to pray for you.

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            I always gratefully accept sincere prayers, and look askance only when people say it condescendingly, implying they are doing it with an unstated insult at the end, as in, “I will pray for you (because I think you are a WRETCHED MURDERING WHORE),” etc.

            But when offered sincerely, prayers can only be a good thing.

          • MEB

            Hope we’ve fallen into the sincere category.

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            Garrett and MEB, those were kind, compassionate responses, and I respect your points of view even if I don’t share them.

          • MEB

            Thank you L. I hope you check back on this thread today. I have been praying for you, and everyone else who needs prayers, don’t worry! :-) And, it occurred to me to ask if you have ever had a devotion to Mary. I really don’t know why I felt like asking you that – I guess other than I was not raised with a strong devotion to her and I only started asking for her intercession as an adult. It’s been wonderful!

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            Thank you, I pray in my own way, MEB.

          • MEB

            Just a thought. My only confidence is that devotion to Mary enriches prayer life. I’m not at all saying that it will change your mind. I am confident that devotion to Mary enriches prayer life.

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            OK, Thanks!

          • Garrett

            I agree…To say, “I’m going to pray for you, because your wrong!” does not signify a sincerity. This reminds me of Luke 18: 9-14 “He then addressed this parable to those who were convinced of their own righteousness and despised everyone else. “Two people went up to the temple area to pray; one was a Pharisee and the other was a tax collector. The Pharisee took up his position and spoke this prayer to himself, ‘O God, I thank you that I am not like the rest of humanity—greedy, dishonest, adulterous—or even like this tax collector. I fast twice a week, and I pay tithes on my whole income.’ But the tax collector stood off at a distance and would not even raise his eyes to heaven but beat his breast and prayed, ‘O God, be merciful to me a sinner.’ I tell you, the latter went home justified, not the former; for everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, and the one who humbles himself will be exalted.”

            L, we all need prayer, no matter where we are in life. Now, in order for us all to come to the table of unity, we all need to be open to listening with a compassionate and loving heart. Just because you feel a different way than I do, doesn’t mean we can’t listen with an honest, open heart. I just ask that you look deep down inside that God-created heart of yours, and try to look at what abortion is, look into the theological and faith reasons against it, pray about it, discern why you might feel that way…You know there is that old- now cliche -saying, WWJD. If we have a good, honest understanding of who Christ was and who He is, that might shed some light on difficult decisions and it may just open us to God’s grace in understanding, which is a beautiful gift of the Holy Spirit. Just open yourself up to God’s truth and he’ll show you the way! God bless you! God bless us all!

          • Garrett

            Also, to be honest, Spokane may not have meant it that way. Commenting is like texting…sometimes taken out of context. Be blessed everyone!

          • SpokaneCatholic

            Thank you, Garrett. I have real concern for L.’s immortal soul, and my prayers for her are sincere.

          • Lauren

            All I can say is… “The cafeteria is closed.”-Pope Benedict

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            It looks open to me. And full.

          • musiciangirl591

            everyone needs prayers! i know i do! :)

        • SpokaneCatholic

          Long ago, when I was not practicing the Faith, I had a pregnancy scare. Although I was basically pro-life, I had never actually faced the issue for myself. Suddenly, I was asking myself if I really could take the baby’s life. But a pregnancy would have been so disruptive to my life then. I thank God that my period finally came, so I didn’t have to truly face that decision. Because of that experience, I have compassion for women who face unwanted pregnancies, as well as those who have already aborted their babies. “There, but for the grace of God…”

          So, L., please give some thought to this: maybe you were not really a hypocrite, but simply – like all of us! – a sinner, weakened by life in a world that has normalized the killing of babies in the womb. So, now, instead of being pro-abortion (promoting abortion), could you not start thinking of yourself as anti-unwanted-pregnancy? And one who is trying to be pro-life? Acknowledging that you might very well be tempted – and give in to that temptation – does not make a hypocrite. There is the Ideal, to which we strive, and the Reality in which we live. Every time we fall, we beg forgiveness, and try again. But, it seems to me, calling yourself a Catholic while being openly (maybe even proudly) pro-abortion – that seems to be far more hypocritical.

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            I DEFINITELY think of myself as ” anti-unwanted-pregnancy.”

            I, too, had a pregnancy scare nearly 20 years ago — an unwanted pregnancy, that fortunately, I miscarried at 7 weeks, but it gave me a lot of insight into why women choose abortion.

            I don’t think it’s hypocritical to call myself Catholic, and I call myself “pro-abortion” not because abortions themselves are desirable, but because I so fervently, firmly believe that they should be legal, and left up to the women who seek them and the doctors who choose to perform them.

            But yes, in an ideal world, women would be able to avoid unwanted pregnancies — through chastity/NFP for those who choose that route, and contraception for those of us who don’t.

          • JAGreene86

            I have a question for you, L. (I know you have a lot of posts on here, and this is not a direct response to this particular post, but just in general.

            What is your motivation/reason for being Catholic?

            You mentioned that you liked how the Church is very big on “Corporal Works of Mercy” and the like…but other Christian denominations do that as well.

            You also mentioned that you don’t receive the Eucharist out of respect for it (even though you are unsure about it being the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Christ)…that goes pretty in line with the Lutheran Doctrine.

            However, you also mentioned that your “partner” (or spouse for the ones who are confused) is not even Christian, but yet you hold fast to your beliefs, despite the obvious conflict that it might create in your house.

            I honestly have a hard time figuring out why you call yourself Catholic. This isn’t necessarily a good thing, because if I were to get married to someone, there should be no doubt in people’s mind why I married that person. Now, to those who don’t know me, they might not know right off the bat, but once they get to know me, they get to see the positive effect that my spouse has in my life and my love for my spouse would easily be seen by those who get to have a conversation with me.

            Is there anything about the Catholic Church that you find unique and beautiful that you cannot find in any other religion? For I will say this: the main difference between the Catholic Church and any other religion is the Eucharist. Everything that the Church does is with the Eucharist in mind. We (Catholics) love, because God first loved us through the Eucharist. We have mass the same way, because it is centered around the Word and the Eucharist.

            Is the Eucharist what you see in the Catholic Church that you see in no other religion? Because if that were the case, why are you so unsure about the Eucharist? Other Christian denominations follow the Bible, go out to the world and do good works, etc. They have salvation through Christ and Christ alone. No other Christian denomination (other than Lutherans, which believe in consubstantiation, not transubstantiation), has the Eucharist like the Catholic Church. That is the beauty of the Church.

            I will not marry a girl just to marry…I want to marry a girl who is so unique in who they are, that I just instinctively know that I will not receive the same kind or amount of joy from anyone else. I have a deep, personal connection with them that uniquely defines us, that no one else has, and that we will get with no one else. This is similar to how I feel about the Catholic Church, both in it’s teachings and in the Eucharist. As I often say to people, there is nothing that another religion can offer that the Catholic Church doesn’t have (when it comes to God). We have Truth, we have Love (and the reason why it seems like we “change” is because the Catholic Church is constantly discovering Truth, but once they discover it is Truth, it becomes Doctrine, and does not change).

            Do you see the Catholic Church uniquely? Or do you see it as “just another religion that I choose to follow”? Is the Church calling you closer? Or are you calling the Church closer? Are you following a God who leads you, or are you following a God who you lead?

            These are just questions, because I am curious to why you believe what you believe. I am not here to make fun of you or judge you, but I am slightly worried that you are purposely deceiving yourself so you can live a “normal” and “comfortable” life. I might be wrong, and I would like to be proven wrong…but, “in my heart”, I believe I’m right when I say that, because I have seen many cases where that was true, but the person wasn’t courageous enough to admit to it. I would like for you to be the exception, but you’re going to have to give me all the facts in order for me to honestly believe you (maybe you feel the same way about the Church, I don’t know).

            From a sinful human to a sinful human, I’m honestly trying to help you, as well as give you a chance to help me. I want to have conversation with you. I want to learn from you, but in order for that to happen, I would like you to learn from me as well.

            Just an offer…I’m glad the majority of people have been very “civil” towards you on this blog…I think that is the True sign of Christ.

            “They will know we are Christians by our love.”

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            I didn’t pick the Catholic church, the way I picked my partner — a wife is the wrong analogy. A father/mother would be a better analogy. My parents aren’t perfect, and yet I will always be their daughter.

          • JAGreene86

            I honestly don’t understand your connection.

            My mother and father are both Catholic, but I understand that I don’t have to be Catholic because they’re Catholic. My faith is not dependent on anyone, my faith is a freely-given choice made by me and for me (and hopefully for the betterment of others)…that’s why I relate to it more like “choosing” a spouse rather than “being born into” it. My faith is made stronger that way, because nothing can take it away from me. Even when my parents die (hopefully later rather than sooner), I would still be Catholic, and I will continue to be stronger in my faith then when I first began.

            We all will be God’s children, no matter what we do…however, people forget, that every kind of love is wrapped up in our love for God. We love Him as a Father, a Friend, a Brother, and even a Lover. Love is always a freely-given choice. If someone was “forced” into loving me, they would be unhappy, and I would be unhappy as well…but if someone freely chose to love me and freely chose to want to be with me, both her and I would be as happy as can be.

            Being Catholic is always a choice…it has to be, or else it’s meaningless to us. If there is no passion, no desire to be Catholic, then we’re just “going through the motions”. I don’t want a wife who is “going through the motions” of marriage…I want a wife that does things BECAUSE she wants to.

            This may sound radical, but I’m 25 years old…and I go to mass because I want to. Yes, there is a sense of obligation, but my desire for mass IS the reason why I go, because I’m aware that I always have a choice. If I marry someone, I’m not going to remain faithful to them because I’m “obliged” to, but I remain faithful to them because I want to.

            Love is all about choosing to let that natural desire for God manifest in our lives and in the people around us. I don’t spend hours on this blog because “it’s my duty to”, but I spend hours writing on this blog because I have a desire to help inform people on what is True, and to help them understand that the world is teaching them a lie, and I want to test their “myths” (that’s why I like MythBusters so much!).

            I can tell you this to be true…unless there’s a desire to be Catholic, being Catholic will not do any good for you, both mentally and spiritually. Catholicism is for those who want to Learn and Love Christ in the highest form possible…not just for those who “just want to get to heaven”. One should not marry just for the sake of getting married…one should marry with a great passion and desire for the other person that they can’t imagine a life without them. I have a natural desire to get married, and I’ll make damn sure that I’ll be the best husband I can be, because I want to be…both for me and for her. I have that same desire for God. I will not stop Learning about God, and I will not stop Loving God, and every moment I grow more in both in some way…that’s what makes life beautiful.

            I hope I don’t sound trite, but there is so much you’re missing by not having a free-willed desire for God through the Catholic Church. Trust me.

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            I believe I do have a free-willed desire for the Catholic church — just not all of it.

          • JAGreene86

            I guess that’s what I don’t get…because if it’s from God, then there is no justification on why you wouldn’t agree with all of the teachings of the Church. It’s like saying “I desire God, but not all of Him”. This is what doesn’t make sense to me.

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            Read one of my responses above, in which I pointed out that marrying outside the faith is no longer an excommunicable offense. The interpretation of God’s will changes, according to the whims of men.

          • musiciangirl591

            fortunately? wow, if my grandmas or my friend monica who miscarried in the last year saw that, they would be sad

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            I am not your grandmas, nor your friend Monica. I am sorry for their losses, but that doesn’t make experience a loss, too, or at least a loss of anything that was wanted. Believe it or not, not all women want exactly the same thing.

          • musiciangirl591

            but still, if i lost a baby (which unfortunately might happen, medication), i would be devastated…

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            Not all babies are wanted. Mine wasn’t. I think that explains it pretty well.

    • Maria

      I had a couple questions for you, after seeing all your responses: why do you sound so proud of your “I’m Catholic and pro-abortion” stance? It seems you’re inserting it at every pause, whether it’s relevant or not.. Just found it strange. Also, are you aware that you could just submit to what the Church says? Like, you can not fully understand or agree with something, yet humble yourself via following it anyway? I’ll give you a real-life example, not religionly oriented: I was in the military for quite awhile, and, through the lovely personality combination of not really having grown up at all (immaturity) and a crazy argumentative, I’m-always-right-and-I’ll-prove-it-by-outthinking-you-cuz-bytheway-I’m-smarter-too mentality, I managed to get into several situations where I had to either swallow my pride and do what I was directed or face serious consequences. But I managed! I listened– tho not happily. Point is, you can go through the motions, kind of lip-sync along, and it’s a start. Doesn’t matter what’s in your heart of hearts. I do this oftentimes when it comes to prayer.. Pretty much never do I get any clear indications that I’m being heard, none of those warm fuzzies, etc. But, I figure just keeping doing it is worth the effort, if only because it’s putting what we’re told to do higher on tim priority-list than what we feel like..

      • maria

        On the* priority list, bah!

      • maria

        Not religiously* oriented! This is why I *love* typing on my phone!

        • SpokaneCatholic

          I hadn’t noticed the typo in your post. But, now that I re-read it, I really like the new word you invented: religionly! Doesn’t it sound like “heavenly”, only down here on earth? ;-)

          And your point is a very good one: the Church asks for our assent, even when we don’t understand. A young woman in my Bible study group – a convert – was struggling to accept the Church’s teaching on contraceptives. But she was doing it the right way, saying: “I don’t understand, and I’m trying to understand. But I will comply, anyway. I just wish I understood.” Her RCIA class never discussed NFP. (She said: “What? So, you take herbs?”) She was getting engaged… so I gave her a quick overview about NFP, and recommended taking the class with her future husband. She was overjoyed!

      • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

        Big difference — you joined the military, whereas I was raised in the Church with no say in the matter. Some of what I was taught stuck, some did not.

        • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

          And why ever would you find it “strange” that I would bring up my Catholic/pro-abortion stance on a post about “Catholics for Choice?”

          It seems like it’s pretty relevant to the post. I daresay I don’t insert it in every conversation — I imagine many people at my parish would be surprised by my views.

          Proud? No, not that — but not ashamed, either.

          • Lux et Veritas

            L:

            In May, 2012 , members of a U.S. House subcommittee heard graphic testimony on a bill (H.R. 3803) prohibiting abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy within the District of Columbia, explaining the extent to which preborn children have the capacity to feel the pain of being aborted.

            Three doctors, including a former abortionist, testified.

            “In the neonatal intensive care unit, we can witness firsthand the change in vital signs associated with pain,” said Colleen Malloy, Assistant Professor, Division of Neonatology/Dept. Of Pediatrics, Northwestern University. Her statement: http://judiciary.house.gov/hearings/Hearings 2012/Malloy 05172012 Her testimony is also on YouTube.

            Dr. Anthony Levatino, a gynecologist who estimates he performed more than 1,200 abortions before becoming pro-life, described in graphic terms abortions performed at the twenty-second week. Watch his compelling, chilling 5/17/12 testimony on YouTube.

            Also, have you ever heard of Abby Johnson, a former director of Planned Parenthood? She has an amazing story to tell-
            http://www.abbyjohnson.org/about/

        • David Paggi

          L:

          At around 3:20 p.m. EDT daily, EWTN runs Reflections, by Franciscan Friar Leo Clifford, for a very pithy 7-10 minutes. One of these episodes titled “First-Hand Faith, was very revealing to me. He observed that at first all of us live on second-hand faith, which we learn from our parents, at church, or (sometimes), at school. However, at some point we must assimilate it, interiorize it, and wrestle with it until it becomes first-hand faith with the power to shape & inform our lives.

          I can remember a time when I thought that those who focused on abortion were mucking up our ability to move forward on defense, economic, & foreign policy issues. A program by Fr Robert Spitzer, S.J., titled “Healing the Culture: A Pro-Life Philosophy” helped me gain perspective.

          I began to see that the Declaration has it exactly right, that liberty is the condition necessary for a vigorous pursuit of happiness, and one must be alive before this liberty can hold any value. At the same time I also gave careful consideration to the Church’s teaching on buman sexuality, which is as profoundly true as it is profoundly misunderstood. Ultimately, it calls for a greater, more authentic, & sacrificial love. It’s tough to accept and difficult to live out, but it is true, coherent & life-giving.

          In the Gospel, Jesus makes a claim that no one before or since has dared utter, “Before Abraham was, I AM!” Jn 8:58. C. S. Lewis famously argued that you cannot treat Christ as merely a wise teacher or one of many remarkably inspirational figures. He is either the world’s greatest liar or most raving lunatic, or He is precisely who He says He is – God incarnate.

          The Church is the same way. She does not see herself as one of many Christian denominations, rather she claims to be the One, Holy, Catholic, & Apostolic Church. So either she is the Whore of Babylon or the Bride of Christ, with the authority to teach in His name.

          Here is where faith must precede understanding. Once I understood the Divine nature of the Church, in spite of her sinful human members, I can place trust in her teaching, even when I don’t like or understand it.

          When we receive Holy Communion, we are challenged with the declaration “The Body of Christ”. When we respond “Amen”, we are giving our assent to everything that implies. This is why Protestants may not receive the Eucharist; for them to do so would be a profoundly sacriligous lie, and it follows that it would be a false ecumenism that would lead a fellow Christian to sin, however inadvertently.

          So those who are saying that you can’t be Catholic and pro-abortion are really saying that your understanding of Christ and His Church is, like mine was for so many years, lacking in some important repects.

          If you have read this far, then your challenge is twofold: while you do your very best act in a manner consistent with the Church’s teaching (faith seeking understanding), you should also avail yourself of the tremendous resources available to increase your knowledge (understanding seeking faith).

          Jesus gives us some guarantees: “Upon this Rock I will build my Church & the gates of hell shall not prevail against it”, “Seek and ye shall find”, and along with truth, “persecution besides”.

          I can suggest some resources for you to study, but the one thing I can’t do is predict which or how many books, articles, and talks the Holy Spirit will use to help you gain understanding. Mostly it’s a cumulative thing, where one insight builds on another. So here is a very incomplete list:

          EWTN has really oustanding content, on TV & radio, and in particular its audio & document libraries at ewtn.com.

          Catholic Answers produces a 2 hour live radio call-in show with incredibly courteous, knowledgeable, and articulate guests on a wide range of topics. Their website, Catholic.com, contains a treasure of good info.

          NewAdvent.com combines tremendous libraries with a home page with links to outstanding writers and news sources. That’s how I arrived here.

          See francisbeckwith.com for really thorough scholarly articles as well aa very accessible shorter pieces. His book ” Defending Life” is written in a remarkably lucid style with both humorous anecdotes and penetrating analysis of the issues.

          A few others who deserve more mention: Priestsforlife.org , usccb.org, CatholicExchange.com, & many, many others.

          The bottom line is that you really cannot be a faithful, practicing Catholic and be pro-abortion. Finding out why will be a great challenge that, if you persevere, will bring you great joy & peace. It’s the pearl of great price.

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            Thanks. I go to mass and take full advantage of the adult education offerings at our parish.

            I live outside the U.S., but when we used to live there, I was active in our parish there (and was even on the board of the parish school).

            My opinions are not based on ignorance, but on conclusions I reached after long and careful thought.

          • SpokaneCatholic

            “For the time will come when people will not tolerate sound doctrine but, following their own desires and insatiable curiosity, will accumulate teachers and will stop listening to the truth and will be diverted to myths.”

            from 2 Tim 4 – part of today’s first reading.

            It amazes me that, so often, the readings for an given day will fit a situation that day to a T.

            L., I’m afraid that you are not following sound doctrine. I’ve reached this conclusion after careful thought and prayerful discernment.

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            Funny, I thought exactly the same thing!

            But I thought (returning to Mattsealjr’s metaphor, above), the shoe is on the other foot. It is some of the supposedly devout Catholics who are believing the myths now.

            SpokaneCatholic, I believe I am indeed following sound doctrine. I’ve reached this conclusion after careful thought and prayerful discernment, too.

            I was pro-life until I was 15, and then went the other way — and nothing I have encountered since in my life has led me to want to reverse what I believe.

          • musiciangirl591

            what sound doctrine?

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            Free will. Free to reject what I believe to be taught in error, such as abortion/contraception/marriage.

          • ms

            Where do you find “free to reject” Church teachings = “sound doctrine”?

        • Maria

          Right, well, there’s no point discussing whether it’s strange or not, and that wasn’t the more important of things said.. You neglected to explain why you don’t submit to the Church’s teaching out of deference. You may have been baptized without your specific consent, but you were not confirmed without it. You are not forced to continue to attend church.. So, my voluntary joining of the military is exactly the same as your voluntary profession of the Catholic faith, as far as choice goes.

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            I was pro-life when I was confirmed, at 13. I rejected those beliefs a few years later.
            I choose to self-identify as Catholic, and I don’t claim to be devout, since I reject some teachings.

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            I was confirmed when I was but a child of 13, and still pro-life. I do not submit to all of the Church’s teachings, and yet I still attend Church and self-identify as a Catholic (though I am usually hasten to add, “not devout” or something, so as to give a correct impression). Unlike the military, the Church isn’t a paid profession — at my job, I follow the rules of the company because that’s why I’m there. What I do in my own time, I do by choice. And I choose to follow some, but not all, teachings of the Church.

    • Mattsealjr

      I’m warning you ahead of time, I’m bad with words.

      Hey L, I’ve read most of the comments and I think one thing that a few people tried to explain may have not been as clear as possible. They have said that if you are not pro-life, you are not Catholic, and you (understandably so) have disagreed wholeheartedly. The best way to see what they’re getting at is in the black and white of things (grey, the most diverse shade, can be oh so confusing in definitions).

      So here’s the black and white, the inarguable objective, what they are really trying to say: if integration depends upon belief, then unbelief dictates (not suggests) severance.

      I used a thesaurus for that last word. But you get my point.

      Let’s say I start a Green-Shoes-Are-The-Best Club (Father forgive me for comparing the Catholic Church to a club). To be in the GSATBC, you have to wear green shoes. It’s a necessary part of the *fact* that you are in the GSATBC. People who wear purple shoes and claim to be with the men in Green Shoes would be scrutinized as hypocrites; for how can one wear purple shoes and say that they believe Green-Shoes-Are-The-Best?

      Now, let me make the lines this ridiculous analogy draws more clear:

      1. The Catholic Church is not a “club.” This analogy is not built to withstand sharp-shooting; I just wanted to show how a group of people with one, very specific, unchanging belief cannot be represented fully by someone who does not hold said belief. (the Church isn’t defined by the ONE belief that all life is sacred, but I don’t really have the patience to think up a bunch of rules about the particulars of green shoes (though that would be cool)). (Oh also the belief that life is sacred isn’t the center of the faith either).

      Man, I’m letting this get sloppy.

      2. I realize that one can wear purple shoes *sometimes* and still think that green ones are the best. Like I said, this analogy isn’t spot-on with transcendental Truth. The point is that one can’t believe that life isn’t sacred at some times, and that it is at other times. It’s a belief that one must hold at all times; to be Catholic is to believe that life begins at the moment of conception, and that the unnatural termination of that life is evil. Without that belief, one can’t really claim to be Catholic and at the same time be in the Truth.

      3. Ya know?

      I’m not as knowledgable as other commenters, and sharing a college with Marc has made me aware that I’m much more ignorant than him as well, so I don’t really know if being pro-abortion means you’ve been excommunicated. I sure hope not, because you seem to admire much of the beauty that Christ has given us. But I do know that to claim to be a part of the family that is the Catholic Church, you have to believe what She teaches us in whole.

      I really wish you could hear the tone in my voice instead of reading this. You’d probably get a good laugh out of how much I’d stutter.

      SO. That just about does it. To recap any confusion:
      -The Church isn’t as simple as a “club.”
      -Shoe color preference is not as unchanging as the belief in the sanctity of life.
      -I can’t put my thoughts to words well.

      I’ll leave you with this (shoot, I probably should have kept it to JUST this): If you were a part of a 2000-year-old institution, which was believed to be created by God Himself, and that institution said that its members must adhere to This Belief, and men began proclaiming that they were a part of the institution, and at the same time rejected This Belief, what would you think?

      Matt

      • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

        You lost me with the shoes. But thanks for making an effort, I guess.

        I will continue to insist that I’m Catholic, and you will continue to insist I that am not. I think that’s what it boils down to.

        • Mattsealjr

          Yeah, this morning I was angry with myself for using such an obscure example. But you’ve pretty much hit the nail on the head there.

          Basically what I was saying is that you cannot claim to be something and at the same time reject part of the nature of that something.

          Catholics believe abortion is wrong (we’re stubborn at times).
          You believe it is ok (which, you know, is your own thing).

          Any attempt to merge your beliefs with the Catholic belief wouldn’t work. That’s all we’re trying to explain. If you held the views of a democrat and adamantly insisted that you were a republican, people would (for obvious reasons) disagree with you.

          Better?

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            Not all Catholics believe abortion is always wrong.

          • JoAnna Wahlund

            It doesn’t matter what they believe. What matters is that they self-identify as part of an organization that teaches the opposite of what they believe. Would you become a member of PETA if you loved to eat bacon? If not, why would you remain a Catholic if you’re pro-abortion?

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            So now that you’ve established my pro-abortion views are genuine, your argument has switched to, “Don’t remain a Catholic?”

            I imagine that if PETA were a religion, and I had been born into it the way I was born into Catholicism, and raised in it so that it formed the core of my values — and then somewhere along the way I decided I liked to eat bacon, I might still support some of the other work they do, attend their meetings, etc.

          • Abadilla

            L. Correct! but those Catholics are dissenting from official Church teaching that clearly states abortion is a grave sin, murder, period. The “truth” of a tenet of Catholicism does not depend on how many Catholics believe or do not believe on a particular tenet. Once God has revealed something as truth from either Sacred Tradition Sacred Scripture or both, it is a truth that must be held by all Catholics precisely because it is the truth. Catholics adhere to truths, we don’t dissent from them because that would be another way of saying, “God, I don’t accept your truth!”
            L. let us say that millions of Catholics contradict Science by saying that oxygen does not exist. Does that make it a questionable scientific truth because millions of Catholics reject the truth of the existence of oxygen? Of course not, that truth is there whether Catholics reject the truth or not. All we can do, in all honesty, is to adhere to such a scientifc truth.
            There was a time when most people believe slavery was O.K. but it is a grave sin, has always been a grave sin, and will always be a grave sin, regardless of what most people in the world think about slavery.

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            I don’t believe that God has “revealed” anything about abortion, just because the Church teaches one thing now.

            Canon law changes all the time — look at marriage outside the faith.

            According to the 1917 Code of Canon Law, Canon 2319 said,

            “Catholics are under an excommunication latae sententiae reserved to the Ordinary: (1) who contract marriage before a non-Catholic minister contrary to canon 1063, 51, 1; (2) who contract marriage with an explicit or implicit agreement that all children or any child be educated outside the Catholic Church; (3) who knowingly presume to present their children to non-Catholic ministers to be baptized; (4) who, being parents or taking their place, knowingly present their children to be educated or trained in a non-Catholic religion.”

            I heard stories about my great-aunt, cast out of the family — and the Church — for marrying a non-Catholic.

            ut in October 1970, Pope Paul VI published the Apostalic Letter Matrimonia Mixta, in which he said,

            The penalties decreed by canon 2319 of the Code of Canon Law are all abrogated. For those who have already incurred them the effects of those penalties cease, without prejudice to the obligations mentioned in number 4 of these norms.

            Just like that — poof! Excommunication revoked! Mixed marriages are still not considered ideal, but those specific violations are no longer excommunicable offenses.

            Too late for my great-aunt, though.

          • Abadilla

            L stated, “I don’t believe that God has “revealed” anything about abortion, just because the Church teaches one thing now.” Have you ever heard of the Didache, the Teaching of the Twelve Apostles? This is the first non-canonical book coming to us all the way back from the Apostolic era, and that book already condemned abortion, infanticide and contraception as anti-Christian. The Church has condemned all three for 2000 years, so, how can you possibly think the Church teaches abortion is wrong now? The early Christians condemned these three practices because the God of life could not possibly approve of the destruction of innocent human life, nor could the God of life support contra (against) ceptives (conception,) against conception. How do we know God is the God of Life? Simple, it is in the Scriptures, the revelation I was writing to you about.

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            I’ve read a lot of church history, but I don’t believe in all teachings.

        • ColdStanding

          Er, not quite so fast. The rules are clearly laid out and it isn’t up to you to decide if you are a member in good standing (but it is your duty to find out FOR SURE what required to be of good standing). You may have been baptized. You may have had confirmation and received communion, but you are required to to the best of your ability conform to the teachings of the Church. Declaring that you are Catholic means that you are confirmed in your belief of God and the truths that He has deigned to teach us through His one true Catholic Church. The Roman Catholic Church is the duly authorized teaching church that protects, nurtures, and expands the implications of the deposit of faith left to us by our Saviour Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of God, through the apostolic succession. The successors of St. Peter have declared that, in light of a number of significant points, it is a mortal threat to the well being of one’s eternal soul to advocate for, participate in, or have an abortion. For you to claim that you possess greater authority in this matter, abortion, or any other matter of significance to one’s eternal salvation, than those duly authorized to proclaim, teach, and defend the articles of the faith as revealed to His Church by God Himself, is a situation that gravely threatens the possibility of your attaining eternal salvation. Or did you forget that this is the purpose of being a Catholic?

          But don’t take my work for it. Go and talk to the priest of your parish. Print out what I have written here and ask him if what I say is true. If he be true to his calling, he will be asking that you renounce the position that you have been advocating here (print that out and show it to him too), repent of it before God in confession, and encourage you to give proper witness to your faith by defending the rights of the unborn to the life that was freely given them by God through the agency of the child’s parents and rebuke with all your might those that care so little about themselves and others that they would slaughter the innocent as if a child be no more than a bug.

          If you refuse repent of advocating for abortion and continue to contradict the Holy Church you are bringing scandal upon the Holy Roman Catholic Church and sowing confusion among those seeking salvation in addition to the hazard to your individual soul which you have brought on yourself.

          God has told us that He deeply desires your individual salvation and He has provide you the means by which you may attain it. His mercy knows no bounds, if you but ask for it and participate in it by your repentance. You, Catholic as you claim to be, have full rights of participation in the Sacraments He provided for His Church for the salvation of souls once you have returned to a state of grace through confession. Implore you to do this. If you are capable of good conscience, but refuse to repent, you aught stop claiming that you are a Catholic.

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            Of course I speak to my priest.

            And I am indeed Catholic, much to what I imagine will be your chagrin.

            Sorry, it is indeed possible to be pro-abortion and be Catholic — in fact, I know many who still receive communion.

          • SpokaneCatholic

            The Church isn’t a democracy, it’s a hierarchy, with Jesus at its head. We aren’t meant to follow trends, we’re meant to follow Jesus. He put Peter in charge, gave him the keys, and told us to listen to him. You openly defy the teachings of His Church. Yes, you are Cathlic, because of your baptism. But you are in error when you decide to ignore some of the rules. And trying to justify that by pointing to others who are also breaking the rules is not a good plan for your eternal salvation. God doesn’t grade on a curve.

            Heck, that kind of logic doesn’t even work here on earth: “Yes, your honor, I stole a car. But I know lots of people who steal cars.”

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            I have no fear for my eternal salvation, honestly.

            And my point about others sharing my opinion was just a statement, not an argument. There are indeed many people who believe as I do — but even if there were only one, I would not question what I know to be true in my own heart.

          • JoAnna Wahlund

            Why do you think your own heart is the final arbiter of what is good and true?

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            Because I truly believe so. You may obediently follow whatever you like, I trust my reason.

          • ms

            Wow, L. That’s some pretty powerful pride on display. How’d you get to be so dang smart? So smart that you don’t even question how smart you are?

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            I am not particularly smart, but I do know what is in my own heart.

          • ms

            I’ve heard it said, and believe it to be very true, because it is so often on display: “There are none so sure of themselves as the morally insensitive, and none so morally insensitive as those who take their superior position for granted.”

          • ColdStanding

            Prevarication!

          • Abadilla

            L, “Sorry, it is indeed possible to be pro-abortion and be Catholic — in fact, I know many who still receive communion.”

            No, L, it is not possible to be a Catholic and believe in the killing of unborn children anymore than it is possibe for a person, even without a religion, to say he respects human life from the moment of conception but it is O.K to kill the unborn.
            As for those Catholics who receive Holy Communion while supporting the destruction of the unborn, they are committing sacrilege and God who knows it all will someday take care of that.

          • musiciangirl591

            they are Catholic in name, but not in practice, i know plenty of “Catholics”

    • Shirley

      Dear L, I admire your persistence in calling yourself catholic but according to church teaching you cannot be catholic and support abortion. Saying you are not pro-choice is contradicting yourself. Pro-abortion and pro-choice are the same thing.

      Your opinions and views are not in tune with church teaching and in order to be Catholic you have to accept the teachings of the church- all of them.

      Catholicism is not a “pick and choose” religion and that’s why there are other churches today.

      I understand you are happy with your opinion on this issue and I pray you reconsider because abortion is a grave evil and God although merciful, is just.

      • guest

        All you need to do to be apart of the catholic church is believe in the Nicene creed, room for disagreement can exist in all the grey area. Not all of catholicism is political.

        • Abadilla

          Guest, the problem is, abortion is definitely not a part of any grey area. On matters of “prudential judgment” we Catholics might differ, but on essential teachings either one is a Catholic or one is not.

    • Abadilla

      L, would you be kind enough to tell me what the difference is between pro-abortion as opposed to pro-choice? By “pro-choice” a person is saying loudly, I have the child to kill my baby in the womb, so, how is that different from being pro-abortion?

      • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

        I find the “pro-choice” description to be wishy-washy and have so many different meanings that it is virtually meaningless.

        I believe “pro-abortion” is short for “pro-abortion rights.” For me, the debate is mainly 1) what I myself might do, if I faced certain situations, and 2) what kind of laws I support, regarding this issue.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=758888637 Jake Machado

    I posted on their wall a defense of the Magisterium and a defense of Objective Truth and invited them to a peaceful conversation seeking truth.

    Let’s see how long it takes me to get the boot haha.

    • musiciangirl591

      i got the boot after posting one comment lol

  • Ben C.

    I laughed so hard at the 80′s R&B pic. You’re a genius.

  • Laura @ Show Me a Day

    For shiz.

  • Tori in the hizzity hay

    Went to their page and am now thoroughly depressed.

  • http://twitter.com/ElibbabethAnne Libby Julien

    I’d like to extend a virtual handshake through the interwebz. And a fist pound. And a hug. AND… a Sign of Peace. You are one BA Catholic. Thank you.

  • Korou

    Thanks for bringing it up, Marc. I am glad to see websites like this exist, and enjoyed visiting it.

  • minxcomix

    Aah yes. Catholics for Choice.
    The Church should be a democracy!
    Let the people vote for Pope and Cardinals!
    The Church needs to be based on the wants and whims of persons. Because God is to be made in our image.

    The worship of God made Man is so yesterday, now we need to modernize and worship man made god.

    • guest

      the pope is voted on by the cardinals…so… yes?

  • http://thecatholicsciencegeek.blogspot.com/ The Catholic Science Geek

    This, I have to say, is one of your finest posts. Keep it up!

    • http://thecatholicsciencegeek.blogspot.com/ The Catholic Science Geek

      Now, off to Facebook to get banned!

      • http://thecatholicsciencegeek.blogspot.com/ The Catholic Science Geek

        BLOCKED AFTER 13 MINUTES OF NONSTOP COMMENTS!

        • http://thecatholicsciencegeek.blogspot.com/ The Catholic Science Geek

          Keep posting everyone, they are quick to delete the truth…so SWAMP THEM WITH TRUTH!

      • http://thecatholicsciencegeek.blogspot.com/ The Catholic Science Geek

        You don’t have to “like” them to comment….which may be why I was on there longer than other people before getting blocked?

        • http://elizabethk-fthnfort.blogspot.com/ Elizabeth K.

          I just got banned after only two comments–so, three minutes? Do I win??

  • musiciangirl591

    we got mail one day at our Campus Ministries house, one of the magazines we got was from Catholics for Choice, we keep it around for a good laugh, i saw on facebook that one of my friends wrote a review for the page, it says something to effect of this is a laughable organization…, someone commented on that (i love this) vegetarians for meat eating! :)

  • http://twitter.com/CharlesJones265 Charles Jones

    Marc – I agree with almost nothing in your blog, but that album cover was the funniest darn thing I’ve seen in a long time. A++ Laughing all weekend!

    • Marc Barnes

      Glad to hear it. ( :

  • Marie

    As usual – awesome! God bless!

  • Ckdaw

    I OWNED them on FB in perfectly respectful terms and they deleted my comments and banned me. Awesome!

    • musiciangirl591

      did they call your terms “dergatory” or “disrespectful” or “hurtful” lol

  • http://thecatholicsciencegeek.blogspot.com/ The Catholic Science Geek

    For anyone who hasn’t gotten banned yet: Leave your comments in the “recommendations” section in the upper right of their page. The comments stay up longer!

  • JoAnna Wahlund

    Here’s another example of the epic fail that is Catholics for Choice: http://a-star-of-hope.blogspot.com/2012/05/catholics-for-choice-killed-strawman.html

  • Ckdaw

    After they banned me, I suggested an edit for their info, to rename themselves “Regular People for Choice”

  • Cgilbert

    USCCB, May 10, 2000:

    “CFFC is, practically speaking, an arm of the abortion lobby in the United States and throughout the world. It is an advocacy group dedicated to supporting abortion. It is funded by a number of powerful and wealthy private foundations, mostly American, to promote abortion as a method of population control. This position is contrary to existing United Nations policy and the laws and policies of most nations of the world.

    “In its latest campaign, CFFC has undertaken a concentrated public relations effort to end the official presence and silence the moral voice of the Holy See at the United Nations as a Permanent Observer. The public relations effort has ridiculed the Holy See in language reminiscent of other episodes of anti-Catholic bigotry that the Catholic Church has endured in the past.”

    http://old.usccb.org/comm/archives/2000/00-123.shtml

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Angelo-Ocampo/100000081911147 Angelo Ocampo

    You sir, wrecked them like a boss! :D

  • Austin

    I hope they ban me too!! I wanna be apart of the banned group!!

    • musiciangirl591

      it won’t take that much or too long, some people i’ve talked to have been banned in less than a minute :P

  • Sherry

    Banned in one.

  • Tzbell06

    bahah im officially banned from their site as well! only took 2 minutes and they deleted my comment disagreeing with “98% of catholics are against contraception”

    • Dmikem

      Tzbell06,

      Are you suggesting our intolerant friends at CFC have thin skin, are close-minded, won’t engage in factual debate and ban anyone who doesn’t agree with their propaganda? ?? :) U B right!

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Victoria-Clarizio/686175007 Victoria Clarizio

    Thank you for bringing this group into the light Marc! The way they are twisting the truth is saddening. We need to do some hardcore praying. St Michael the Archangel defend us in battle!

  • Tally Marx

    A heretic, by definition, is one who dissents from Catholic doctrine.
    “Heretics for Choice” is a more fitting title for this group of which you speak.

  • TheIdler

    Brilliant, as usual.

  • Mike

    Am I the only one who imagines the lawyers delivering a canon lawsuit, followed by cannons blasting the crap out of whoever got sued? Cause that sounds pretty awesome to me…

  • http://www.facebook.com/marcia.b.castro Marcia Brown Castro

    I loved this! Isn’t Catholics for Choice an oxymoron?

    • musiciangirl591

      vegetarians for meat eating!

    • musiciangirl591

      also one i made up myself, Lactose Intolerants for Dairy Products :P

    • Samedisam1492

      Athiests for Christ!

    • JD

      I think this is a good use for latae sententiae excommunication.

      The bishops would get a few nasty editorials written about them, but it would clear up the confusion.

  • RCJC

    Has anyone else noticed that many of the people who are allowed to comment on their facebook page are not Catholic and have, if not hatred, a very strong dislike of the Church and her heirarchy? I find that strange, given the name they chose for themselves…

  • silly catholics

    LoL. I hope this guy walks off a cliff.

    • Dmikem

      Typical liberal tolerance…lovely.

  • silly catholics

    Talk about deleting comments! Can’t comment if you don’t agree with this irrational, illogical propaganda!

    • Dmikem

      Silly Catholics,

      Please read my earlier post on the use of the word Catholic. Please remove Catholics from your screen name. This will make me happy and more accurately describe you.

      • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

        Excommunicated Catholics are still Catholic.

        • JoAnna Wahlund

          But no one with any integrity should self-identify as Catholic if they don’t embrace ALL the teachings of the Church.

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            I guess I lack integrity, then? Okay, if you insist. But I am what I am.

        • musiciangirl591

          yes, in name but not in practice, i know alot of “Catholics”

        • JAGreene86

          By what definition? Is someone who’s divorced still married?

  • Dmikem

    Fantastic….loud cheering, clapping, standing ovation. What a great smack-down. I’m tired of these pro-choice people who want to save the trees but don’t mind killing the babies.

    Here’s the bottom line, YOU CANNOT BE CATHOLIC AND PRO-ABORTION! (caps for emphasis)

    The use of Catholic to describe any group that opposes Church teachings should be stopped. They have a lot of names they could choose that would convey the message:

    *Heretic Catholics for Choice
    *Pretend Catholics for Choice
    *Former Catholics for Choice
    *Catholics in Name Only for Choice; CHINO’s for Choice has a nice ring to it.
    *Camouflage Catholics for Choice; I kinda like the initials, CCC…..oooohh wait, this might be confused with the Catechism of the Catholic Church.
    *Ex-Catholics for Choice

    The exit door awaits dissident Catholics.

    • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

      So what are you going to do, push us out the door? It’s one thing to condemn our opinions — and believe me, we expect it. But then what?

      • JoAnna Wahlund

        I prefer to pray that you become a person of integrity and either (a) embrace all the teachings of the Church, or (b) leave the Church and stop self-identifying as a Catholic (the preference being (a)).

        • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

          Neither (a) nor (b).

    • guest

      this was a smackdown because the writer made fun of an organization for using a stock photo? organizations do that all the time, the banner for this website is a simple combination of already existing photos. how about instead of making fun of the other side, you open a dialogue about why they belief a women should have the right to choice, and I’ll bet you’ll find they aren’t baby killing fanatics, rather people who belief there are better way to save unborn children than anti-women legislations.

      • http://www.facebook.com/joeclark1977 Joe Clark

        Yeah, right! I bet there’s nothing they think about more than “how can we help unborn children today”… except maybe how to make life better for born children? Isn’t that what they always accuse pro-lifers of: neglecting needy (born) children? Surely pro-abortion people are lining up to adopt special needs orphans and stuff, right?

        • guest

          Joe,
          I agree with you completely, I just didn’t want to open up a whole new discussion on welfare. Personally, I feel that the Safety net for at risk mothers and youth that it is a ridiculous assumption that making abortion illegal will solve anything. there was a time before roe V. wade and women still had abortions and many died. Children outside the womb have a right to life too.

      • Dmikem

        guest,

        I’m not making fun of anyone and I’m ready and willing to have a detailed discussion murdering babies in the womb. The euphemism ‘right to choice’ is offensive because it a transparent attempt to take the ugly out of abortion. I’m happy to debate you on the science of abortion, abortion and natural law, abortion and religion, abortion and woman’s rights or any other platform you want.

        I’m betting you’ve never seen an abortion. I suggest that you go to abortionNO.org. There you will find a short video of a full vaginal section abortion. Watch this and they multiply it by 52,000,000 which is the approximate number of aborted babies in the U.S. since Roe v. Wade became law.

        Ever see a late term abortion? Here the baby is prevented from fully exiting the birth canal. The doctor takes the fully viable child by the feet and raises them into the air to get access to the back of the child’s head. Then he jams an instrument into the back of the child’s head and collapses the skull.

        Since it is undisputed scientific fact that life begins at conception the I believe the unique person in the womb has equal rights to the mother and father, who represents them?

      • Abadilla

        Hi. Guest,

        “how about instead of making fun of the other side, you open a dialogue about why they belief a women should have the right to choice, and I’ll bet you’ll find they aren’t baby killing fanatics…”
        Are you not reading the contributions of many here? They tried to open a dilogue and they were banned, that’s it.

        • guest

          an open dialogue doesn’t start with an attack, and joking about how you are trying to be banned doesn’t sound like you are trying to discuss with them, but rather only make them rage.

          • kimberly

            most people didn’t start out joking and trying to be banned. there have been honest attempts at dialogue and speaking the truth. when a group censors every contrary statement it is really hard to open dialogue…and at a certain point you kinda have to see the humor in it.

  • http://twitter.com/thenerdywife Kendra B

    I just tweeted them (https://twitter.com/thenerdywife/status/211485609565495297) we’ll see how long until I get blocked…

    • musiciangirl591

      i tweeted them yesterday (@musiciangirl591), they haven’t blocked me yet (i haven’t checked since last night

    • musiciangirl591

      and they blocked me

  • http://www.facebook.com/TheEpigone Mike Strauss

    This has to be one of the best Bad Catholic articles ever.

  • catholicboyrichard

    My dad turned 90 yesterday… Now THAT is also a very “pro-life” thing to do…He had to fight with the docs several years ago to get 2 stents implanted to save his life–they felt he was “too old and it was too dangerous” even though he was having chest pains 3-4 times a week and had just suffered 3 minor heart attacks–with 3 total blockages to essential blood vessels directly connected to his heart. He forced the issue and now he is 90 and no more chest pain for years–anyone who thinks there is no priority list of who lives and who dies already, way before Obamacare, has a rude awakening either for themselves or a loved one. Off topic slightly, but my dad is a “pro life miracle” as far as I am concerned.

    BTW I just posted this on the “Choice” FB page, so we will see if they ban me for it. Hope so.

    • musiciangirl591

      i tweeted it to them and got blocked there lol

      • catholicboyrichard

        Amazing…I had done it through FB so maybe Tweeting is the answer…thanks!

  • catholicboyrichard

    I know!!! JUST WHAT DOES IT TAKE anyway…ban me please!!!

  • Michelle Thuldanin

    This had my hubs and me laughing out loud. Really like it when you’re so funny.

  • Mme_Chantal

    On May 10, 2000 the US bishops condemned Catholics for Choice (then known as Catholics for a Free Choice), stating truthfully that they are not Catholic, and are an arm of the abortion lobby. The statement can still be found on the USCCB website.

  • Corita

    “Go for a Lost Cause approach, full of serious-looking old people saying, “No matter if all the youth of the world begin to associate themselves with that filthy adjective, “pro-life”, we know what’s right. ”

    Yeah, 98% of the members of “Catholics For Choice” are definitely /old/ people with serious ideas about how awful we pro-life Catholics are. I wish them all the best as they die off and go to meet their maker, who is more compassionate even than they.

    • JD

      Is anyone surprised that a “Catholic” group that endorses contraception and sterilization is going the way of the Shakers?

      • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

        I can’t speak for any group, but I have say that lots of pro-abortion rights folks do reproduce — though I imagine natural selection will eventually take care of the “child-free-by-choice” people.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=646818734 Katiee Marie
  • Ttodd1952

    To be Catholic, one must follow the teachings of the Church. A person who is for abortion is not, in essence, Catholic. He may go to church and pretend to himself and others that he is Catholic. However, a true Catholic (or christian) cannot be pro abortion.

    • guest

      Clearly someone needs to understand the Catholic teachings on conscious. A person, wil a fully informed conscious, may come into disagreement with the church, and the church teaches that that is aceptable. the church’s stance on contraception is not infallible, because It has not been issued from an ecumenical council, therefore multiple opinions can exist.

      • JoAnna Wahlund

        Clearly, someone needs to learn how to spell “conscience.” (Seriously – you lose major credibility when you misspell words like that.)

        The teaching is infallible. It’s not going to change.

      • Abadilla

        No Guest, the teaching on contraception has been dealt with by Pius XI, the Second Vatican Council and Paul VI in Humanae Vitae and we are not a liberty to ignore it though many L’s do.
        Is the teaching that we must go to Mass every Sunday infallible or the product of a council? No, yet it is the teaching of the Church and we must, hopefully out of love, not fear of damnation.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Martin-G-Snigg/613538402 Martin G. Snigg

    And that’s that. Bad Catholic is v.good!

  • Melia

    The whole stock photo thing made me LOL. Reminds me of that time my family received a leaflet from the BNP that, under its banner comparing exiling immigrants to the Battle of Britain and the like, showed a happy, smiling white family who were no doubt thrilled by such a brilliant and nuanced idea being the basis of British society.

    Either that or it was actually a stock photo of a Californian family who found the whole thing completely offensive and requested to be removed. And then there was that atheist bus campaign about raising free-thinking kids whilst toting a happy, Pentecostal girl.

    Personally, if I were to do a campaign, I’d just draw my own supporters with crayons.

    • musiciangirl591

      just take your own pictures, takes like 10 minutes to do, and doesn’t really cost anything… lol, thats just lazy what they did

  • De

    You assume that the Church has rejected contraception with infallibility (i.e., definitively). You should know that many theologians disagree. I’d ask a few of your college professors what they think.

    • ColdStanding

      They are not the Magisterium, so if they contradict the teaching of the Holy Roman Catholic Church, the can in good conscience be ignored.

      • guest

        disagreement with the Magisterium is possible, the church isn’t some big totalitarian instution. with an informed conscious, with a thoughtful, prayerful approach to the gospel and teachings, people have the ability to disagree. Furthermore because no ecumenical council has rendered the teaching on contraception and reproductive rights infallible, dissient opinions still exist.

        moral of the story: think critically.

        • ColdStanding

          You are deceived. Infallibility resides with the Magisterium. The Magisterium speaks definitively when the pope issues his pronouncement on the given matter. Pope Paul VI settled the matter now at issue in this blog definitively with Humanae Vitae. What you say about needing an ecumenical council is nonsense.

          • Corita

            Using ecumenical councils to define doctrine makes you a Lutheran, doncha know!

        • JoAnna Wahlund

          Key word there: INFORMED conscience. Anyone who rejects Catholic teaching on contraception hasn’t informed their conscience. It is an infallible teaching taught unceasingly for the entire history of the Church, and this teaching has been reiterated by several popes in teaching encyclicals. It has been deemed infallible by the ordinary Magisterium. Deal with it.

          • guest

            Lol like how the Church allowed priests to marry until 900 CE, and women could be deacons until the 300′s. so clearly the church is capable of changing its mind in a few instances…

          • JoAnna Wahlund

            Priestly celibacy is a discipline, not a doctrine. You should learn the difference. The Eastern Rite of Catholicism still allows priests to marry (pre-ordination), and the Latin Rite allows married priests via the pastoral provision.

            Disciplines can be changed. Doctrines cannot. The intrinsic evil of contraception is a doctrine, not a discipline.

          • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=690784228 Clayton Manning

            JoAnna is correct, Priestly Celibacy is unique to the Roman Rite. The Vatican could change it at any time, as it isn’t dogmatic. Other things are also dogmatic, such as the Body and Blood to be ministered separately (In the Byzantine Rite they are mixed). Additionally, there is not really any disunity within the Magisterium (ie the Bishops, Priests, Cardinals, etc, who have the authority over such doctrine) in regards to abortion and contraception. Sure, some theologians may disagree with them, but let’s be serious: I could get a theology degree from a Catholic University and proceed to spew heresies. It doesn’t make it infallible or authoritative. That’s why the authority belongs to the magisterium, so that there isn’t complete chaos.

            A good analogy is with US Law. A law degree doesn’t give someone the ability to change the Constitution (the doctrine). Standing laws are subject to various measures of change (the disciplines). Can discipline complement or hinder doctrine? Sure, but the doctrine CANNOT change (this is where the analogy fails, as by rather infrequent means the Constitution can change) whereas the discipline CAN.

          • JD

            Let’s not forget all those Catholic bankers out there who lend money at interest.

            The Church CAN change the teaching on contraception (it is not infallible and the Vatican said as much back in 1968) but SHOULD they?

            First of all, one must understand what the teaching is. The Catholic Church does not teach that couples should have as many children as God will send them. Quite the contrary. Although children are a blessing and one of the ends of marriage, couples may, for just reasons, choose to limit family size. The Church gives no definition of what “just reasons” are.

            The problem is not with family planning, but the means by which it is done. Sterilization is immoral because it is the deliberate destruction of a healthy body. Hormonal contraception is really temporary chemical sterilization. So are Copper IUDs, although the mechanism is different.

            Treatment of a diseased body that leads to sterilization, such as a medically necessary hysterectomy or taking hormonal contraception to treat the symptoms of reproductive disorder (such as endometriosis) is allowed. Sterilization is a side effect of the treatment, not a primary intent.

            Barrier methods and alternatives to completed intercourse (i.e. withdrawal) are less problematic, but are still problematic. The Catholic Church teaches that the marital act is part of the Sacrament of Marriage. It is the complete physical union of husband and wife. By their very language, “Barrier” and “Withdrawal” contradict the idea of complete physical union. Therefore, barrier methods trade something holy for mere physical pleasure. The Church considers such misuse of our bodies is sinful.

            Fertility awareness based methods, where the couple plans their love life based on their fertility status is allowed. The couple is neither harming their bodies nor interfering with the marital act.

            Now, should the policy change? “Because I really want to and don’t see anything wrong with it” is not a compelling reason to change anything. Modern fertility awareness based methods are as effective as contraceptives (although admittedly less convenient), so even couples who do have a serious need to avoid pregnancy still have a moral option short of complete celibacy.

            Nevertheless, there are some true “hard cases” where I could perhaps see the Church softening their stance on barrier methods. (They will never change their minds on contraceptive sterilization.) But it will not happen in my lifetime. There is too much chaos and disunion among even the priests and bishops for this to happen now. Given this long delay, I believe it is far more likely that science will find a remedy for such cases long before the Church even considers changing its mind, rendering the problem moot.

  • ColdStanding

    That is a lie.

  • Guest

    I’m a pro-life non-catholic. Maybe this “passionate” blog is something near and dear to the hearts of catholics everywhere, but you have no idea how much this disturbs me. The meme-usage strikes me as incredibly unprofessional. If I wanted to find a polarized debate with each side releasing ill-strung polemics, I’d lock a bunch of politicians in a room with me. I’m pretty surprised to find something of this nature on patheos.
    I realize that the abortion debate is an incredibly sensitive topic. And yes once again, I am pro-life, but we will never make progress with ANYONE by constantly labelling the other side as “baby-killers.” Yes, abortion is murder, but our words can murder as well. People can smell ad hominem attacks from miles away and it doesn’t really add onto our credibility.

    • Corita

      BTW who called anyone “babykillers”???

      • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

        I didn’t see “babykillers” anywhere below, but I was called a “proponent of child murder.” Slightly different wording, though.

        • Corita

          Eh,L, most people here haven’t known you long enough to know how inappropriate that term is to apply to you.

          (And in general, not a good way to talk.)

      • Guest

        I’ve seen the exact word “babykillers” elsewhere obviously. The exact wording is absolutely irrelevant to my point- namely that oftentimes the pro-life side appears to show absolutely no compassion for the abortion doctors and women who believe in abortion.

        I’m not sure if you know of an author/pastor named Greg Boyd. In one of his books (“Myth of a Christian Nation”), he talks about an alternative way to deal with this controversial issue.
        One of the young high school girls in his church became pregnant from a random guy and her parents were absolutely furious- they even kicked her out of the house. An older woman in Boyd’s church heard about the situation and offered to have the young pregnant girl stay with her. The woman told her that whatever she decided to do, she would support her and love her no matter what. If she wanted to deliver the baby and give it away for adoption, the woman would be more than willing to arrange absolutely everything. If, after several weeks of thinking about it, the girl wanted to abort the baby, the woman said she would be there to comfort her and show her love, despite disagreeing with the principle.
        The girl ended up having the baby without being pressured by lobbyist, protesters with signs, newly enacted state laws, or grassroots organizations. This strikes me as a pretty innovative way to be “pro-life” in an incresingly divided world. My point in even posting on here (I don’t usually post on such polarized and oftentimes bitter topics) is that the love of Christ can actually change lives. But you have to be willing to truly embrace and love the neighbor, even when things remain uncertain or scary.

        • Corita

          I totally agree with you that radical love and acceptance of persons is *the* fundamental pro-life spiritual action. It would go *most* of the way to eliminating abortion, imo.

          Radically loving people does not mean that you have to agree with what they do, if the choice itself is immoral. I wouldn’t kick out the woman who chose abortion. I probably couldn’t go there with her, though I might if she knew I thought it was absolutely wrong– as a witness to the humanity of that child, and a record-keeper of its destruction. I would not say any of it with anger or condemnation. But I couldn’t not speak up about that; my love for any vulnerable person comes from the same place.

          • Guest

            I know that a lot of what I may say might reflect some unfair and unintentional assumptions. Looking back on everything, upon reading this and seeing the stream of comments at the bottom, I felt like a lot of catholics were content with just writing comments/blogs on attacking a “pro-choice catholics” facebook group/organization. And I am truly sorry for immediately thinking that subconsciously. It’s unfair to assume the worst and I appreciate your comments! Oftentimes I’ve found myself burnt out by discussions like this because I feel as though both side “listen” to one another while secretly thinking of the next verbal attack to launch.

        • Chip Hopr

          The love of Christ would tell the woman in question not to sin, and if she did, to repent. And oh yeah, there’s the issue of an innocent’s life hanging in the balance.

          You won’t find Mark, or really anybody who follows his blog, demonizing or condemning pro-aborts.

          But make no mistake, we Catholics know this is a seriously grave sin, and so no, we won’t quit fighting valiantly against the sin or its root(s), ever.

          And on an internet comment section, we have exactly one option: write, briefly and effectively. It’s no surprise the wording often comes out strong.

          We regards to his tone/style: Marc is a teenager whose intended audience is other teenagers, specifically of the Reddit variety. One could argue that it’s time, with his newfound popularity, that he take a step up presentation-wise, but for now it is what it is.

  • Alexandra

    You realize this blog has devolved into a bunch of Catholics talking about how people who don’t agree with them aren’t “real Catholics”, making fun of those people who don’t agree with them using overplayed memes, deliberately trolling, and then high fiving each other for how witty they are?

    This is just a self important circle jerk.

    I think this is what real rage quit feels like. You’re showing your true colors, and they’re very turd-y.

    • Corita

      Oh, c’mon, Alexandra. Everybody has shitty colors in their rainbow of personality. I have seen a few of yours here.

      Before you rage quit, ask yourself if the behavior would inspire the same amount of anger in you if you agreed with the people doing it.

      • Alexandra

        That would be my point, Corita. I definitely am not proud of my crappy colors, and try not to hang out in communities that encourage me to let them fly. I’m pretty sad this blog has gotten to become that kind of place, but that’s really what it is.

        • musiciangirl591

          and yet you are still here :P

        • Corita

          Hey, I totally understand not hanging around people who bring out the worst in you. For me, that was pretty much everyone on Facebook, so I quit that. :)

          What about this part?
          “ask yourself if the behavior would inspire the same amount of anger in you if you agreed with the people doing it”

          • Alexandra

            Absolutely. I topped reading an atheist blog because they started harassing other forums.

          • Alexandra

            Ugh, stopped not topped.

          • Ckdaw

            Hey Alexandra,

            I get why it makes you angry. I get just as angry sometimes on other pages. (Or in my daily life. I tend to hang out with a bunch of poet/anarchists/atheists) This “self-importance” is something we put up with every single day of our lives from the people around us–it is a human trait, and sadly, we are not exempt as Catholics, because we re all full of sin. But to be fair, as Catholics, we don’t actually shut ourselves into a little world. We are called live in it and live our faith anyway. It is intensely relieving to come to a blog like this and find others that are keeping up the “good fight” as we like to think it. For us, it is a fight of good against evil…not opinion v. opinion.

            Most of our posts on CFC’s page have been perfectly respectful. We are banned anyway. So here we are trying to get some community. Your posts are still here. Marc has not banned you. I even admire you…you clearly have a conscience and are trying to follow it, so I can respect you in a way that I cannot respect the CFC, who seems to honestly just want to trash talk our Church.Our lovely, beautiful Church, that has given the rest of us so much. Please, forgive our anger. I would hardly call our comments “harassment”. That seems wildly unfair…most of us are asking honest questions of them. Sure, there are some snark sharks, but that goes with the territory of online debate. I actually think it’s been pretty clean.

            And we do get to call them not real Catholics. Our religion isn’t LIKE judaism. Or any other religion. It’s not a matter of opinion.
            The Church has made mistakes in the past. Lord knows. The beautiful thing about it is that when Martin Luther nailed his piece of paper to the church door, it sparked a revolution that THANK GOD really improved our church. There was corruption among the clergy, there was evil in the sanctuary. Some things changed. For the better…and there was a reason these beliefs on abortion/contraception did not. CFC goes against not just the teachings on reproduction…by extension they are refusing to recognize the incredible beauty and grace of the way God created our bodies, the way he gave us sex (procreation hem hem). They are saying their way is better than God’s…which would be that if you don’t want to be pregnant, don’t HAVE SEX. All of this stems from pride, which coincidentally is itself the great fall in Eden, which coincidentally led to sexual sin. CFC is making our human autonomy of “free will” a little false idol to worship. “Our rights” are the new Christ. Which leaves no room for him.

            Please, explain to me how we are just claiming they do not believe in what we believe in? This is no schism in belief within the church. They are not Catholic by definition, because they put their own will ahead of God’s will.

          • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=690784228 Clayton Manning

            This^^ I find it hard to keep a cool head like yours. Thanks for the refreshing post, although unfortunately many posts as humble and honest as yours get overlooked all over the interwebs… after seeing many sorts of forums I feel like many people only ever want to point out the “evil” (whether it is a true evil or merely a perceived one) in others, so that when the time comes they can point the finger and say “I’m not as bad as those Catholic guys” or “those Atheist guys” or “those darned LOL nerds”.

            Anyways, point is, the bar for “being good” has always been the call of sainthood. That’s not ever gonna change. Have we “loved our neighbors as ourselves?” “Turned the other cheek”? No? that’s fine, as our God is forgiving. Yes? that’s cool, but no matter how far along you get, infinity is forever away.

    • musiciangirl591

      we are just joking about an organization thats an oxymoron like vegans for meat eating, Democrats for Mitt Romney, and Lactose Intolerants for Dairy Products :P

      • Alexandra

        Do you fail to understand how it is different from vegetarians for meat? Vegetarians only stand for not eating meat. There is a lot to Catholicism besides abortion and specifically whether or not abortion should be illegal. Dems can vote for Mitt Romney and people who are lactose intolerant can eat dairy. These are things that exist and they know they’re different, that’s why they form groups. You guys are just being asswipes by flooding their group to taunt them for not agreeing with you.

        • musiciangirl591

          they do the same thing with other groups… look into it

        • musiciangirl591

          jeez take a chill pill, i think i’m hilarious

        • guest

          We are just exercising our right to disagree just as you do in this blog. It is freedom of expression for ALL.

          • Alexandra

            There’s a difference between disagreeing and trolling with the intent purpose of getting banned. You know they don’t want you there, and you harass them anyway.

            I disagree, but if I get the impression that people want me to leave, I will.

          • guest

            “trolling with the intent purpose of getting banned.”

            It’s called speaking the truth knowing you’ll get banned but hoping a seed will be planted

            You’ve been on this blog long enough to see plenty of Badcatholics being harassed and Marc specifically. It is interesting that you deem harassing people on this blog ok but you get all mushy and sentimental when the people at Catholics for Choice choose to delete comments and their authors for the prayer to St. Michael. The prayer to St. Michael! Whoa! Harassment!

            BTW, out of all the comments that have ever been posted on this blog the only person that ever has been banned was Edinburg Eye and that was for much more than the prayer to St. Michael.

            And Alexandra, you are my favorite dissenter and I would miss you if you left. Got to go because I know you don’t like long comments :)

        • Andrew

          There is no difference in that analogy. The religion of veganism forbids eating meat, or at least you would clearly not be a vegan if you ate meat. Would it make any sense for me to be a vegan and then one day say, ‘well, I’m a vegan, but I actually think drinking milk is alright, but I’m still a vegan.’ With that logic, I could eventually get to the point of saying ‘I’m a vegan, but I think its ok to eat steaks.’ Its a dissent from veganism, and an honest vegan would have every right to call me out on my dissent. They might say to me, ‘you can eat meat, but don’t call yourself a vegan. That’s the analogy being made and thats what this CFC’s are doing. It makes no logical sense to be Catholic and Pro-Choice, and this sort of heretical dissent calls for tough smack down, just like what Jesus did in the temple. Of course, we should all be tactful in our posts and responses.

          • Alexandra

            No, there is a huge difference between these analogies. You’re just being obstinate if you fail to see them.

            For one, Catholics for Choice aren’t even saying that they want to have abortions themselves. They’re saying that they don’t think that the Church has any business being involved with the legal status of abortion. They’re saying stop imposing religion on our secular laws. Being Catholic doesn’t require that you force other people to live in a world dictated by our own morality.

            That’s like saying you’re not a real vegan if you don’t think that meat should be illegal. And your claim that you need to go tell them they’re heretics is like saying that vegetarians should go and yell at other vegetarians that eat fish that they’re not really veggies. Not productive.

            Catholics for Choice don’t want to have a conversation with you guys on their FB page. That’s clear by the fact that they’re banning people. Everyone who hears that they’re banning people and goes to spam them anyway is just behaving like a jerk. They are fully aware of the fact that they are dissenting, that’s why they made a group. You have no claim to the title Catholic. By pretending you do you’re just alienating people.

          • JAGreene86

            It’d be like me saying “Well, slavery’s ok if the other person is alright with it”. (Relativism alert!)

            If it is a Universal Moral Issue, then it is Universal (meaning applies to all). If slavery is wrong, then any form of slavery is wrong. If it is wrong to murder, than any form of murder is wrong.

            Catholics for Choice is basically saying this: “We believe the Catholic Church is not from God, therefore, doesn’t apply to all.” They say “Our religion teaches that abortion is murder, but since it’s not from God, we can believe that it’s not murder.” However, in the same breath, they’ll say “We’re going to heaven because we believe that the Catholic Church is from God”. See the contradiction?

            I sent Catholics for Choice two messages…one of them was asking “since when did Catholicism become a political party?” and the second one saying “All ‘Catholics for Choice is spewing out subjective opinions and labeling it with the word ‘Catholic’ and you know it.” Neither got a response…as you might suspect.

            Hey, I’m honest enough with myself, that if someone catches me in my own contradiction, and I can’t find a better argument around it, I’ll admit defeat. I struggle with those who cannot do the same…as now I have the saying:

            “Pride wins and argument; humility wins a soul.”

            However, I’ll go a step further and say that people who have the same mentality about “Catholic for Choice” is why Catholicism has the bad rap that it has. #1, the word “Catholic” means Universal, which is properly named, because we are the only religion that claims that our Doctrine is Universal to all (because, again, the Church is smart enough to know that Relativism is a cheap philosophy (can you tell how much I despise Relativism?)). It’s really impossible to believe that the Church is Universal and consciously disagree with it (there is a difference between disagreeing and not understanding…not understanding is an intellectual problem that can be solved, but they are not necessarily accountable for not understanding. However, disagreeing with the Church is a free will decision, therefore, that person is accountable to that decision). #2, because they believe that the Church doesn’t apply to all, they realize that it doesn’t have to apply to them, so they feel they can do whatever they want, and believe whatever they want, and as long as they claim themselves to be Catholic, they’ll go to heaven (because God likes Catholics). So…when the world watches a Catholic sin, they’re like “hey, aren’t you not suppose to do that?” and the Catholic is like “Eh, it’s only minor detail. I mean, I’m going to heaven, and you’re not, so who are you to judge me? Anyway, what’s the big deal? Everyone else is doing it!” and then the non-Catholic is like “The Catholic is being so judgmental, but they’re doing the same thing as the non-Catholic! This ‘religion’ misguides them into believing that they have the ‘right’ to be hypocrites…that makes them no different than any other religion”. Thus begins the hatred for religion.

            Everyone wants to judge the other…but no one wants to judge themselves.

            The Catholic Church teaches that ALL will have to undergo the final Just Judgement, Catholic or not, and no one is fully exempt from this Just Judgement. No one is guaranteed heaven while still alive here in Earth, but no one is guaranteed hell while still alive here on Earth. However, our lives here help dictate the final decision that God will have for us all. We cannot predict God, for God is both perfect Mercy and Justice, and we are not. In my eyes, I can see myself as the most righteous person on Earth, but in God’s eyes, I might be the worst sinner BECAUSE I have that mentality. I learn and do what God teaches me to do and learn via the Catholic Church, not vise versa. I pray that I am worthy enough to enter into His Kingdom, and I know as soon as He says His Just word, my soul will be destined for eternal bliss with Him or eternal Hell without Him without the need for my defense. So I live the life I do so that I may pass rightful Judgement before the King of kings…that is why I am Catholic, because I believe that is THEE BEST chance (for all, not just for me) of rightfully passing such Just Judgement.

            May God have Mercy on us all…and may He rule on the Throne of Rightful Justice, forever and ever.

          • Andrew

            “For one, Catholics for Choice aren’t even saying that they want to have abortions themselves.” …but theoretically they would since they are condoning it. Yes they are.

            “They’re saying stop imposing religion on our secular laws.”… Then they clearly are not practicing Catholics, so why do they feel the need to identify themselves with a Church that is so unwavering in its position on the issue. Catholics have the social responsibility to transform the culture to Truth, Beauty, and Love. CFC is doing the opposite while claiming the name of the Church.

            “Being Catholic doesn’t require that you force other people to live in a world dictated by our own morality.”…. But being Catholic requires all Catholics to live in a world dictated by . You yourself are not subjected to that, but CFC sure as hell is by the fact that they use the Catholic name.

            “You have no claim to the title Catholic.”…. Yes huh. I make my fair share of dumb choices, but I don’t try and justify them and say the Church should condone them. ‘Catholics for Drunkenness!” No, these CFCer’s need to realize that they are in grave violation of Catholic moral teaching.

            Catholics have been ‘alienating’ heretics since Pentecost.

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            Another oxymoron: “…calls for a tough smack down..” and “tactful.”

            I don’t think I’ve ever seen a tactful “smack down,” which by definition isn’t tactful.

          • Andrew

            Like I said, Jesus himself laid the smack down on the pharasies who were treating the temple like a market place. He flipped out on them actually. But he was tactful. This blog post here by Marc is what I mean by a ‘smack down.’

        • JoAnna Wahlund

          So, it’s perfectly okay, in your opinion, for members of PETA to wear fur coats and eat bacon? You don’t see any problem with that?

    • Chip Hopr

      I’m confused. You disagree with just about everything Marc believes. You consistently nitpick Marc and commenters on things like word choice and whether or not their tone sounds “mean” or not. You’ve gone as far as to say that if anyone with a degree from a decidedly Catholic school applied to work for you they’d be automatically disqualified. Oh and you’ve publicly quit this blog more than once.

      So why on earth are you still here? Serious question.

      • Alexandra

        Boredem. Bickering is fun.

    • Jmsteve4

      Alexandra! I was wondering how long I’d have to scroll to find you. Odd seeing someone else in a long debate.

      Also, I like the memes. Perhaps they don’t always fit the tone. Sometimes they do. I don’t think people should protest them, or protest the protestors! And you’re right, we could all use some humbling- be aware that you pull on a bit of an attitude eventually. I agree with you ignoring comments based on grammar though- I can’t read them either! Also, telling someone they’re not catholic isn’t an insult- it’s a fact. People just look at the phrase differently. like that 98% statistic that isn’t even true.

  • Paul Rimmer

    I’m not Catholic, so could you clear this up for me? Why would Catholics for Choice or whatever be worried about a law-suit on canon law? Canon law is based on some book put out by some Vatican officials, right? So why should any organization in the US even be worried about it? All sorts of organizations that have no real connection to the Vatican call themselves Catholic.

    What would be the consequences off losing a canon lawsuit? Why should anyone care?

    • Alexandra

      Yeah, I laughed at that. Unless the Church incorporates the name Catholic in the US they have no claim to the title, and Canon law is a joke.

      In general it seems like these kids are under the delusion that the Catholic Church has any kind of serious power in the US and that the name Catholic means exactly what they’ve decided it does, instead of how it’s actually used in the States.

      • Paul Rimmer

        Yes, Alexandra, this is what I’m getting at.

        First off, what are the penalties this group would be facing, under canon law?

        Second, why should they care about these penalties?

        This sort of thing happens in Judaism. Some new Jewish group begins to eat bacon, or drive to Synagogue on the Sabbath, or some such thing. An Orthodox Jewish community says that this group is no longer really Jewish, and may even formally banish them from real Jewish (TM) society. The new group tends not to care. I suspect the same sort of thing is happening here.

        • Alexandra

          Pretty much. The Vatican doesn’t have a monopoly on the word Catholic. There are going to be plenty of groups that are going to form their own versions of Catholicism and hold onto the label. That doesn’t mean they’re unaware that there’s people who don’t consider them to be Catholics.

          Marc is just sending people out to be bullies.

          • musiciangirl591

            i understand that you went to liberal Catholic school, i went to in your opinion “fundamentalist” Catholic school, Marc is saying that this group shouldn’t be calling itself Catholic, the Catholicism i know and love isn’t for killing babies and preventing life

      • musiciangirl591

        i take it you are a Canon Scholar?

        • Paul Rimmer

          No. But here is a question for a Canon Lawyer. What would be the penalty associated with losing a Canon law suit? Is it a penalty this group would even care about?

          • musiciangirl591

            he’s making a joke, jeez, get a sense of humor

          • SDG

            FWIW, I don’t think that there is a canon law case here. Canon law would cover names like “Catholic Alliance for Choice”; it does not, AFAIK, cover names like “Catholics for Choice” (i.e., “Catholics” used as a plural noun rather than “Catholic” used as an adjective).

      • JAGreene86

        They can get sued for slander. Incorrectly representing a religion can be argued that it’s an “attempt to slander the belief of millions around the world”. Even though that may not be the intention of “Catholics for Choice”, but most people who get sued for “slander” never had the intention to “slander”, but because it can be clearly interpreted as such, they are subjected to getting sued, and a Canon Lawyer can be the very one to have all the evidence needed to follow through with that very suit. Catholics for Choice group and/or organization would be forced to change the name that does not include, or associate themselves with, the Catholic Church. The people themselves can be Catholic (whether they’re “bad Catholics or not” is not part of this argument), but the group itself cannot call themselves Catholic if the group itself does not fully reflect the teachings of the Catholic Church.

        • SDG

          They can’t be sued for slander or libel because they aren’t representing anyone’s views but their own. If someone founds a group called “Republicans for Necrophilia,” “Democrats for Genocide,” “Americans for Pedophilia,” or anything else, no one can sue them because the group name only describes its own members. If people are Catholics (i.e., canonical members of the Catholic Church, which currently covers anyone baptized Catholic) and are pro-choice, then the group name “Catholics for Choice” is accurate for them, however heinous and oxymoronic it may be, and no grounds exists for a charge of slander or libel.

          • JAGreene86

            Correction: I WISH they could get sued for slander.

          • Alexandra

            Yeah, you’re completely wrong. Only in your mind can they actually get sued for slander.

          • JAGreene86

            If only I were a Relativist, then I’d be right.

          • Alexandra

            It’s okay, because in the meantime, you’re an asshat.

          • Alexandra

            Or should I have done like you all seem to like and capitalize it? Search for Truth, Beauty, and Asshattery.

          • JAGreene86

            I apologize if I’m really bad with jokes…comedy isn’t necessarily a gift of mine.

            …so maybe that makes me “an attempt to be an Asshattery”.

  • Anonymous

    What about Catholics who don’t vote?

  • Alex C V

    Just got thrown off!

  • Liam Wells

    You know, at WYD Madrid 2011, I saw a sticker that said “Good Catholics use birth control”. Back then, I was like, “Ummm… No.” Now, I’m like “lol, good thing I’m a bad Catholic.”

    And if you’re interested to know who a good Catholic is, there are only two, and both were (and still are) Jews. Yeah, you know who I’m talking about. ^_^

    • JoAnna Wahlund

      I’m pretty sure Mary converted to Christianity on the day of the Resurrection…

      • SDG

        “I’m pretty sure Mary converted to Christianity on the day of the Resurrection…”

        You seem to be missing the point, JoAnna. Sociologically, apostolic Christianity was originally a Jewish sect. Mary didn’t “convert” to anything and certainly didn’t cease being Jewish, nor did Peter, Paul and the other apostles. Paul described himself as a Jew throughout his life.

        • JoAnna Wahlund

          Given that Catholicism is the fulfillment of, not a replacement for, Judaism, I think Mary did convert, as did Paul.

          • SDG

            Okay, JoAnna, the word “convert” is fair, but not in a sense that involved ceasing to be Jewish. You can say Paul converted, but not that he was no longer a Jew. Not according to Paul himself.

  • Irreality

    Haven’t read through 400 comments, but for the record:

    “the obstinate post-baptismal denial of some truth which must be believed with divine and catholic faith”

    This doesn’t apply. Abortion legislation does not fall under this set of truths. It is still *really* bad and all the other jazz you have stated in this post, but it is not *heresy.*

    • JoAnna Wahlund

      If you deny that murder of innocents is wrong, which is what most pro-choicers do, I think that would qualify as heresy.

      • SDG

        Those who support abortion do not “deny that murder of innocents is wrong.” They deny that abortion falls under the category of murder of innocents. They’re wrong, gravely and obviously so, in many cases culpably so, and their souls are in grave danger. But the word “heresy,” as defined in canon law, does not apply.

        • kimberly

          “They deny that abortion falls under the category of murder of innocents. ” But the Catholic church doesnt. The Catholic church is clear about their teachings, and the gravity of abortion.

          So a group like “Catholics for choice” who BTDUBS is super obnoxious and disrespectful towards the bishops and has kind of no idea about the difference between a hierarchy and a democracy is pretty clearly no Catholic.

  • Diehl Kristen

    “hope” and “change” – two ideas that if every pregnant woman embraced as part of her own life, there would never be another abortion…

  • SDG

    From what I understand, the canon in question is concerned with the use of “Catholic” (adjective), whereas “Catholics” (plural noun) is a different matter. For example, many years ago there was a case in California involving a publication called “Catholic News Notes.” Competent authority objected; the publication was renamed “News Notes for Catholics”; end of story. By the same token, I would think that whereas, say, “Catholic Alliance for Choice” would be a canonical issue, “Catholics For Choice” would not.

  • http://www.facebook.com/Marit.C.G Marit Gookin

    I’d just like to point out something that people here seem to have forgotten (I didn’t read all the way through the comments, so if this came up, please forgive the redundancy): there’s a difference between being pro-choice, legally speaking, (often for reasons having to do with religious freedom), and being morally opposed to abortion.

    • SDG

      Marit Gookin: Prescinding from what I’m supposing is an inadvertent mistake in your comment (presumably you didn’t mean to say that being pro-choice and morally opposed to abortion are different—that’s obvious!—but that being pro-choice is not the same as being pro-abortion)…Pope John Paul II in EVANGELIUM VITAE makes it clear that Catholics must be not only morally opposed to abortion but also against pro-choice abortion laws. Just laws MUST protect the unborn from murder and Catholics MUST favor such laws. A legal system that expressly permits the murder of some members of society undermines the whole concept of justice and rule of law.

      • http://www.facebook.com/Marit.C.G Marit Gookin

        Admittedly, I haven’t looked at Evangelium Vitae in quite a while, so correct me if I’m wrong, but its three core statements are considered infallible by way of the ordinary and universal magisterium, and while the immorality of abortion is considered infallible, nowhere have I seen someone claiming that the statement concerning legality is such. now, like I said, it’s been a while, so feel free to correct me if I’m wrong. Being pro-choice means you support someone’s right to make a decision about an issue on which denominations, scientists, and politicians can’t reach a consensus by using their own conscience and morals. As it has more positive connotations than “pro-abortion” it has been used to mean such, much in the same way as the Federalist Papers were actually written by people opposed to federalism in its proper sense. This hi-jacking, if you will, does not change what it actually means and what people who thoughtfully and deliberately identify themselves as such mean the label to communicate–by being pro-choice, you are just as much against government mandates supporting abortion as you are against mandates opposing abortion. Once again, what this comes down to is freedom of conscience and religion.

  • Justathought!

    This was so good even the East German judge gave it a 10.0!

  • Paul Rimmer

    SDG, thank you very much for the reply about canon law. The distinction makes good sense to me.

    I have another hypothetical question. Let’s say that this group was calling itself Catholic Alliance for Choice. Then canon lawyers sue, and let’s say that they win.

    After they win, the “Catholic Alliance for Choice” refuses to change its name. What happens then?

  • Sam Pauken

    Wow, I’m a non-Catholic Christian, but this is awesome.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Greg-Smith/100002020333790 Greg Smith

    If these Catholic(big C Christopher) conversations weren’t so tragic they’d be pure entertainment. A mind and heart that advocates the barbaric murder of unborn children is a mind and heart untouched by the resurrecting grace of almighty God. It just ain’t no more complicated than that. There is not now, has never been and never can be any such thing as a pro abortion Christian. That is a foundational contradiction in terms. Please carry on. Literally.

  • http://twitter.com/rujx Rujuta Xavier

    Hehehe… well done!

  • http://mominapocket.blogspot.in/ Nancy

    Excellent post! Always enjoy reading your serious message sprinkled with a little humor and terrific visuals.

  • Andrew

    Show me where it says that one must accept the teachings of every papal encyclical in order to be Catholic. While I certainly agree that being “pro-choice” is incompatible with the teachings of the Church, it would be a mistake to equate everything promulgated by bishops and popes as infallibly defined dogma.

  • Paws911@ hotmail.com

    Similarly excluded is any action which either before, at the moment of, or after sexual intercourse, is specifically intended to prevent procreation—whether as an end or as a means.

    Darn, I guess NFP is out the window now. Guess we’d better start telling all those families practicing NFP that they’re going to hell. Remember, you can’t disobey church teaching if you don’t agree with it. Unless they change it. Which they might. Since its not a core belief. But it would be ok then.

    • JD

      Exactly what action do couples who use NFP take before or at the moment of sexual intercourse to prevent procreation?

      If procreation cannot naturally occur, nothing is being done to prevent it.
      If the couple abstains because conception is possible, there is no sexual intercourse.

      NFP is merely knowledge of the woman’s fertility and a couple can use that information as they see fit. (With prayerful discernment, of course.)

      • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

        “Similarly excluded is any action which either before…sexual intercourse, is specifically intended to prevent procreation…”

        I have seen this passage discussed on blogs, where most interpret “action” to mean, putting on a condom. But a few (a definite minority) have argued that “…action…before…” applies to abstaining from sex entirely, if the sole purpose of that is indeed to prevent procreation, and it is therefore a warning not to use NFP with a “contraceptive mentality.”

        • JD

          Then they do not know the meaning of the word “action”.

          Abstaining is not action, it is refraining from action. For inaction to be sinful, there must be an affirmative duty to act.

          The Catholic Church does believe that married couples do have some sort of duty to have marital relation and some sort of duty to have children. But they are not specific as to the extent of either these duties. They no more require couples to have as many children as they can as they require couples to have relations X times per week.

          • Alexandra

            But keeping track of fertility signals in order to know when to abstain is an action. I really don’t see the difference between putting on a condom and using NFP in terms of making a conscious choice to have sex that has minimal chances of resulting in procreation. Sure one results in a physical barrier, and the sex is different, but when all you consider is the planning that went into the decision to have sex, NFP has the same intention that using a barrier contraceptive does.

          • ms

            Checking the weather report to decide when to bring a jacket is just common sense. And, for many women, those fertility signals require no effort whatsoever.

            First and foremost, though, the couple should be discerning God’s will for them. The condom (like The Pill, IUD, and all barrier methods) are much easier to use, and so there’s no need for thought or planning… or prayer to discern God’s will.

            That is a really big difference.

            Besides, putting on a condom is a very clear and overt way of saying: “MY will be done”. But being open to life – even during periods of infertility – allows God to act, should He choose to do so. At the very least, it is not a big and obvious and irrefutable “NO!” to God.

            If the difference still seems too subtle, perhaps more prayer is required.

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            There is indeed a difference, but anyone who has ever abstained from sex knows that it can require a GREAT deal of willpower and action, to refrain. At least for some of us!

          • ms

            Ah, yes: concupiscence “is left for us to wrestle with, it cannot harm those who do not consent but manfully resist it by the grace of Jesus Christ.” Indeed, “an athlete is not crowned unless he competes according to the rules.” – Catechism #1264

            concupiscence remains in the baptized such that with the help of the grace of Christ they may prove themselves in the struggle of Christian life. This is the struggle of conversion directed toward holiness and eternal life to which the Lord never ceases to call us. – Catechism #1426

            “I thought that continence arose from one’s own powers, which I did not recognize in myself. I was foolish enough not to know . . . that no one can be continent unless you grant it. For you would surely have granted it if my inner groaning had reached your ears and I with firm faith had cast my cares on you.” – St. Augustine – is his “Confessions”

            But L., you are at a severe disadvantage. By not participating in the sacraments, you starve yourself of the grace needed. So, like the young Augustine, you are trying to do it all on your own. Prayer helps enormously, as does making a good, sacramental Confession and returning to the Eucharist.

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            Ah, but in order to receive the sacrament of Confession, one must be sorry — and in my heart, I am not. It would be a lie, which would be much worse.

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            Also, technically I wasn’t “wrestling” with concupiscence — I was just stranded with no contraception, and I really, REALLY did not want to get pregnant. And abstaining was tough!

          • ms

            All of this flows from “MY will be done”. If you were striving to do God’s will – following the teachings of the Church He established – you would be able to partake of the sacraments and recieve the graces He desires to flood you with.

            Pray for the grace to desire to do His will. This is how I turned from my habitual sins – from not wanting to give them up – until my will is conformed to His. Then I could enter the confessional with true sorrow for my sins. And then EVERYTHING is easier, better, grace-filled.

            God is smarter than we are, and His will is for our good: for better life now, and in the hereafter. So we are wise to try to conform ourselves to His will. If you just start to try, He (like the father in the Prodigal Son parable) will rush out to meet you.

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            I appreciate your concern, but for me, abortion rights go beyond my personal spirituality. Would I ever support laws that force an individual to submit to “God’s will?” I cannot fathom ever supporting that, in all honesty.

  • A Young Scholar

    Umm…well I’d like to address something I saw in a comment made by L just to clear it up. I don’t want any to think I am using a negative tone or anything! I just wish to help. If someone already cleared it up great! and I have also seen this brought up a few other times. It was brought up that some (emphasis on some) teachings of the Catholic Church have changed over its history particularly in this case marriage outside the faith. Why is that many asked? Don’t many Catholics claim that the Church’s teaching has not changed its teaching on things in its 2000 years? And yes It has(as it hasn’t changed its teaching on those teachings) BUT only on certain teachings most specifically teachings that involve what I am(and many others have)going to call “intrinsically evil” actions(or actions that are always evil to simplify). The action which I am going to highlight is the one being talked about for the most part with abortion. Murder is an intrinsically evil act and thus the Church’s teaching on it will never change. It will ALWAYS be evil. Abortion in the Church’s eyes (and the eyes of unbiased logic but lets not get into that others have said enough on this) is murder and thus again will always be evil (this is because the Church recognizes and ALWAYS will recognize “personhood” in the womb from conception). This is why Catholics claim the Church has not changed its teaching on this. Now the Church has changed or to use a better word “developed” its doctrine in several other areas that don’t have to deal with such permanent or “heavy stuff”. In this case dealing with marriage outside of the faith. Now this teaching “developed” in recent days to be allowed (although with specific restrictions such as raising the children in the faith, sacramental marriage, and maintaining your own faith). Marrying outside of the faith is not (emphasis on NOT) an intrinsically evil act while some semi-evil (loss of faith due to intimate relationship, enough said) has the possibility of coming from it. The Church changed or “developed” its teaching in this because before the potential risk of evil was seen as too great but the Church reevaluated its position and saw that while risk was still there, so too was potential for good (spreading of faith, communication between faiths) so this act which was not about direct prevention of evil but maintenance of faith was changed or “developed”(See Development of Doctrine according to the Church for further information) Some have claimed that with this change all teaching is malleable now because if one teaching is changed all can be changed. But saying this is in direct contradiction to how the teaching office of the Church works and how not all teachings are equal as I have explained beforehand (Research the Four Levels of Teaching according to the Church). So in some sort of conclusion (I didnt mean to be this long winded and I sorta did this mostly off the top of my head so any correction from experienced scholars would be appreciated) Church teachings about abortion and certain aspects of marriage ( though some parts are permanent) should not be equated in the fact that some teaching can be changed through development of doctrine and others cannot. (also sorry I didn’t give links I might later)

    • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

      The bottom line, though, is that some actions that used to get people excommunicated in the past, are now okay — well, not quite okay, as I know (since I married outside the faith, and we’ve raised the kids primarily in my partner’s non-Christian religion), but they’re no longer punishable by excommunication.

      Also, as several people noted below, merely holding pro-abortion opinions is not an excommunicable offense — just having or procuring one.

      My grandmother never used contraception herself, but, seeing some of her friends worn out by bearing child after child when NFP (or the earlier version of it) failed, she believed that married people should be able to use it. I have been told that the fact that she merely held this opinion, which differed from Church teaching, means that she is now spending eternity in hell. Somehow, I find it hard to believe this.

      • A Young Scholar

        And you are right on this! If you look up the 4 levels of Church teaching(which I mentioned) you could know for sure and refute anyone who said such awful things about your grandmother(especially since God is the final judge). Merely disagreement on that teaching is not grounds for excommunication from the Church (at least as far as I know it isnt, however with certain follow up actions it could be) however it is still seen as a sin in the eyes of the Church, so it goes from excommunication to sin which are both bad things still. However this is beside the point other then correct those who did draw this conclusion because you do not believe in this part of Church teaching.

  • A Young Scholar

    also to be slightly more clear development of doctrine is applied to all teaching but only materially changed some that do not deal with before said “heavy stuff”

  • A Young Scholar

    and also while I am commenting, I’d like to thank Marc for his great blog and let him know know how much I appreciated his young scholartude as well! This is one of my favorite corners of the interweb!

  • A Young Scholar

    and one more, Andrew I didn’t see your post there. But excellent job on understanding the levels of Church teaching!!! I am glad more then just I realize their distinctions.

  • siuol11

    I don’t suppose you could stop using lame internet memes for long enough to fix your horrible layout, could you? I like to get my fill of pompous preachery from a hip website, not one that looks like it was made as a grade school project.

    Thanks

    • Marc Barnes

      On it! ( :

  • ms

    Reply to L. “abortion rights go beyond my personal spirituality. Would I ever support laws that force an individual to submit to “God’s will?” I cannot fathom ever supporting that, in all honesty.”

    “Thou shalt not steal.” The law says it is illegal to steal a car. So, that law forces submission to God’s will. You oppose that??

    • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

      There is secular agreement that stealing is undesirable. Not so for abortion — and not so for adultery, which is why, although many people don’t approve of it, it’s legal.

      We live in a secular society (thank God!), and laws aren’t intended to compel people to do “God’s will.” Nor do I think they should be.

      • said she

        Interesting. After days of discussing with several of us how you believe the church is wrong on abortion, where a few of us have tried to warn you about endangering your immortal soul… suddenly, you changed the subject to secular law. I find that very interesting.

        • ms

          You’re right. Out of the blue, L. switched from talking about what is in her heart to now talking about how she doesn’t want to “force an individual” or “compel people” to do God’s will.

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            Both are true — I know what is in my heart, as well as what I believe what should be against the law or permitted under it. These are not mutually exclusive concepts, but are in fact complementary — particularly when people want the law to compel me to conform to what they believe is “God’s will.”

          • ms

            Sure, but you attempted to shift the coversation away from what is in your heart – and how it is not immutable, and that, in fact, all of us struggle to conform ourselves to God’s will – and, instead, focus outside yourself: on secular laws. That is very telling. Something to take with you into prayer.

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            I didn’t attempt a “shift” – I replied to a different comment in a different way.

            The issue, as I see it, is, “What does it mean to be pro-life?” Since I have never had an abortion myself, it’s a matter of 1) what I personally believe in my heart, and 2) how I act on these beliefs.

            To be pro-life, I would have to view every pregnancy of mine as God’s will, under all circumstances. I also, by extension, would have to view every pregnancy of every other woman as God’s will, under all circumstances, and therefore compel all of them to do something that I believe I would not do myself. This strikes me as hypocritical.

          • ms

            Every pregnancy IS God’s will (whether you choose to view them that way or not) because every pregnancy is a person.

            But what’s with this “compel” stuff? Even God does not “compel” anyone. Neither does the Church. So that’s a staw man.

            No, I think you turned away from the dialog about what is in your heart because you don’t want to conform yourself to God’s will.

            No one is compelling you to, of course. You have free will to do whatever you like – even ignoring God’s will. He is such a gentleman, He allows us to follow our own way, if we choose to.

            But as for me and my house, we will follow the Lord.

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            This “compel stuff” is whether abortion/contraception should be against the law, and I say, no.

            It is your right to discern God’s will as you see fit.

            I will continue to do the same.

          • ms
          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            I found this one PARTICULARLY creepy.

          • ms
          • ms
          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            This “compel stuff” is whether abortion/contraception should be against the law, and I say, no.

            It is your right to discern God’s will as you see fit.

            I will continue to do the same.

      • Kimberly

        “There is secular agreement that stealing is undesirable. Not so for abortion…”

        I know enough athiests who are pro life to conclude that there mst be some kind of secular reasoning for agreeing abortion is undesirable. And i wouldn’t say there is secular agreement that stealing is undesirable, given the amount of theft that goes on every day.

  • Nancy Maffeo

    Wow, how refreshing! Thank you!

  • Mary Rose

    can you do a post on Canon lawyers? I’ve tried to research them, but I haven’t really been able to come up with anything.

  • Nigger

    faaaaaaaaaaaaaaart

  • Anp

    HAHAHAHAHAHAHA…………………………………………………………………………………..AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

  • Guest

    …..anybody can use the phrase “Catholic”. It’s the first amendment….freedom of speech, ever heard of it?? “Catholic” is not copywrited….

  • marie

    Amen!!! Be pro~ life and b catholic!!!! Vote Mitt R!!!!! Him and Paul R will save us and are babys!!

  • Alma

    AWESOME WORK!!! MAY OUR LORD KEEP ON BLESSING YOU WITH THIS GREAT TALENT OF YOURS OF SAYING THE BOLD TRUTH

  • Mick Deering

    catholics for choice. sorta like celbates for promiscuity, or sluts for abstinence
    calling yourself Catholic means you accept the teachings of the Church. no one says you have to, but if you don’t, you’re not Catholic. a young lady one sunday after mass, declined to sign a parental notification petition, saying, ‘my beliefs on abortion are different from other Caholics.’ i corrected her, saying, ‘no, your beliefs are different from Cathoics.’


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X