US Bishops Decry Rejection of Marriage Defense

Finally the US Bishops grow a set and speak up for something, late though it may be.

Obama's hair-brain scheme
The Obama administration will no longer defend the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which defines marriage as a relationship between a man and a woman, Attorney General Eric Holder has announced.

He states While the President opposes DOMA and believes it should be repealed, the Department has defended it in court because we were able to advance reasonable arguments under that rational basis standard. The Justice Department traditionally defends all federal laws against court challenges. But Holder said that if no "reasonable" defense is available (Guess they have not read the Book of Leviticus, or decided to ignore it since the almighty O'bama knows all), his department does not offer such defense. In the case of the DOMA law, he said, no "reasonable" defense is possible.

In his February 23 announcement, Holder said that President Obama had changed his views on DOMA, and "concluded that given a number of factors, including a documented history of discrimination, classifications based on sexual orientation should be subject to a more heightened standard of scrutiny." He said that the President concluded the DOMA legislation "fails to meet that standards and is therefore unconstitutional." (Again, how about the documented history and instruction God reveals to us in the Bible? Not important?)

Consequently, the Department will not defend the constitutionality of Section 3 of DOMA as applied to same-sex married couples in the two cases filed in the Second Circuit. We will, however, remain parties to the cases and continue to represent the interests of the United States throughout the litigation. I have informed Members of Congress of this decision, so Members who wish to defend the statute may pursue that option (Must be their guilty conscience talking: hint to those with a moral backbone still intact, this can not slip quietly into the night). The Department will also work closely with the courts to ensure that Congress has a full and fair opportunity to participate in pending litigation.

The Department has a longstanding practice of defending the constitutionality of duly-enacted statutes if reasonable arguments can be made in their defense. At the same time, the Department in the past has declined to defend statutes despite the availability of professionally responsible arguments, in part because – as here – the Department does not consider every such argument to be a “reasonable” one. Moreover, the Department has declined to defend a statute in cases, like this one, where the President has concluded that the statute is unconstitutional. ( Aren't we glad to have a president that is smarter and knows more than God. We american's sure did pick a winner this time. Oh what a change indeed!)

Much of the legal landscape has changed in the 15 years since Congress passed DOMA. The Supreme Court has ruled that laws criminalizing homosexual conduct are unconstitutional. Congress has repealed the military’s Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy. Several lower courts have ruled DOMA itself to be unconstitutional. Section 3 of DOMA will continue to remain in effect unless Congress repeals it or there is a final judicial finding that strikes it down, and the President has informed me that the Executive Branch will continue to enforce the law. But while both the wisdom and the legality of Section 3 of DOMA will continue to be the subject of both extensive litigation and public debate, this Administration will no longer assert its constitutionality in court. (So God, All the Jewish clergy, Jesus, All the Roman Catholic Clergy, your grandparents and parents (or parent for most of the US) were all incorrect when they said "two wrongs, don't make a right".)

Bishops Denounce The Presidential Failure to Uphold Law

On Wednesday the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops issued a statement from its Office of General Counsel noting:

"Today, the president has instructed the Department of Justice to stop defending the Defense of Marriage Act. Marriage has been understood for millennia and across cultures as the union of one man and one woman.A federal law reiterating that definition of marriage, was passed by a Republican congress and signed by a Democratic president just fifteen years ago. The principal basis for today's decision is that the president considers the law a form of impermissible sexual orientation discrimination. This decision represents an abdication of the responsibility of the executive branch to carry out its constitutional obligation to ensure that the laws of the United States are faithfully executed.. It is also a grave affront to the millions of Americans who both reject unjust discrimination and affirm the unique and inestimable value of marriage as between one man and one woman. Support for actual marriage is not bigotry, but instead an eminently reasonable, common judgment affirming the foundational institution of civil society. Any suggestion by the government that such a judgment represents 'discrimination' is a serious threat to the religious liberty of marriage supporters nationwide." (I'll translate for the O' omniscient one: "Hey yo, playa! Check it, this s@#$ right here is lame, yo. You betta check yoseowf fo you wreck yoseowf fool, heard. You coming wit some weak game like this. U trippn, best chill wit that; u 'sposed to be the Prez and be slippn'. O.G. Biggun' in Heaben gon' turn the heat up on the microwave when he come back 'round this way. And trus' me playa, it's gon' get hot in heer fo ya! Best believe dat!)

God has already ruled on this issue

God's definition of marriage is clearly defined in the account of His creation of this basic human relationship in Genesis 2: 22-24:

"And the rib, which the Lord God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man. And Adam said, "This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man. Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh."

A man and A woman are put together to make another human being. A man and a man can't; neither can a woman and a woman.

Catechism 2357 states: Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex. It has taken a great variety of forms through the centuries and in different cultures. Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained. Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity, 141 tradition has always declared that "homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered." 142 They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved. (141 Cf. Gen 19:1-29; Rom 1:24-27; I Cor 6:10; I Tim 1:10. 142 CDF, Persona humana 8.)

Scripture from Douay-Rheims version of the Holy Bible

Leviticus 20
[13]If any one lie with a man as with a woman, both have committed an abomination, let them be put to death: their blood be upon them.
[22] Keep my laws and my judgments, and do them: lest the land into which you are to enter to dwell therein, vomit you also out.
[23] Walk not after the laws of the nations, which I will cast out before you. For they have done all these things, and therefore I abhorred them.

Jude 1:7
As Sodom and Gomorrah, and the neighbouring cities, in like manner, having given themselves to fornication, and going after other flesh, were made an example, suffering the punishment of eternal fire.

I don't know about you, but I'd rather trust in the Word of the Lord than take my chances with the whims of the world, which are the devil's deceits. I know I'm not perfect, I am a sinner. But this just beats all I've ever seen. Especially from said office. For those Catholics who voted for him just one question? Feeling like the Iscariot yet? Hope those thirty pieces of silver were a plenty!

Holy Family: Jesus, Mary, and Joseph; Pray for this nation. That God does not destroy us, but rather show us the way to Him who is all powerful and reigns over all of the world. That we should come to our senses and take a stand for that which is right!

Shame on Obama! Shame on America!

Spiritual Bouquet for Pope Benedict for St. Joseph’s Day (19 March)

For those of you who follow Father Z's blog: What Does the Prayer Really Say? you may have already seen this. For those who have not yet discovered this blog, Father has enlisted the help of every able Catholic to offer some spiritual works up for His Holines Pope Benedict XVI. I have Provided a link to Father's post below. Please read and participate. I will! Wont you?

http://wdtprs.com/blog/wdtprs-spiritual-bouquet-for-pope-benedict-for-st-josephs-day-19-march/

Polish Priest murdered in Tunisia

Shocking story found at:


http://www.zenit.org/article-31792?l=english

Let us pray for the soul of God's beloved priest Father Rybinski.

REQUIEM aeternam dona ei, Domine, et lux perpetua luceat ei. Requiescat in pace. Amen.

Why on earth—I wonder, and ask myself—was a rite that has nurtured generations of the faithful banned in the name of an absurd modernism?

Visor lift to Rorate Caeli:

In all sincerity, do you find that the rite of St. Pius V ensures greater solemnity, spirituality, and mystery at Mass?
"I think, then, that the Mass of St. Pius V is one that really looks toward God, and, compared to the Novus Ordo, it seems to me more complete from the point of view of the prayers.”

Read More

The Pope's Warning

Worthy to Receive the Lamb: Catholics in Political Life and the Reception of Holy Communion

by Bishop Robert J. Baker, Archbishop John F. Donoghue, Bishop Peter J. Jugis:

As bishops, we have the obligation to teach and guide the Catholic Faithful whom we shepherd in the Body of Christ. A fundamental teaching of our Church is respect for the sacred gift of life. This teaching flows from the Natural Law and from Divine Revelation.
Life is a gift bestowed upon us by God, a truth underscored by the commandment: "You shall not kill" (Deut 5: 17). The Old Testament also teaches us that human life in the womb is precious to God: "...I formed you in the womb..." (Jer 1: 5). The right to life is a value "which no individual, no majority and no State can ever create, modify or destroy, but must only acknowledge, respect and promote" (Pope John Paul II, Evangelium vitae, 71a). A law, therefore, which legitimizes the direct killing of innocent human beings through abortion is intrinsically unjust, since it is directly opposed to the natural law, to God's revealed commandments, and to the consequent right of every individual to possess life, from the moment of conception to the moment of natural death.
Catholics in political life have the responsibility to exemplify in their public service this teaching of the Church, and to work for the protection of all innocent life. There can be no contradiction between the values bestowed by Baptism and the Catholic Faith, and the public expression of those values. Catholic public officials who consistently support abortion on demand are cooperating with evil in a public manner. By supporting pro-abortion legislation they participate in manifest grave sin, a condition which excludes them from admission to Holy Communion as long as they persist in the pro-abortion stance (cf. Canon 915).
Holy Communion is where Catholics meet as a family in Christ, united by a common faith. Every Catholic is responsible for being properly prepared for this profound union with Christ. Participation in Holy Communion requires certain dispositions on the part of the communicant, namely, perseverance in the life of grace, and communion in the faith of the Church, in the sacraments, and in the hierarchical order of the Church (Pope John Paul II, Ecclesia de Eucharistia, 35-38).
The Church also recognizes that there is a manifest lack of a proper disposition for Holy Communion in those whose outward conduct is "seriously, clearly, and steadfastly contrary" to the Church's moral teaching (Ecclesia de Eucharistia, 37b). A manifest lack of proper disposition for Holy Communion is found to be present in those who consistently support pro-abortion legislation. Because support for pro-abortion legislation is gravely sinful, such persons should not be admitted to Holy Communion.
We also take this opportunity to address all Catholics whose beliefs and conduct do not correspond to the Gospel and to Church teaching. To receive the great gift of God - the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ - we must approach Holy Communion free from mortal sin. Those who are conscious of being in a state of grave sin should avail themselves of the Sacrament of Reconciliation before coming to Holy Communion. To partake of the Eucharist is to partake of Christ Himself, and to enter into sacramental communion with our Lord we must all be properly disposed.
Because of the influence that Catholics in public life have on the conduct of our daily lives and on the formation of our nation's future, we declare that Catholics serving in public life espousing positions contrary to the teaching of the Church on the sanctity and inviolability of human life, especially those running for or elected to public office are not to be admitted to Holy Communion in any Catholic church within our jurisdictions: the Archdiocese of Atlanta, the Dioceses of Charleston and Charlotte. Only after reconciliation with the Church has occurred, with the knowledge and consent of the local bishop, and public disavowal of former support for procured abortion, will the individual be permitted to approach the Sacrament of the Holy Eucharist.
We undertake this action to safeguard the sacred dignity of the Most Holy Sacrament of the Altar, to reassure the faithful, and to save sinners.

Most Reverend John F. Donoghue Archbishop of Atlanta
Most Reverend Robert J. Baker Bishop of Charleston
Most Reverend Peter J. Jugis Bishop of Charlotte

This item 6095 digitally provided courtesy of CatholicCulture.org

A Lifetime of Fraternal Devotion

12/8/2010
The year 1933 saw the repeal of Prohibition in the United States, the continuation of the Great Depression, the start of construction on the Golden Gate Bridge, Adolph Hitler grabbing power in Germany, the premiere of King Kong, and FDR’s first fireside chat. Another item that occurred that year that you won’t find in history books, but that did lead to a lifetime of devoted fraternal service, was that John (Jack) A. McLoughlin Jr., a native of West Haven, Conn., became a member of San Salvador Council 1. That was the start of a remarkable 78 years of service to the Order until his passing on Dec. 3, 2010, at the age of 99.
Along with being a member of the Order, McLoughlin was an accountant at the Supreme Council office from 1941 until 1968 when he retired to take an administrative position at Quinnipiac College in Hamden, which was followed by a career at the Yale University Athletic Department. He served in the Coast Guard during World War II. He was predeceased by his wife Connie, and is survived by his three children and six grandchildren.
“Mr. McLoughlin’s experience stands as a true example of what it means to make membership in the Order an experience of a lifetime,” said Supreme Knight Carl A. Anderson. “His life also serves as an exemplary model of service to our Church and the community, something every Knight should strive toward.”
McLoughlin – who maintained his membership in Council 1 even after retiring to Arizona – was active with Ave Maria Council 9380 in Tucson, Ariz. Upon the occasion of his 75th anniversary as a Knight, the council (after finding that the years of active service pins did not go to that high of a level) had a pin especially designed for him.
“Jack moved to Tucson quite a few years ago, but kept his membership in San Salvador Council 1,” said former District Deputy Peter Karculias. “Up to the age of 95, Jack would be found out in front of the grocery store every year collecting money for people with intellectual disabilities campaign – all day long! Only when his health began to fail him and he had to use a wheelchair did he slow down. Still, he attended council functions as often as he could. His dedication and service to the Order and our Lord are an inspiration to us all.”