Posted on 11/18/2012 9:12:47 AM PST by jmaroneps37
Within a few days Father Joseph McShane S.J. the president of New York’s Fordham University called Ann Coulter “too hateful and needlessly provocative” as he ordered that she be disinvited to speak at Fordham.
Then he had no trouble approving “ethicist” Peter Singer as a speaker. Singer is a man who promotes the murder of children he would consider “defective” within the first two years of their lives.
According an article in “First Things” magazine, “Singer has spent a lifetime justifying the unjustifiable. He is the founding father of the animal liberation movement and advocates ending “the present speciesist bias against taking seriously the interests of nonhuman animals.”
He is also a defender of killing the aged (if they have dementia), newborns (for almost any reason until they are two years old), necrophilia (assuming it’s consensual), and bestiality (also assuming it’s consensual).”
“..As the founder of a movement elevating animals to equality with humans [Singer] has cheapened human life. He is guilty of promoting the murder of the sick and elderly in the name of convenience.
He is guilty of promoting the murder of “defective” children to satisfy of his own definition of who has a right to life. He is guilty of promoting necrophilia which is nothing less than Satanic and he is guilty of promoting bestiality – a sin of the gravest degree that certain makes Satan proud.
Nevertheless, somewhere lodged in his own sick mind, Father McShane has determined that the purely political rhetoric of Ann Coulter would be more harmful to his students than the words of the monster Singer. Coulter is therefore not acceptable as a topic for free discussion at Fordham.
The worst thing about Singer is his endearing nature. He is a perfect earthly representative of Satan…
(Excerpt) Read more at coachisright.com ...
Defend Catholic doctrine? I’d be satisfied to know there are Jesuits who actually believe in Catholic doctrine, much less be willing to defend it.
Their education has been liberal for years.
Who knew?
Apostates.
Why won’t Jesuits defend Catholic doctrine?
Because they are Jesuits, not Catholics. The Church has been stretched to the breaking point. The only way to remain true to its’ doctrine is to start excommunicating thousands, including a lot of Jesuits.
But that would slow the money train, and there is already trouble there.
Just like world govts, giant institutions like the Church are doomed until they burn down and rise again from the ashes.
Jesuits have always been rather...pragmatic about allowing heterodox beliefs and practices as long as it resulted in conversion.
The Chinese Rites controversy was all about the Dominicans demanding that Chinese converts practice the same Mass as Europe, and the Jesuits allowed for traditional practices like ancestor worship. That was centuries ago.
Marxism and Postmodern philosophy is a lot more dangerous to accommodate these days.
I was planning to attend Notre Dame but they invited to campus ...and bestowed a high honor on...an infamous advocate of killing babies...
Isn’t that like asking why Catholics won’t defend Jesuit doctrine?
Which proves they want to be dominated
If you look into the history of the Jesuits you’ll find they’re a brood of vipers.
Notre Dame honored The Incompetent One who voted multiple times to deny medical aid to a baby that survived an abortion and had pro-lifers arrested who protested his being honored. Outrageous!
>>Jesuits have always been rather...pragmatic about allowing heterodox beliefs and practices as long as it resulted in conversion.<<
I knew giving away toaster ovens for conversions would come back to bite them...
As I understand it, Fr. Mateo Ricci and others of the 16th-18th century Chinese mission, were appropriately allowing Chinese customs which had been purified of non-Christian meanngs. The most well-known was the Chinese custom of ancestor-worship. This was, in part, a matter of civic custom, (like putting a wreath at the grave of the Unknown Soldier); partly simple acknowledgment of felial piety, and partly a matter of pagan spiritist beliefs. Ricci saw that the first two meanings are compatible with Catholicism, and the third could be re-interpreted by believers as a reminder to pray for the souls of the dead.
The Catholic Church suppressed the Jesuit mission, wrongly believing that they tolerated idolatry; the Church reversed this stance in 1939, after further investigation and a clarified ruling by Pope Pius XII. But by then it was too late: the Catolic Mission in China was substantially dismantled.
Notre Dame isn’t Jesuit (SJ). It’s Holy Cross Fathers (CSC).
Not always. There are very great Jesuit saints: Ignatius Loyola, Francis Xavier, and Edmund Campion among many others.
The Church should have disciplined them 50 years ago. I told all my children at an early age: No Jesuit school ever.
yes of course, sorry I did not mean to confuse the two
(but the problem exists, in spades, at Notre Dame, just as it apparently does at Fordham..., alas....alas...)
Thanks again very much,
fhc
It isn’t only young Catholics who are confused, a lot of us older ones are having problems too.
The Bishops hiding pedophile faggots, Nuns wanting to be Preists and are pro-abortion, Lesbians in the fold, Bishops pushing Obamacare and then getting bitten by it. Bishops letting false Catholic politicians do anything they like.Few people go to confession any more and many we see Easter and Christmas.Bishops shoving illegals down our throats.
It is confusing, and it’s hurting the Church.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.