.
Madame's Nightshirt
Mrs. Peperium
.
P; A; I; N
"The journey will be difficult. The road will be long. I face this challenge with profound humility, and knowledge of my own limitations. But I also face it with limitless faith in the capacity of the American people. Because if we are willing to work for it, and fight for it, and believe in it, then I am absolutely certain that generations from now, we will be able to look back and tell our children that this was the moment when we began to provide care for the sick and good jobs to the jobless; this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal; this was the moment when we ended a war and secured our nation and restored our image as the last, best hope on earth. This was the moment—this was the time—when we came together to remake this great nation so that it may always reflect our very best selves and our highest ideals." --Candidate Barack Obama
If the first and lowest operation of pain shatters the illusion that all is well, the second shatters the illusion that what we have, whether good or bad in itself, is our own and enough for us. Everyone has noticed how hard it is to turn our thoughts to God when everything is going well with us. We “have all we want” is a terrible saying when “all” does not include God. We find God an interruption. As St. Augustine says somewhere, “God wants to give us something, but cannot, because our hands are full—there’s no- where for Him to put it.” Or as a friend of mine said, “We regard God as an airman regards his parachute; it’s there for emergencies but he hopes he’ll never have to use it.” Now God, who has made us, knows what we are and that our happiness lies in Him.
Yet we will not seek it in Him as long as He leaves us any other resort where it can even plausibly be looked for. While what we call “our own life” remains agreeable we will not surrender it to Him. What then can God do in our interests but make “our own life” less agreeable to us, and take away the plausible source of false happiness? It is just here, where God’s providence seems at first to be most cruel, that the Divine humility, the stooping down of the Highest, most deserves praise. We are perplexed to see misfortune falling upon decent, inoffensive, worthy people—on capable, hard-working mothers of families or diligent, thrifty little tradespeople, on those who have worked so hard, and so honestly, for their modest stock of happiness and now seem to be entering on the enjoy- ment of it with the fullest right. How can I say with sufficient tenderness what here needs to be said? . . . Let me implore the reader to try to believe, if only for the moment, that God, who made these deserving people, may really be right when He thinks that their modest prosperity and the happiness of their children are not enough to make them blessed: that all this must fall from them in the end, and that if they have not learned to know Him they will be wretched. And therefore He troubles them, warning them in advance of an insufficiency that one day they will have to discover. The life to themselves and their families stands between them and the recognition of their need; He makes that life less sweet to them. I call this a Divine humility because it is a poor thing to strike our colours to God when the ship is going down under us; a poor thing to come to Him as a last resort, to offer up 'our own' when it is no longer worth keeping. If God were proud He would hardly have us on such terms: but He is not proud, He stoops to conquer, He will have us even though we have shown that we prefer everything else to Him, and come to Him because there is 'nothing better' now to be had. The same humility is shown by all those Divine appeals to our fears which trouble high-minded readers of Scripture. It is hardly complimentary to God that we should choose Him as an alternative to Hell: yet even this He accepts. The creature's illusion of self-sufficiency must, for the creature's sake, be shattered; and by trouble or fear of trouble on earth, by crude fear of the eternal flames, God shatters it 'unmindful of His glory's diminution'. Those who would like the God of Scripture to be more purely ethical, do not know what they ask. If God were a Kantian, who would not have us till we came to Him from the purest and best motives, who could be saved? And this illusion of self-sufficiency may be at its strongest in some very honest, kindly, and temperate people, on such people, therefore, misfortune must fall.
The dangers of apparent self-sufficiency explain why our Lord regards the vices of the feckless and dissipated so much more leniently than the vices that lead to worldly success. Prostitutes are in no danger of finding their present life so satisfactory that they cannot turn to God: the proud, the avaricious, the self-righteous, are in that danger. --- C.S. Lewis, The Problem of Pain
.
.
Most Holy Father, I asked President Obama to personally hand deliver this letter to you. As a man of deep faith himself, he understands how important my Roman Catholic faith is to me, and I am deeply grateful to him.
I hope this letter finds you in good health. I pray that you have all of God's blessings as you lead our Church and inspire our world during these challenging times.
I am writing with deep humility to ask that you pray for me as my own health declines. I was diagnosed with brain cancer more than a year ago, and, although I continue treatment, the disease is taking its toll on me. I am 77 years old and preparing for the next passage of life.
I have been blessed to be a part of a wonderful family, and both of my parents, particularly my mother, kept our Catholic faith at the center of our lives. That gift of faith has sustained, nurtured and provided solace to me in the darkest hours. I know that I have been an imperfect human being, but with the help of my faith, I have tried to right my path.
I also want you to know that even though I am ill, I am committed to do everything I can to achieve access to health care for everyone in my country. This has been the political cause of my life. I believe in a conscience protection for Catholics in the health care field and will continue to advocate for it as my colleagues in the Senate and I work to develop an overall national health policy that guarantees health care for everyone.
I have always tried to be a faithful Catholic, Your Holiness, and though I have fallen short through human failings, I have never failed to believe and respect the fundamental teachings. I continue to pray for God's blessings on you and our Church and would be most thankful for your prayers for me.
Ted Kennedy
/
The Obama administration's abortifacient and contraception mandate is appalling, but I cannot claim to be surprised by it. In fact, I would have been surprised---indeed stunned---had the administration done anything significant to honor or protect the rights of Catholics and others on whose consciences the mandate will impose.
In every area touching the sanctity of human life and issues of sexual morality, the Obama administration is aggressively prosecuting the agenda its critics predicted and its most ardent left-wing supporters hoped for. Those who are driving the train, including key administration officials who self-identify as members of the Catholic Church, have no regard for the ethical beliefs of Catholics and others when they are in conflict with left-liberal orthodoxy. Their task, as they perceive it, is to fortify and expand the "right to abortion" and "sexual freedom" wherever they can. They pursue this agenda with a religious zeal because, in fact, the ideology in which abortion is a "right" and "sexual freedom" is a core value is their religion. These beliefs are integral to their worldview. If, like Kathleen Sebelius, they happen to be Catholics, you can be assured that it won't be Catholic teaching, or the Judaeo-Christian ethic, that shapes their policies on issues of life and death and marriage and sexual morality; it will be liberal ideology---pure and simple---that does the shaping.
Interestingly, Obama and his people have been willing to break the hearts of those on the left when it comes Guantanamo, rendition, basic procedural rights of detainees and those accused of supporting terrorism, targeted assassinations, drone attacks, and so forth. But they keep faith strictly with them when it comes to anything pertaining to abortion, contraception, and other central components of the ideology of lifestyle liberalism---the conscience rights of Catholics and others be damned.
Pro-life citizens, including many Catholics, who in 2008 allowed themselves to be persuaded that Obama wouldn't, as his critics warned, push abortion hard and run roughshod over the religious liberty and rights of conscience of Catholics and other pro-life citizens and their institutions, have now gotten a rude awakening. His administration revealed its contempt for religious freedom and the rights of people and communities of faith when it embraced an extreme and utterly untenable position on the ministerial exemption in the Hosanna-Tabor case. In case anyone thought that was some sort of isolated mistake, the President's abortifacient and contraception mandate leaves the matter in no doubt.
In 2012, it is no longer possible to sustain illusions about what Obama and his people mean to do to us. They are already doing it. "Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me." --- Robert P. George
;
“As a Roman Catholic, her appointment is the source of the greatest embarrassment because she has publicly and repeatedly betrayed her Catholic faith…”
Archbishop Raymond L. Burke
Catholic Action for Faith and Family
March 10, 2009
Your Excellency:
The Governor of Kansas, Kathleen Sebelius, has a long history of supporting abortion rights while holding public office. As a result of her actions, last year the Archbishop of Kansas City, Archbishop Joseph Naumann, publicly requested that she refrain from receiving Holy Communion because of public scandal she was giving. As her bishop he first carried out a prolonged dialogue with her over many months where he tried to reason with her and make her aware of the seriousness of her actions supporting abortion.
Last week President Obama nominated Governor Sebelius to serve as Secretary of Health and Human Services. Archbishop Naumann, as well as many prominent Pro-life organizations across the country, is decrying the appointment as being detrimental to the Catholic and Pro-life causes in the United States.
Is Your Excellency aware of this controversy?
Yes, I am quite aware of the case of Governor Sebelius. She is well known for her support of the right to procured abortion and for her public association with some of the more notorious agents of the culture of death. She has also favored other anti-life legislation, especially legislation which denies the right to life to the innocent and defenseless unborn.
What is your opinion of her appointment to this influential position?
Her appointment saddens me on several scores. First of all, it is sad for our nation to have a person who favors the right to kill the unborn in the womb placed in charge of the federal office with responsibility for health and human services. No matter how good Governor Sebelius’ record regarding other human life concerns may be, if she is not committed to the safeguarding of human life from its very inception, she should not be entrusted with the questions of health and human services for our nation.
As a Roman Catholic, her appointment is the source of the greatest embarrassment because she has publicly and repeatedly betrayed her Catholic faith, in the most fundamental tenet in the most fundamental tenet of the moral law, that is, the law to safeguard and foster human life from the moment of its inception to the moment of natural death. What is more, she has obstinately remained in her moral error after being admonished by, at least, three of her Bishops, including her present Bishop, Archbishop Joseph F. Naumann of Kansas City in Kansas. Her position on the question of procured abortion is the source of the greatest scandal to Catholics and to all who uphold the natural moral law.
In your opinion did Archbishop Naumann proceed in accordance with canon law?
Archbishop Naumann proceeded in perfect accord with Canon Law and the sound pastoral practice it embodies. He steadfastly tried to help Governor Sebelius recognize her grave error and to correct herself. When she refused to do so, he had no choice but to remind her that the Church’s discipline requires that persons who publicly and obstinately remain in serious sin must be denied Holy Communion. When the Governor did not respect the Archbishop’s instruction that she not present herself to receive Holy Communion, he was obliged to make it public that the Governor had been instructed not to present herself to receive Holy Communion. Archbishop Naumann acted with exemplary pastoral charity in the matter, protecting the Body and Blood of Christ from unworthy reception, preventing the Governor from the commission of the most serious sin of sacrilege, and ending the great scandal caused by the Governor’s unworthy reception of the Body and Blood of Christ.
Under these circumstances was he justified in asking her to refrain from receiving Holy Communion and do you believe this was a pastoral approach?
Not only was Archbishop Naumann justified, he was fulfilling one of his most solemn duties as a pastor, namely, the care of the Most Blessed Sacrament and of the worthy reception of Holy Communion. As I mentioned above, his action, in my judgment, could not have been more pastorally correct. He has spoken the truth with love. More than that cannot be asked of any shepherd of the flock.
If Governor Sebelius was to be confirmed as Health and Human Services secretary and move to Washington D. C., would the Archbishop of Washington or any surrounding diocese where she might take up residency, be obliged to enforce in their diocese the sanction imposed by her bishop in Kansas?
To be accurate, Archbishop Naumann did not impose a sanction upon Governor Sebelius. He simply made clear her canonical status in regards to reception of Holy Communion anywhere. No Catholic who publicly and obstinately remains in serious sin can receive Holy Communion. For her sake and for the sake of the Church, Archbishop Naumann made clear that Governor Sebelius is in the condition of unworthiness to receive Holy Communion, until she reforms her public actions regarding procured abortion.
As I said above, Archbishop Naumann only did what was his duty as Bishop. Every Bishop is held to the same universal Church discipline which has been in force since the time of Saint Paul the Apostle and is stated in canon 915 of the Code of Canon Law. Whether Governor Sebelius is in the Archdiocese of Kansas City in Kansas, or in any other diocese, she should not present herself for Holy Communion because, after pastoral admonition, she obstinately persists in serious sin.
.\.
Enjoy yourself Sebelius.
.
.
Comments