In essence what happened is Supreme Council sent a memo to all local Councils that forbids any action to be taken against members who support legalized abortion or same-sex marriage. This memo was sent after a Massachusetts council sent in a resolution to suspend members who are politicians who gave public support to abortion and same-sex marriage. This was declared inappropriate by Supreme Advocate John Marrella. Marrella declared that "a subordinate council may not impose fraternal discipline with respect to a public figure's official actions on matters pertaining to faith and morals. Rather, any such discipline must be made by or at the direction of the Supreme Board of Directors. We recognize that some of our members who are public figures may use their public position to advocate or support policy positions that are contrary to the teachings of the Catholic Church on matters of faith and morals," Marrella conceded in his letter. He went on to admit that such public advocacy "contradicts the Catholic identity and mission of the Order". Marrella went on to say that the K of C would not go further than the American bishops in taking public action against members whose public stands conflict with Church moral teachings. "If the public figure's bishop has not excommunicated him for his public positions on issues relating to matters of faith and morals, it would be highly inappropriate for the Knights of Columbus to do so," Supreme will never oust a member because of his support for abortion. If the local councils are forbidden to act, and the national leadership is unwilling to act, then the disgrace will continue: prominent men who support the killing of the unborn, and go against the Teaching of Holy Mother Church as well as disrespecting clergy will be allowed to parade around in the guise of Catholic knighthood. In reality this is happening even still, on a daily basis. Supreme has allowed the Order to become a business institution, not a Catholic Fraternity. I think Fr. McGivney is rolling in his grave.
I, Grand Knight P. Aguilar sent the following Memo to Supreme, without response...: [Worthy Supreme Knight, As it concerns the memorandum in reference to protocol involving public officials, their counter-faith stance and their membership in the order I must inquire further, as at this point it appears to be unethical, and thereby unlawful. As such I am duty bound by the rules of Chivalry; the annals of knights, crusaders and martyrs who came before me and my faith as a Catholic layman to disobey such a request Upon initiation, the Chaplain, which is generally the parish priest of the local council decides the “Catholicity” of the candidates the bishop is not consulted, nor is it a requisite. If the Candidate is not a practicing Catholic or is not in communion with the Church they are denied membership. This is the same for members as well, whereas he would have a more familiar involvement with member’s public stance and whether he has been resolved with Holy Mother Church. I am not speaking of an individual’s struggle with sin in general but the public display of support for such issues that are clearly not in line with the Catholic Church. Which to me implies that one maintains not only a belief in but a support of it's tenets with regard to the sanctity of human life from conception to natural death and the Sacrament of Marriage. Nonetheless, laymen can be excommunicated own their own with out a Bishop’s pronouncement by way of their sinful actions and/ or failure to act when it is necessary to do so; such as against abortion or other political views that are contrary to the faith. Therefore public officials who need to be “excommunicated” already are due to their public display of support for such issues that are anti-catholic or go against the teachings of Holy Mother Church. This is referred to in Canon Law as latæ sententiæ. When considered from a moral standpoint, the guilt requisite for the sentence of excommunication implies, first, the full use of reason; second sufficient moral liberty; finally, knowledge of the law and even of the penalty which in this case is Latae Sententiae. It is clear that a public official that continually supports issues that are contrary to Catholic teaching is not going to be in communion with Holy Mother Church whereas we are all Catechized so that we know what it is we are supposed to believe in. In cases such as these the politicians have no excuse; the Bishops who refuse to exercise their duty and right not to allow politicians who act against church teachings to receive communion have no excuse. We as an Order of Christian Knights have no excuse to not admonish those who are against the very Church we are sworn to defend! I do not intend that the Order judge members’ souls; for that is the place of the Church: not just the bishop, but the priest has that authority to refuse communion. The Order has the responsibility to suspend or ultimately expel members if they are not publicly living up to the ideals of the Church or of the Order and are continually showing public display contrary to same. Again Canon law states: One is not only excommunicated by action of a Bishop. When one PUBLICLY opposes fundamental Church teaching and commits heresy, that person removes himself from the Church and "self-excommunicates." Supreme Advocate John Marrella's example of bishops who do not "ex- communicate" Catholic politicians who vote in favor of abortion and same-sex marriage for why the Order can not "excommunicate" these men is not only a misnomer but a shame to us as Catholic Knights to become so complacent when we are fighting to end abortion. This just makes us seem cowardly and defeats the purpose. As a Catholic fraternal organization the K of C does not have the authority to "excommunicate" from the Catholic Church any of its members; however, it does have the authority and duty to "discharge" any member whose behavior is a constant scandal to the Catholic faith. Failure to do so is in itself scandalous and an act of cowardice! Are we not to have a Catholic backbone? Are we to give in to liberal political agenda? The answer is a resounding NO! This stance will only perpetuate the problem and as stated turn the order into hypocritical cowards. Gerald du Aurillac, a Templar used his social station in a Christian way, that is, by using his power, even military power, no to plunder and pillage but to defend the defenseless people of Christ. These so-called Catholic Politicians have a duty to do the same, even if they are not knights, but especially if they are. An individual priest would be within his rights to refuse communion to anyone guilty of public sin. Why should a local or state council be prevented from acting as their conscience dictates? I am well in favor for praying for them and even teaching them, however they are grown and should be well aware of their actions and how it jeopardizes their souls. Just like I know my personal sins jeopardize my own soul, but I take measures to frequently correct myself. As a Grand Knight and layperson I am not perfect nor do I purport myself to be without the stain of sin. I know that I am a sinner, however I go to confession on a regular basis, and I publicly uphold the teachings of the church and stand with the Church against such political issues that are contrary to our faith. Famed knight Ramon Lull wrote knights will by definition fail as they are human, but attain their grace in the striving for virtue, for the perseverance of seeking to overcome the vanities of the body and soul, to do what is 'right'. It is a striving for excellence even as we know that perfection is beyond our grasp, but that fact alone does not allow us to stop in our quest for it. Nonetheless, I do not and will not allow anyone who should bring such public shame and disgrace to the Catholic Church or the Order to participate in Council events or share an active roll within the council. What steps then are we to take to keep such shameful and blatant acts of irreverence, heresy and blasphemy from our midst if the Supreme Council decides to bind up the hands of local and state officers? Are we to allow them to continually claim membership and partake actively within our ranks and maintain their obstinacy to Holy Mother Church and those articles of faith, truths that She teaches to us? There must be some sort of consequence for such betrayal! I can only thank God that there are none within my Council (to my knowledge) that publicly support such anti-Catholic views. Instead of the Order looking at this situation from a business standpoint and be fearful of losing money, gained by insurance we should look to the code of Chivalry that would not allow the order to act as it is in this instance. The rule of Chivalry expressly requires knights to be a visible example of holiness and moderation. The Templars would not allow any member to remain among them if they went about contrary to the Rule of their order which was written by the Catholic Priest Bernard of Clairvoux. Nonetheless the original motivation of Huge de Payen (the founder of the order) sustained the Temple for a relatively short time. It may be the rapid institutionalization was sufficient in itself to modify the original concept beyond recognition. If the leaders of this Order are not careful we too shall share in the fate of the Templars: extinction, excommunication or censure. Is it then the case that we are becoming too institutionalized? I would hope not but as it stands at this moment it would appear we have. The famous knight Sir Geoffrey d’Charny wrote that piety and Chivalry do not occupy separate spaces in a knight’s consciousness; they are inseparable almost interchangeable qualities in men of war and insists that a good knight can wear his armor as purely and devoutly as any priest wears his vestments for Mass. Moreover, a knight must keep his conduct as thoroughly honest as any priest. He is certain that there can be no contradiction between a worthy knightly vocation and true religion. It is for these very reasons that I must disobey the Supreme Council’s memo. I have been a faithful knight, and a practicing Catholic and will remain so. However I can not sit back and allow anything or anyone to bring disgrace to my council or to this Order. I encourage you to rethink this strategy and will pray that St. Michael will guide us. However you should not bind our hands in doing what is right, just to add bodies to our Order if they are not worthy to be called a knight. I would not want to serve in a council full of such hypocrites, nor will I ask any man to involve himself in such shamefulness. As I stated my council has nothing to fear, nor do I for we are void of such dishonorableness. We have a Chaplain who stands by us and nourishes us in our Spiritual Warfare with Satan and his demons. Strengthened by the Traditional Latin Mass, we will continue to march into battle with our Armor fully polished, without tarnish of any sort. With the sincerest fraternal care I encourage you to do the same.]
Irony indeed, from the horses mouth: Guarding against false values (an article from KOFC website) 6/1/2005 Dominican Father Gabriel B. O’Donnell The Knights of Columbus must always stand for the vision of faith commended to its first members by Father McGivney. The Knights of Columbus stands for the culture of life. The evils of abortion and euthanasia must be opposed and overcome. But the sanctity of life is also threatened by the false values that may pervade our homes.
Has the KOFC lost its luster? Has the KOFC forgotten it's mission? Has the KOFC became too institutionalized? YES!!!!!!!! The Only Thing I know to do is to Pray for Supreme Council, to fight for what is right and to let the voice of Truth be heard. We will effect the necessary change or we will let the cancer destroy what is evil and create something better. Which ever is best for Holy Mother Church. Holy Mother Church does not need the Order or its "knights" like they need Her! More Proof: Knights of Columbus Climbs 29 Spots on Fortune’s® List of Top Companies 5/23/2011 The Knights of Columbus has moved up 29 places in Fortune’s® annual ranking of America’s 1000 largest companies this year according to the recently released Fortune® list. Fortune’s® 2011 list ranks the Knights of Columbus – a fraternal benefit society – at 900 in total revenues. It ranked 929 last year. The organization also rose 21 spots on the list of most profitable companies, moving to 725 this year, up from 746 in 2010 on Fortune’s® list. Last month, the Knights surpassed $80 billion of life insurance in force – twice the amount of insurance in force slightly more than a decade ago, when CEO Carl Anderson took the helm. The organization also has more than $17 billion in assets under management. “There is no more highly rated North American insurer than the Knights of Columbus. We have every confidence in our continued success because we have a fundamentally solid business model, which continues to serve us well,” said Supreme Knight Carl A. Anderson. “Despite the difficult economic conditions in the United States, the Knights of Columbus has maintained its strength, has enjoyed record years of growth, and has improved its standing relative to the insurance industry as a whole. We foresee similar success going forward.” The Knights of Columbus has enjoyed record growth during the last several years – despite the weakness of the overall economy – and is one of only five life insurers that holds the top rating from both A.M. Best (A++) and Standard and Poor’s (AAA). The Knights of Columbus was established in 1882 as a fraternal benefit society, with one of its primary aims to enable members to protect their families with life insurance. Today, the K of C has more than 1.8 million members in the United States, Canada, Mexico and Central America, the Caribbean, Philippines and Poland. One of the most active charitable groups in the United States, Knights of Columbus members last year set records by providing nearly 69 million hours of charitable service and more than $151 million in donations to charitable causes. Cumulative figures show that, during the past decade, the K of C has donated more than $1.36 billion to charity, and provided nearly 640 million hours of volunteer service in support of charitable initiatives.
1. nothing stating we are a Catholic organization, the word Catholic doesn't even appear. 2. We are refereed to as a business company and fraternal benefit society 3. nothing stating that we are a Catholic organization; I know I already said that this time it was for effect! 4. we contribute to charities but nothing is said about service to Holy Mother Church.*News Flash * Guess it's true, they finally let the cat out of the bag; we are not a Catholic organization anymore!
Qoute of St. Augustine's in reference to Holy Mother Church
“This same is the holy Church, the one Church, the true Church, the catholic Church, fighting against all heresies: fight, it can: be fought down, it cannot. As for heresies, they went all out of it, like as unprofitable branches pruned from the vine: but itself abides in its root, in its Vine, in its charity. "The gates of hell shall not prevail against it" (On the Creed: Sermon to Catechumens (14) c. 395)
Sacred Heart of Jesus
Have mercy on us!
Holy Sacrifice of the Mass
Without priests there would be none
I’m here as a Catholic Christian and an American citizen -- in that order. Both of these identities are important. They don’t need to conflict. They are not, however, the same thing. ... No nation, not even the one I love, has a right to my allegiance, or my silence, in matters that belong to God or that undermine the dignity of the human persons He created.
Arch Bishop Chaput