The Decency Gap / Eve Reinhardt Censored Version

Planned Parenthood as we can plainly see is spreading out all across the globe to promote infanticide through abortion. A few weeks ago Eve Reinhardt went to Peru and pretended to be an unbiased filmmaker wanting to interview pro-life leaders, bishops and priests. But she was unmasked by Carlos Polo.

The film of Carlos Polo confronting her deception was posted on youtube.com. Word was that Youtube removed it but it can still be found on Youtube.com.

Carlos Polo is a real pro-life hero…HE DID NOT BACK DOWN!

GO! CARLOS!

http://www.abc.net.au/tv/swindle/

St. Irenaeus was born in Asia around 120 A.D. He sat under the teaching St. Polycarp who was instructed in the Faith by St. John the Apostle. From St. Irenaeus’ Against Heresies:

Mary is the Mother of God

“The Virgin Mary, …being obedient to His word, received from an angel the glad tidings that she would bear God.”

On the Eucharist:

“He (Jesus) has declared the cup, a part of creation to be His own Blood, from which He causes our blood toflow: and the bread a part of creation, He has established as His own Body, from which He gives increase to our bodies.” 5,2,2

On the Gospels:

There is such certainty surrounding the Gospels that the heretics themselves bear witness to them: and starting from the Gospels, each one of them attempts to establish his own doctrine. …It is not possible that the Gospels can be either greater or fewer in number than they are. Just as there are four regions of the world in which we live, and four universal winds and since the Church is disseminated over all the earth, and the pillar and mainstay of the Church is the Gospel, the r breath of life, it is fitting that she have four pillars breathing immortality on every side and enkindling life in men anew. From this it is evident that the Word, the Artificer of all, who sits upon the cherubim and embraces all things, and who was manifested to man, has given us a fourfold gospel embracing one spirit. 3,11,7 & 8

On St. Polycarp:

Poly carp, however was instructed not only bht the Apostles, and conversed with many who had seen Christ, but was also appointed bishop of the Church in Smyrna, by the Apostles in Asia. I saw him in my early youth; for he tarried a long time and when quite old he departed this life in glorious and most noble martyrdom. He always taught those things which he had learned from the Apostles, and which the Church had handed down and which are true. To these things all the Churches in Asia bear witness, as do also the successors of Polycarp even to the present time….Once he was met by Marcion ( a heretic) who said to him,

“Do you recognize me?” and Polycarp replied,

“I recognize you as the firstborn of Satan.”

Q. Are homosexuals born gay?

A. There is much controversy about whether homosexuals are born gay, choose it or are influenced by adverse upbringin. At the moment the cause is not certain. However, what we do know is that practicing homosexual intercourse, oral sex, etc. is gravely sinful and disordered.

CATECHISM OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH

Chastity and homosexuality

2357 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.

2358 The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God’s will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord’s Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.

2359 Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection.

This teaching of the Catholic Church derives its authority from Sacred Scripture:

Leviticus 18:22

You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination.

Leviticus 20:13

13‘^(A)If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act; they shall surely be put to death. Their bloodguiltiness is upon them.

Deuteronomy 23:18 18You shall not bring the hire of a harlot or the price of a dog (a sodomite) into the house of the Lord your God as payment of a vow, for both of these are an abomination to the Lord your God.

Romans 1:27

27 and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error.

1 Corinthians 6:9-10

9 Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, 10 nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God.

1 Timothy 1:8-11

We know that the law is good when used correctly. 9 For the law was not intended for people who do what is right. It is for people who are lawless and rebellious, who are ungodly and sinful, who consider nothing sacred and defile what is holy, who kill their father or mother or commit other murders. 10 The law is for people who are sexually immoral, or who practice homosexuality, or are slave traders, liars, promise breakers, or who do anything else that contradicts the wholesome teaching 11 that comes from the glorious Good News entrusted to me by our blessed God.

By this it is established that the PRACTICE of homosexuality is gravely sinful, an abomination and detestable to God. HOWEVER, THE ORIENTATION IS NOT sinful. So, whether the human person is born a homosexual, or wounded in such a way that he becomes oriented towards homosexuality, or even out of some inner rebellion or rage actually makes a conscience choice, IT DOES NOT MATTER!

HOMOSEXUAL SEX IS A GRAVE SIN!

A person who finds himself/herself attracted to members of the same sex must exercise self mastery and abstain from indulging in this sin throughout his/her whole life. The suffering will purify the soul. This self denial is absolutely no different than many heterosexuals who find it extremely difficult to abstain from sex before marriage or even after marriage to remain faithful. They can often seem to be under as much compulsion to sin in this way as the homosexual. Both must deny themselves. The same can be said for those attracted sexually to children, rape, group sex, etc.

Whatever our inclination, we may find we are all born with certain proclivities to sin in different ways, we must overcome these with the help of God’s Grace and the sacraments, in order to grow in holiness. But God loves each and every one. Our eternal souls were created and infused into our bodies by our Heavenly Father. He wants every human person to join Him in Heaven after our time of testing in this life. So, take up your cross and follow Him. For what does it matter if you gain the whole world but lose your soul?

I thought the Catholic Church was started in the 4th or 5th century?

No Jesus started the Catholic Church in Mt. 16 when He said to Simon, “You are rock and on this rock I will build my Church”
And it was called the Catholic Church in 110A.D. See post Are Catholics Christian?

Also, were the first followers of Jesus called Gnostic Christians with a completely different look at Christianity then what the Catholic view is?

Absolutely not. The Gnostics have the distinction of being, not the first followers of Christ but the first HERETICS! In fact, they were such early heretics that St. John refutes some of their beliefs in his first epistle. The first followers were Jewish. The first Christians were Catholic.

The one thing i have never understood in Christianity is infant baptizing?

Infant baptism is implied when “whole households” are baptized in Acts. And it corresponds to OT infant circumcision as the rite of initiation into the People of God. See Infant Baptism

It was a Pagan tradition and was first implemented into Christianity by the first Roman Catholics aka ex pagans.

The pagans do many things. They marry. Does this make marriage pagan? The wedding ring was of pagan origin. Does this make everyone who wears a wedding ring a pagan? Of course not. Christian Missionaries adapt certain pagan things to have a Christian meaning. The Jews baptized. John the Baptist, baptized. Jesus told his disciples to baptize in the Name of the Father the Son and the Holy Spirit. Mt. 28. So, if baptism is good enough for Christ it is good enough for the Catholic Church.

More than enough evidence has shown that Religious Pagan traditions are much alike Christian traditions, just with different dates and names. Anybody know why this is?

All religions have some similarities to each other. They are differentiated by their doctrine, beliefs and the meaning of the rituals. The similarities prove nothing.

As a Protestant, i wonder why our Holy Bible was written so many times and in some cases differ from one another greatly. Who is right and who is wrong, and who is to say which is right and what is wrong? I beleive Only GOD can judge.

Aside from the fact that Martin Luther removed 7 books from the OT there is not that much difference between the Catholic Bibles and the Protestant Bibles. There is more than enough to keep you occupied just starting with one of these. Waiting for God to judge is just a smokescreen for procrastinating a life of faith and obedience.

So how do i know that i am not being deceived by man? The reason i say deceived by man is because we have some very different views in different bibles.How do i know Jesus’s words were not changed and or our view of him being the Son of GOD?

Look into the writings of the Early Church Fathers to see what they knew and believed as Christians. You can find them on the internet. You will find that their beliefs correspond to Catholic beliefs and NOT Protestant beliefs. That is precisely why I converted to the Catholic Church.

There is much evidence that the Gnostics never worshipped him in the way we do today.

This is True. As I said above they were heretics.

Am i just reading a bunch of phony bologny, or do other Christians ever research and think about these things too?

Yes, other Christians do research these things. When I finally realized that I needed to hear from Catholic, who knew their faith, what the Catholic Church believed and not listen only to Protestants tell me what the Catholic Church believed, I was amazed at the beauty cohesion of the Catholic Faith and Scripture. You need faith. Ask God to lead you to the Truth if you are willing to follow it no matter where it leads. There are a lot of lies about the Catholic Church out there and Christianity too. So, you may very well be reading phony bologna.

Hint: The Catholic Church is not the answer to any of them.

1) Contraception is the one sin for which the penalty is national death; a sin for which there is no atonement.

2) The abandonment of the reproductive function is the common feature of all sexual perversions. We actually describe a sexual activity as perverse if it has given up the aim of reproduction and pursues the attainment of pleasure as an aim independent of it.

3) “Contraceptive methods are like putting a premium on vice. They make men and women reckless. Nature is relentless and will have full revenge for any such violation of her laws…If contraceptive methods become the order of the day nothing but moral degradation can be the result. As it is, man has sufficiently degraded woman for his lust, and contraception, no matter how well-meaning the advocates many be, will still further degrade her.”

4) “By accepting contraception, the world is trying …to form a civilized but non-Christian, mentality. The experiment will fail; but we must be very patient in awaiting its collapse; meanwhile redeeming the time so that the Faith may be preserved alive through the dark ages before us; to renew and rebuild civilization and save the world from suicide.”

Prior to 1930 all of Christendom condemned the use of contraception as an evil. But, then in 1930 the Anglican Church decreed that the use of contraception was permissible when the life of the mother was in danger. What periodical ridiculed that decision? Hint: It is still published today.

5) “Carried to its logical conclusions, (contraceptives)…would sound the death knell of marriage as a holy institution by establishing degrading practices which would encourage indiscriminate immorality: The suggestion that the use of legalized contraceptives would be ‘careful and restrained’ is preposterous.”

Answers:
1) President Theodore Roosevelt
2) Freud
3) Ghandi
4) T.S. Eliot
5) The Washington Post-”Forgetting Religion” 3/22/1931

Here is a link to the online article I have reproduced below. We, in California will be voting on this issue in November.
But it is of interest for everyone. I thought this was an excellent well- thought out article.

http://ncregister.com/site/article/15099/ 

BY JENNIFER ROBACK MORSE

June 8-14, 2008 Issue | Posted 6/3/08 at 10:48 AM

Advocates of same-sex “marriage” present the idea as a step forward for tolerance and respect. But recent developments place that interpretation very much in doubt.

Legalizing same-sex “marriage” is not a stand-alone policy, independent of all the other activities of the state. Once governments assert that same-sex unions are the equivalent of marriage, those governments must defend and enforce a whole host of other social changes.

Unfortunately, these government-enforced changes conflict with a wide array of ordinary liberties, including religious freedom and ordinary private property rights.

It began with the persecution of Catholic Charities in Boston. The archdiocese eventually closed down its adoption program, because the state of Massachusetts insisted that every adoption agency in the state must allow same-sex couples to adopt.

Recently, a Methodist organization in New Jersey lost part of its tax-exempt status because it refused to allow two lesbian couples to use their facility for a civil union ceremony. In Quebec, a Mennonite school was informed that it must conform to the official provincial curriculum, which includes teaching homosexuality as an acceptable alternative lifestyle.

At last report, the Mennonites were considering leaving the province rather than permit the imposition of the state-sponsored curriculum on their children.

And recently, a wedding photographer in New Mexico faces a hearing with the state’s Human Rights Commission because she declined the business of a lesbian couple. She didn’t want to take photos of their commitment ceremony.

The underlying pattern is unmistakable. Legalizing same-sex “marriage” has brought in its wake state regulation of other parts of society. The problem is sometimes presented as an issue of religious freedom, and so, in part, it is. But the issue runs deeper than religious freedom.

McGill University professor Douglas Farrow argues in his book A Nation of Bastards that redefining marriage allows the government to colonize all of civil society.

If same-sex couples can marry each other, they should be allowed to adopt. Anyone who says otherwise is acting against the policy of the state. If same-sex couples can have civil unions, then denying them the use of any facility they want for their ceremony amounts to unlawful discrimination. When the state says that same sex couples are equivalent to opposite-sex couples, school curriculum will inevitably have to support this claim.

Marriage between men and women is a pre-political, naturally emerging social institution. Men and women come together to create children, independently of any government. The duty of caring for those children exists even without a government or any political order.

Marriage protects children as well as the interests of each parent in their common project of raising those children.

Because marriage is an organic part of civil society, it is robust enough to sustain itself, with minimal assistance from the state.

By contrast, same-sex “marriage” is completely a creation of the state.

Same-sex couples cannot have children. Someone must give them a child or at least half the genetic material to create a child. The state must detach the parental rights of the opposite-sex parent and then attach those rights to the second parent of the same-sex couple.

The state must create parentage for the same-sex couple. For the opposite-sex couple, the state merely recognizes parentage.

In her essay in The Meaning of Marriage, Seana Sugrue argues that the state must coddle and protect same-sex “marriage” in ways that opposite-sex marriage does not require.

Precisely because same-sex unions are not the same as opposite-sex marriage, the state must intervene to make people believe (or at least make them act as if they believe) that the two types of unions are equivalent.

Public schools in California are soon going to be required to be “gay friendly.” A doctor has been sued because she didn’t want to perform an artificial insemination on a lesbian couple. A private school is in trouble for disciplining two female students for kissing. All in the name of supporting the rights of same-sex couples to “equality” with straight couples.

The fact that opposite- and same-sex couples are different in significant ways means that there will always be scope for the state to expand its reach into more and more private areas of more and more people’s lives.

Perhaps some people think it is okay to shut down Catholic adoption agencies, because the Catholics have it coming to them: The Church’s enemies are many. Perhaps some people don’t care for Methodists, and don’t care whether they lose their tax-exempt status.

But the Mennonites? These are the most inoffensive people on the planet. They have been pacifists for centuries. Their continued existence here in North America is a testimony to the strength of our ideals of religious tolerance and pluralism, in all the best senses of those terms. But now, in the name of equality of same-sex couples, the Mennonites are being driven out of Quebec.

Perhaps you think people have a natural civil right to marry the person of their choosing. But can you really force yourself to believe that wedding photography is a civil right?

Maybe you believe that same-sex couples are entitled to have children, somehow. But is any doctor they might encounter required to inseminate them?

Advocates of same-sex “marriage” insist that theirs is a modest reform: a mere expansion of marriage to include people currently excluded. But the price of same-sex “marriage” is a reduction in tolerance for everyone else, and an expansion of the power of the state.

Jennifer Roback Morse is the senior fellow in economics at the Acton

Institute and the author of Love and Economics:
It Takes a Family to Raise a Village, newly reissued in paperback.

Q. Women wish to be priestesses for the exact same reason men wish to become priests: they want to serve their God in a special way.

A. Serving God in a special way is a noble goal. But this is turned into rebellion against the Church HE founded when women demand ordination against the constant teaching of the Church, Her ministers, and Her popes.

Q. Although the religious life is an alternative, it does not allow them to participate in the rite of transubstantiation, as priests do; preside over the sacraments (and reach out to others during the sacrament of Confession), as priests do; and speak on the word of God in the homily, as priests do.

A. This is true.But women can partake of the Body of Christ in communion. That is a very great grace. Women can go to confession and receive forgiveness of sin and grace to avoid sin. That is a very great grace too. And women can teach the faith at schools, sacramental preparation classes, RCIA, or become a Catholic speaker. Rather than bemoan what they cannot do, women should get busy and do the things that are open to them. God will bless women as they serve Him in obedience and humility.

1 Samuel 15:23
For rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft, and stubbornness is as iniquity and idolatry.

Q. They also would like to help their fellow Christians with guidance and instruction in the faith, and become closer to God.

A. This can be done without being a priest. I hope more women will do this because our priests are overworked and could use help in this area.

Q. This is a completely lesser aside, but many women do not feel comfortable discussing certain issues with priests. It would be easier for them to speak with a priestess on these subjects.

A. We have many excellent women counselors, psychologists, and psychiatrists who are also Catholic. No doubt the Church needs more, so this are is wide open to women.

Q. Women who desire to become priestesses do not want to exalt themselves or to turn away from the church; rather they want to become servants in it. It is the church that denies them, when all they wish is to assist it.

A. A true servant’s heart wishes to serve and obey Christ’s Church in all obscurity. And this can be done by anyone, at any age, regardless of  sickness or disability. A good servant does not tell Jesus or His ministers how to run His Church.

Q. Furthermore, every Christian should go for the gold and try to be named a saint!

A. Amen, Sister.

Q. Men, however, have been priests (and involved in the religious life as well) and named as saints. The two ideas- of being a priest and becoming a saint -are completely separate from one another.

A. That is true. But not even all men can be priests. It not a right. The call to the priesthood is a gift from God. Not all are called. Men cannot be pregnant. Their gender excludes them. Is this unfair? Should they be pursuing equality in this area? It is a very special experience to have a baby growing inside of your body. Don’t you think there are some men who might like this experience? Each gender has gifts that the opposite gender does not share. Any woman who feels badly that she cannot be a priest should try to be at peace and pray for be contentment. Otherwise she may fall into the sin of envy. (10th commandment, Ex 20)

Mark 7:21 Jesus said, “For from within, out of the heart of men, proceed the evil thoughts, fornications, thefts, murders, adulteries, 22 deeds of coveting and wickedness, as well as deceit, sensuality, envy, slander, pride and foolishness. 23 All these evil things proceed from within and defile the man.

Q. Most Christians, including women, do strive to become saints. Nonetheless, some feel called to the priesthood as well.

A. I would submit that any women who “feels” she is called to the priesthood is not hearing the voice of Our Lord but rather of Our Enemy.

May 29, 2008

Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith
General Decree

Regarding the offense of attempted holy ordination of a woman
The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, in order to safeguard the nature and validity of the sacrament of holy orders, and in virtue of the special faculty conferred upon the congregation by the supreme authority of the church (see canon 30, Code of Canon Law), in the Ordinary Session of December 19, 2007, has decreed:
In keeping with the disposition of canon 1378 of the Code of Canon Law, both the person who attempts to confer holy orders upon a woman, and the woman who attempts to receive holy orders, incur the excommunication latae sententiae, reserved to the Apostolic See.
If the one who attempts to confer holy orders upon a woman or the woman who attempts to receive holy orders is subject to the Code of the Canons of the Eastern Churches, in keeping with canon 1443 of that code, that person will be punished with major excommunication, the remission of which is reserved to the Apostolic See (see canon 1423, Code of the Canons of the Eastern Churches).
The present decree takes effect immediately from the moment of its publication inn L’Osservatore Romano.

William Cardinal Levada
Prefect
Angelo Amato, s.d.b.
Titular Archbishop of Sila
Secretary