Returning to our developing theme of Amoris Laetitia >> adultery >> fornication >> Humanae Vitae >> contraception >> sodomy, let’s continue to keep score as the narrative is drawn in sharper relief with each passing day.
Following is the lead headline on Drudge as of this moment, 10:16am MST, 21 May 2018:
Yes, Antipope Bergoglio over the weekend was reported to have further abused an abuse victim by telling him his homosexuality was from God. God made him that way, God loves him that way, and he should love himself that way. This actually goes way beyond “born this way,” to say that God Himself is the author. This is so diabolical, words fail. If God is the source of homosexuality, that would mean God wills evil, which is impossible. While it is true that we all have our crosses to bear, and while God does allow us to be tempted, the source of our weakness is Satan, through Original Sin and the resultant concupiscence. This is basic Catholicism. And although it’s not wrong to pray to be freed from disordered thoughts, learn well that God doesn’t often lift these burdens, so we are also meant to look upon them as an opportunity — an opportunity to cooperate with God’s grace, which He always offers us in sufficient quantity to avoid sin, as explained by Saint Paul:
“And lest the greatness of the revelations should exalt me, there was given me a sting of my flesh, an angel of Satan, to buffet me. For which thing thrice I besought the Lord, that it might depart from me. And he said to me: My grace is sufficient for thee; for power is made perfect in infirmity. Gladly therefore will I glory in my infirmities, that the power of Christ may dwell in me. For which cause I please myself in my infirmities, in reproaches, in necessities, in persecutions, in distresses, for Christ. For when I am weak, then am I powerful.” 2 Cor 12:7-10
As even the secular media begins to feed on this reportage of Bergoglio promulgating the doctrine of Born This Way, I have a feeling the pace of events regarding The Situation is about to go into hyperdrive. If sodomy is from God, who can be against it? We already know that Genesis 19 was only about sodomitical RAPE, right? God would never be against CONSENSUAL sodomy, right? Haters gonna hate. Love is Love.
Don’t laugh. I have friends who call themselves “Christians” who firmly believe this. And it makes logical sense, because they also believe contraception is a responsibility, abortion is merciful, and a number of other things that are grossly incompatible with the gospel. If you are unaware of the direct connection between artificial contraception and the embrace of sodomy, just trust me on this point for now. I’m posting a thorough explanation in the coming days.
Did you happen to see the post by an anonymous priest at Lifesite a few days ago HERE?
“I said it right from the beginning, when Amoris Laetitia was first published, with its infamous Chapter 8 that allows individual conscience to trump objective moral law and thus effectively eliminate the notion of intrinsic moral evil: The real issue is not Holy Communion for the divorced and civilly remarried. After all, Pope Francis had already streamlined the annulment process, to allow declarations of nullity which were generally easy to attain, to be even easier. The real issue is all about sodomy, and normalizing — even blessing — this behavior called by the Catechism “intrinsically disordered.” “
I do have a quibble when he states that giving Holy Communion to adulterers is not the “real issue.” It should not be dismissed this casually, because it is the camel’s nose under the tent, on the road to the complete destruction of the moral order. But that last paragraph is meant to be an uppercut to the jaw, which, if you’ve ever been on the receiving end of an uppercut to the jaw, you know what I mean.
Please click on the link and read the whole thing; he really does have a firm grasp on the situation, and the article serves as a good encapsulation of the entire affair, should you need to explain to someone in short order. I am skipping over a bunch of supporting evidence he provides, along with a lot detailed annotation. Go read it.
In the end, he distills it down to this:
“Call it modernism, call it corruption of doctrine, call it by whatever name one sees fit. I submit that winning moral approval for homosexual behavior is the real goal of Amoris Laetitia, and that this is precisely why the teaching of Humanae Vitae and the Natural Law must be cast aside, which is: that by God’s design, there exists an inseparable link between the unitive and procreative meanings of the marital act, and that the unitive meaning is subordinated to the primary end: procreation…if the procreative meaning can be eliminated from the marital act, then one is effectively left with no argument against sodomy.
And those who promote the sodomite agenda know this. They know that they must also discard the notion of physical and emotional complementarity of the sexes, as well as the concept of intrinsic moral evil – which in effect means they must overturn the entire moral order…This also explains why for over a year now we’ve heard talk of “re-examining” the teaching of Pope Paul VI’s 1968 encyclical. Those who desire to cast Humanae Vitae into the trash bin are now showing their hand…
More arguments to permit the exclusion of the procreative end of sexual activity are sure to come from those who seek approval of homosexual behavior, because they know that they cannot succeed as long as the teachings of Humanae Vitae and the Natural Law stand.“
All this ties neatly back to something that came out a few months ago. You don’t need any sort of advanced degree to connect the dots:
“Italian moral theologian Father Maurizio Chiodi said at a December 14 public lecture at the Pontifical Gregorian University in Rome that there are “circumstances — I refer to Amoris Laetitia, Chapter 8 — that precisely for the sake of responsibility, require contraception.”…When “natural methods are impossible or unfeasible, other forms of responsibility need to be found,” argued Fr. Chiodi in his lecture entitled: Re-reading Humanae Vitae (1968) in light of Amoris Laetitia (2016).
In such circumstances, he said, “an artificial method for the regulation of births could be recognized as an act of responsibility that is carried out, not in order to radically reject the gift of a child, but because in those situations responsibility calls the couple and the family to other forms of welcome and hospitality.” The Italian professor’s comments come as the Church this year marks the 50th anniversary of Pope Paul VI’s encyclical Humanae Vitae, which reaffirmed the Church’s ban on contraception. In his encyclical, Paul VI called artificial contraception “intrinsically wrong,” approved natural family planning, and upheld the Church’s teaching on conjugal love and responsible parenthood.” HERE
To sum this up, we again return to the deceitful and utterly diabolical idea that there are certain “concrete situations” in which we must go beyond the law, and not only is the sinful behavior acceptable, it’s actually what God himself is asking. God wills sin, you know. It’s as if the moral law is wholly arbitrary and not grounded in metaphysical reality, because the Modernists don’t believe in reality itself. The “reasoning” being employed in this specific example is especially laughable, because the erroneous appeal to “responsibility” was specifically called out BY NAME, thoroughly examined, and CONDEMNED in Humanae Vitae. This will be explained in the forthcoming redpill post.
Sodomy is the endgame. You’ll be forced to pick a side.