Dr. Mark Miravalle Discusses Catholics Obligation To Obey The Magisterium

God Bless Archbishop Chaput! - "If they don't believe what the church teaches, they're not really Catholic"

In an interview with the Associated Press Archbishop Chaput states that "If they don't believe what the church teaches, they're not really Catholic". He says that it's not the place for so-called "cafeteria Catholics" who don't accept all of its teachings.


Archbishop Chaput is spot on!  The Archbishop has also made it crystal clear that those Catholyc politicians who are pro-choice should not receive Holy Communion.  I agree with him. There are too many pro-abortion so-called Catholic politicians who have been allowed by their bishops to cause scandal to the Church publicly.  That has got to stop! Bishops need to start doing their jobs, reign in the lost sheep and if those lost sheep refuse to change their ways and refuse to follow the precepts of the Church then they need to suffer the consequences. 

Abstinence Education Under Assault

The Department of Health and Human Services is spending $100 million out of $155 million on promoting the use of contraceptives for teen pregnancy prevention while only setting aside $33 million for abstinence education. And, even that money looks to be in jeopardy of disappearing. The culture today throws sexual innuendos, sexual actions, and the notion of "safe sex" out in the open nonchalantly, like it is no big deal.  Well, sex is a big deal. Sex is a wonderful and very beautiful act of love.  Sex is an act of love when the act takes place between a married couple - a man and a woman.  For those in high school and in dating relationships abstinence is the answer.  Our bodies are to be respected and not meant to be cheapened by using your body, and another person's body just for a momentary good feeling.   But, this administration and The Department of Health and Human Services are promoting the false notion of "safe sex" by pushing contraceptives on our youths.  We must continue to fight against this pervasive attack on family values and promote chastity and abstinence among our youths. 

Church Teaching On Contraceptives

From Catholic.com:
In Pope Paul VI's encyclical Humane Vitae, Pope Paul VI  reemphasized the Church’s constant teaching that it is always intrinsically wrong to use contraception to prevent new human beings from coming into existence.

"Contraception is "any action which, either in anticipation of the conjugal act [sexual intercourse], or in its accomplishment, or in the development of its natural consequences, proposes, whether as an end or as a means, to render procreation impossible" (Humanae Vitae 14). This includes sterilization, condoms and other barrier methods, spermicides, coitus interruptus (withdrawal method), the Pill, and all other such methods."


Contraception is wrong because it’s a deliberate violation of the design God built into the human race, often referred to as "natural law." The natural law purpose of sex is procreation. The pleasure that sexual intercourse provides is an additional blessing from God, intended to offer the possibility of new life while strengthening the bond of intimacy, respect, and love between husband and wife. The loving environment this bond creates is the perfect setting for nurturing children.


But sexual pleasure within marriage becomes unnatural, and even harmful to the spouses, when it is used in a way that deliberately excludes the basic purpose of sex, which is procreation. God’s gift of the sex act, along with its pleasure and intimacy, must not be abused by deliberately frustrating its natural end—procreation.

Contraception is not a modern invention and is indeed mentioned and condemned in the Bible.
The Bible mentions at least one form of contraception specifically and condemns it. Coitus interruptus, was used by Onan to avoid fulfilling his duty according to the ancient Jewish law of fathering children for one’s dead brother. "Judah said to Onan, ‘Go in to your brother’s wife, and perform the duty of a brother-in-law to her, and raise up offspring for your brother.’ But Onan knew that the offspring would not be his; so when he went in to his brother’s wife he spilled the semen on the ground, lest he should give offspring to his brother. And what he did was displeasing in the sight of the Lord, and he slew him also" (Gen. 38:8–10).


The biblical penalty for not giving your brother’s widow children was public humiliation, not death (Deut. 25:7–10). But Onan received death as punishment for his crime. This means his crime was more than simply not fulfilling the duty of a brother-in-law. He lost his life because he violated natural law, as Jewish and Christian commentators have always understood. For this reason, certain forms of contraception have historically been known as "Onanism," after the man who practiced it, just as homosexuality has historically been known as "Sodomy," after the men of Sodom, who practiced that vice (cf. Gen. 19).

The Church Fathers condemned the use of birth control.

In A.D. 195, Clement of Alexandria wrote, "Because of its divine institution for the propagation of man, the seed is not to be vainly ejaculated, nor is it to be damaged, nor is it to be wasted" (The Instructor of Children 2:10:91:2).


Hippolytus of Rome wrote in 255 that "on account of their prominent ancestry and great property, the so-called faithful [certain Christian women who had affairs with male servants] want no children from slaves or lowborn commoners, [so] they use drugs of sterility or bind themselves tightly in order to expel a fetus which has already been engendered" (Refutation of All Heresies 9:12).

Around 307 Lactantius explained that some "complain of the scantiness of their means, and allege that they have not enough for bringing up more children, as though, in truth, their means were in [their] power . . . or God did not daily make the rich poor and the poor rich. Wherefore, if any one on any account of poverty shall be unable to bring up children, it is better to abstain from relations with his wife" (Divine Institutes 6:20).

 Augustine wrote in 419, "I am supposing, then, although you are not lying [with your wife] for the sake of procreating offspring, you are not for the sake of lust obstructing their procreation by an evil prayer or an evil deed. Those who do this, although they are called husband and wife, are not; nor do they retain any reality of marriage, but with a respectable name cover a shame. Sometimes this lustful cruelty, or cruel lust, comes to this, that they even procure poisons of sterility [oral contraceptives]" (Marriage and Concupiscence 1:15:17).


The apostolic tradition’s condemnation of contraception is so great that it was followed by Protestants until 1930 and was upheld by all key Protestant Reformers. Martin Luther said, "[T]he exceedingly foul deed of Onan, the basest of wretches . . . is a most disgraceful sin. It is far more atrocious than incest and adultery. We call it unchastity, yes, a sodomitic sin. For Onan goes in to her; that is, he lies with her and copulates, and when it comes to the point of insemination, spills the semen, lest the woman conceive. Surely at such a time the order of nature established by God in procreation should be followed. Accordingly, it was a most disgraceful crime. . . . Consequently, he deserved to be killed by God. He committed an evil deed. Therefore, God punished him."

The Magisterium

In Humanae Vitae, Pope Paul VI stated, "[W]e must once again declare that the direct interruption of the generative process already begun, and, above all, directly willed and procured abortion, even if for therapeutic reasons, are to be absolutely excluded as licit means of regulating birth. Equally to be excluded, as the teaching authority of the Church has frequently declared, is direct sterilization, whether perpetual or temporary, whether of the man or of the woman. Similarly excluded is every action which, either in anticipation of the conjugal act, or in its accomplishment, or in the development of its natural consequences, proposes, whether as an end or as a means, to render procreation impossible" (HV 14).


This was reiterated in the Catechism of the Catholic Church: "[E]very action which, whether in anticipation of the conjugal act, or in its accomplishment, or in the development of its natural consequences, proposes, whether as an end or as a means, to render procreation impossible is intrinsically evil" (CCC 2370). "Legitimate intentions on the part of the spouses do not justify recourse to morally unacceptable means . . . for example, direct sterilization or contraception" (CCC 2399).

The Church also has affirmed that the illicitness of contraception is an infallible doctrine: "The Church has always taught the intrinsic evil of contraception, that is, of every marital act intentionally rendered unfruitful. This teaching is to be held as definitive and irreformable. Contraception is gravely opposed to marital chastity, it is contrary to the good of the transmission of life (the procreative.aspect of matrimony), and to the reciprocal self-giving of the spouses (the unitive.aspect of matrimony); it harms true love and denies the sovereign role of God in the transmission of human life" (Vademecum for Confessors 2:4, Feb. 12, 1997).

Pope Paul VI predicted grave consequences that would arise from the widespread and unrestrained use of contraception.

Unfortunately, his prediction has become true.  

Walking the Walk and Not Just Talking the Talk

Tito Edwards of The American Catholic has posted an excellent article by Charles E. Rice on the Notre Dame 88, which outlines the great injustice being committed by Notre Dame.  Notre Dame refuses to drop the charges against Fr. Norman Weslin, O.S. and the rest of those who were arrested while peacefully entering Notre Dame Campus and praying while Obama, the most pro-abortion president ever, was receiving an honorary degree from Notre Dame. Charles E. Rice explains about motions and decisions that have been made by the court so far.  He also talks about questions left unresolved.   On April 30, 2010 Fr. Jenkins released  a statement saying:
“the University cannot have one set of rules for causes we oppose, and another more lenient set of rules for causes we support.  We have one consistent set of rules for demonstrations on campus—no matter what the cause.”
Charles E. Rice points out how Father Jenkins statement is untrue.  In fact, there is evidence that the university treats pro-gay and anti-military supporters better then their own pro-life, Catholic brethren.  Then, Mr. Rice shares information on the "criminals" that have been stigmatized and targeted by Notre Dame.

I am so sick of Catholic Universities being CINO and violating Church Teaching.  These universities, Bishops, priests, and parishioners need to stop being CINO's.  The Bishops, priests, and professors need to start walking the walk and not just talking the talk- and some don't even do that anymore.  Many Catholic universities have abandoned Catholic principles and have accepted the liberal platform, promote that platform, which is diametrically opposed to Catholic Tradition or Catholic values.  Even those catholic universities which are Traditional or conservative, when push comes to shove and they have a choice of CYA or standing up for what's right, IMO it seems like they abandon Catholic principles and choose protecting the university's image rather than standing up for the student or whomever. I know of this because I have been personally affected by the decisions of the higher ups at the university level. 

I attended a very Traditional Catholic college in Ohio and put the priests and maybe even the professors on a pedestal and thought that they were the light of the world, the greatest and could do no wrong. I thought that they would do the "right" thing and watch out for me.  Boy was I wrong. Well, something awful happened to me while attending the university and it was compounded by the fact that it involved a faculty member and because of this the university covered it up and they scapegoated me.  I found out that at least some of the university staff only talked the talk, and most certainly did not walk the walk. I felt like my heart had been ripped out of me. I loved being at this college and had made many friends there. It really hurt that this college was making false accusations about me to cover up for the professor, and to save the reputation or image of the college.  So, when the priest sex abuse scandals started surfacing I could believe that this could happen. If a small cover up could occur at a small university why couldn't a huge cover up or multiple little cover ups occur in parishes nationwide? 

First, I was in shock, then sad and angry.  Then, I shelved my anger and sadness for awhile. Then I became angry at the Catholic Church and struggled with my Faith. I connected the Catholic Church as a whole with what had happened to me at the Catholic university.  Then, my husband helped me to realize that the people who did this to me are human and humans sin or do wrong, and do not represent the Church. Over the past three years or so I have met some wonderful Catholic friends online and they have helped me to overcome many of my struggles with my faith.  I thank them, my husband, and my parents for helping me to overcome many of the struggles I have had with my faith.

I just wish people would do the right thing - make the right decision- no matter how hard the decision was instead of making the easy decision and taking an easy out.

Let us pray for all Catholics or former catholics who have abandoned the Catholic faith and those dissenters who are leading the flock astray that they may return to the One True Faith and return to following the Magisterium. God Bless.

Here is a video of Michael Voris talking on Walking the Walk:

On Holy Orders & Why Elaine Groppenbacher Cannot be Father Elaine

I know people are for “equality” between men and women in a more humanistic sense but in a spiritual sense Jesus was the High Priest and instituted Holy Orders but where is the paradigmatic woman priest found in Scripture? Was there a High Priestess somewhere in the scriptures that I don’t know about? I am not talking about those women that were called to evangelize in the Bible because whether we are nuns, priests, brothers, or laity we are all called to evangelization, but rather I am referring to any woman in the Bible that was designated a pastor, a priestess, or an apostle of God. Women and men have different “Calls” from God and for that reason they are called to different vocations and even different professions - teaching, nursing, etc. A male isn’t allowed to be a nun so is that discrimination or inequality? Nuns have a different call than priests and vice versa and they are no better than one another.


The Catechism specifically states who may receive the Sacrament of Holy Orders:

1577 "Only a baptized man (vir) validly receives sacred ordination." The Lord Jesus chose men (viri) to form the college of the twelve apostles, and the apostles did the same when they chose collaborators to succeed them in their ministry. The college of bishops, with whom the priests are united in the priesthood, makes the college of the twelve an ever-present and ever-active reality until Christ's return. The Church recognizes herself to be bound by this choice made by the Lord himself. For this reason the ordination of women is not possible.


1578 No one has a right to receive the sacrament of Holy Orders. Indeed no one claims this office for himself; he is called to it by God. Anyone who thinks he recognizes the signs of God's call to the ordained ministry must humbly submit his desire to the authority of the Church, who has the responsibility and right to call someone to receive orders. Like every grace this sacrament can be received only as an unmerited gift.

Here is Bishop Olmsted’s response to a schismatic group called Ecumenical Catholic Communion who attempted to confer the Sacrament of Holy Orders upon a woman named Elaine Groppenbacher. There was also a priest named Father Vernon Meyer who participated in this attempted ordination.


Dear Brothers and Sisters in Christ,


As reported in the news this week, a schismatic group in Tempe known as the Ecumenical Catholic Communion attempted to confer the Sacrament of Holy Orders upon a woman. It was also reported in the news that Fr. Vernon Meyer, a priest of our diocese, participated in the attempted ordination.


Actions such as these are extremely serious and carry with them profoundly harmful consequences for the salvation of the souls participating in this attempted ordination. To feign the conferral of the Sacrament of Holy Orders results in the penalty of excommunication. This penalty applies both to the person attempting the ordination and the person attempting to be ordained.


The attempted ordination of a woman is a grave offense against a sacrament and the structure of the Church. As it states in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, #1577: “Only a baptized man validly receives sacred ordination. The Lord Jesus chose men to form the college of the twelve apostles, and the apostles did the same when they chose collaborators to succeed them in their ministry. The college of bishops, with whom the priests are united in the priesthood, makes the college of the twelve an ever-present and ever-active reality until Christ’s return. The Church recognizes herself to be bound by this choice made by the Lord himself. For this reason the ordination of women is not possible.”


The Church’s position on the Sacrament of Holy Orders, of course, does not mean that women are of any less value or dignity than men. We are all called to Christian service, and women have always played an instrumental role in the life and holiness of the Church. Women serve in various levels of Church leadership and hold nearly half of diocesan administrative and professional positions, including chancellor and school superintendent in our own diocese. Women serve as presidents of Catholic colleges and universities in our country, and nearly 80 percent of lay parish ministers are women.


However, it is of paramount importance to recognize that the Catholic Church teaches that only a baptized man can be validly ordained to the ministerial priesthood. The Catholic priesthood, today as in ages past, mirrors the actions of Christ, who lived as a celibate male and chose to ordain only men.


You or your parishioners may also have seen it reported in the news that the Holy See allegedly considers the attempted ordination of women to be on par with the sexual abuse of minors. This is simply not true. This portrayal arose following the release of a letter from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith to the public July 15, 2010, which concerns updates to norms related to grave crimes that were outlined in 2001 by Pope John Paul II. It expands the number of offenses to be referred to the Holy See and deals with such issues as sexual abuse of a minor, pornography, violations of the seal of the confession, and the attempted ordination of women.


You may have further questions about this or related topics. I ask that you please direct all canonical questions to Fr. Christopher Fraser, the Judicial Vicar for the Diocese of Phoenix, at frfraser@diocesephoenix.org. Additionally, you may be receiving calls or questions from the press. Please direct all media requests to Rob DeFrancesco, our Director of Communications, at (602) 354-2130 or rdefrancesco@diocesephoenix.org.


Please pray for all involved in this divisive, scandalous act against the Catholic Church.


Grace and wisdom in the risen Christ,


+Thomas J. Olmsted
Bishop of Phoenix

The Long Goodbye