|
|
|
 |
FreeRepublic , LLC PO BOX 9771 FRESNO, CA 93794
|
|
|
|
Posted on 01/15/2003 1:16:03 PM PST by Remedy
Pope John Paul II frequently and rightly denounces the "culture of death," the soil that nourishes the odious crime of abortion.
The pope is correct, but here in the United States, some unlikely husbands of the culture fertilize the fetid soil: Catholics whose church condemns abortion and the very culture that sustains it.
If it weren't for Catholics, for people who call themselves Christians in general, abortion would be illegal. The Demographics
Nearly 150 members of the U.S. Congress are Catholics, including such titans as Edward and Patrick Kennedy, Joseph Biden, Tom Daschle and Charles Rangel.
Add to these men and women the hundreds of state legislators who are Catholics, as well as the doctors, lawyers, judges and powerful members of the news media, Tim Russert and Chris Matthews, to name just two.
But since 1973, abortionists have snuffed out 40 million innocents. Many of those abortionists, as well as the mothers who slew their children, were Catholics. Why?
Answer? Too many Catholics, particularly those in power, aren't Catholic. They do not heed the elemental teachings of their church on such subjects as contraception and abortion. If they abide church teaching, or believe abortion is an outrage, they sequester their faith and morals from their politics.
How one pulls off this feat of intellectual contortionism is a subject for another day; for now, it suffices to say we hear it from politicians all the time. "I won't let my personal beliefs affect my political decisions," they proudly say, or "I personally think abortion is wrong, but I can't impose my morals on someone else."
Happily, they don't think similarly about other crimes, such as murder and rape -- and unhappily, they merrily impose their superstitions about welfare, socialism, taxes, the environment, sex education, and anything else they can think of.
Anyhow, for whatever reason, millions of American Catholics either accept the culture of death or fully embrace it. Sure, some attend weekly mass or even believe abortion is wrong, but few of them yank their kids out of public schools because state teachings on sexuality contradict those of their church. Even fewer march in pro-life rallies. One wonders how many even pray. These truths apply to that three-quarters of the population that isn't Catholic, but instead mostly Christian.
American Christians, Catholic and Protestant, have abandoned the unborn to the machinery of death. The Answer?
Nothing short of a religious or moral conversion will energize this nation's guilt and grief over abortion. Only the burning sorrow that accompanies spiritual awakening will thaw the icy conscience that accepts as a "right" what is so clearly a sin of Mephistophelian dimension.
Catholics should tutor the nation on abortion and why it is evil. Instead, they cultivate it. Disconcerting yes, but atrociously, incandescently true.
Shame on us.
Abortion as "Shedding Innocent Blood" & Lessons Toward Repentance ... The "Equal Creation" principles in the Declaration of Independence were the cry of the anti-slavery crusade for 30 years. Today most evangelical leaders and many presidential candidates reference the same document and the Creator's "endowment of unalienable rights" in the fight against big government and abortion rights. What they fail to mention is that this document is also an instrument of judgment. They overlook its "execution" provisions. In its first paragraph, the very existence of the nation is pinned to the "laws of nature and nature's God." For Jefferson's contemporaries, this phrase meant the Romans 2:15 law written on every man's heart, whether Christian or not, as tested by the Christian Bible.
Abortion is the shedding of innocent blood. The blood of an unborn child is separate from that of its mother at 21days gestation and is a person from conception (Luke 1:42-43). As you know, killing such a child violates God's laws in the Decalogue (Exodus 20:13). God hates such killing (Proverbs 6:16-17) and it defiles the land (Numbers35:33). God is personally pledged to avenge the shedding of innocent blood (Deuteronomy 32:43).
For shedding of innocent blood in Israel God brought a series of escalating judgments culminating in the Babylonian captivity in 586 B.C. (Psalm 106:36-43; Jeremiah 33:35,36) and, according to Jesus (Matthew 23:34,35; Luke 11:49-51), the life for life judgment and total destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D. To the idolatry of Israel involving child sacrifice to Baal and Molech in exchange for material wealth and to celebrate sexual promiscuity, we have added an idol of convenience.
Dr. George Grant in GRAND ILLUSIONS documented a 1989 discovery of 39,000 patient information forms from 14 Planned Parenthood abortion clinics nationwide indicating that 62% of the women receiving abortions identified themselves as Evangelical Christians, another 20% as Catholic or Orthodox. Of those 82% of Planned Parenthood customers, 76% identified their local church membership and pastor. In the 25 years since abortions were legalized in 1973, Planned Parenthood has performed napproximately 2.5 million abortions. Based upon this sample, as many as 2 million (82%) Christian women have been Planned Parenthood patients.
An article called "Silence of the Shepherds," published by World Magazine on January 21,1995, offered the following observations on the absence of pastoral leadership in opposing abortion:
a. A study of preaching on abortion by World found that out of 20 well known Christian leaders (from 9 National Association of Evangelical-member denominations, and 2 at-large denominations) only 6 could provide a complete sermon on abortion and only 3 more could provide even an excerpt,
b. A poll by Molly Stone of Last Days Ministries in Tyler, Texas for her master's thesis at Regent University of 104 pastors from evangelical, mainline, and fundamentalist churches in the area surrounding South Hampton, Virginia, found that:
-76% believed that life began at conception, and 69% believed a strong stand on abortion was important, but only 39% ever devoted an entire sermon to abortion. Among evangelicals, the percentage jumped to 58%. -90% mentioned abortion in a sermon, but less than 50% ever announced a pro-life event from the pulpit or church bulletin. -70% said crisis pregnancy centers were the pro-life activity of choice, but 70% did not actually support such a center. -Only 17% endorsed pickets or prayer at clinics, and only 7% encouraged rescues.
World quotes R.C. Sproul of Ligonier Ministries: "One of the greatest travesties of the church is its silence on abortion, particularly the evangelical church."
Many in the Pro-Life movement have been a major prophetic voice to the Church and to the nation. Their heroic evangelism outside the clinics has saved many unborn lives and quite a few abortionists. Like the abolitionists during the 19th Century, however, the civil disobedience and other tactics of some activists have contributed to their marginalization by the Church. Many on the front lines of clinic counseling or demonstrators have believed that rescuing is the only effective scriptural response since Proverbs 24:11 tells us to rescue those being led to the slaughter. In addition, these and other pro-life activists have responded to the silence of the pastors and the Church by "lobbying" them to become legally or politically involved.
The message sent and received is that the involvement in the abortion fight means picketing clinics, getting arrested or lobbying the legislature. For most pastors, this message simply reinforces the idea that abortion is a political issue and contributes to the ongoing silence from the pulpits. All of us in this movement need to repent where we have had any part in (1) sustaining the silence from the pulpits, (2) distracting the clergy from their ordained roles of preaching that abortion is sin, and ministering forgiveness and healing, and (3) failing to believe that God can end abortion through repentance and revival regardless of whether abortion is ever made a crime again.
Anti Abortion and Pro Life group 'Jews For Life' The Third Reich leaders were experts in distortion, and indoctrination techniques. To dehumanize Jews, Nazi leaders had to suppress facts and propagandize with a barrage of lies about the Jewish people.
There is no argument that the Nazis used a variety of methods to thwart resistance to their goal, the annihilation of every Jew in Europe. However, even with our democratic government, we do not really have freedom to choose freely. System-regulated propaganda is so pervasive that individuals who initially support certain causes can eventually fall victim to the lies built within, with devastating consequences (Norma McCorvey is one example; she was deceived by the feminist pro-abortion propaganda machine.
The dehumanization of unborn children did not occur in a vacuum.
Simon Wiesenthal Center Multimedia Learning Center Online Despite the different interpretations, a few directions seem clear: (1) an overwhelming majority of Christian clergy acquiesced in the destruction of European Jews THE UNBORN ; (2) church leaders were unable to mount a successful effort against the Nazis ABORTIONISTS. This bears serious reflection for the continuing struggles which the churches face in the contemporary world; (4) the churches were far too connected with the dynamics of German AMERICAN society to really stand in Judgment against it;...(6) the churches, which will never regain the kind of control over society they once had, must reflect anew on how to combat THE CULTURE OF DEATH totalitarian power. Where are their primary resources in such a context? (7)Is there danger of repetition in our day? Our Secularist Democratic Party (Long, Important Analysis)
Death as Deliverance: Euthanatic Thinking in Germany ca. 1890-1933 Writing in 1989, the late Cardinal John O'Connor of New York City, an ardent pro-life advocate, predicted that euthanasia would "dwarf the abortion phenomenon in magnitude, in numbers, in horror."
The ACLU's Dirty Dozen: Twelve Cases that Changed America
RELIGION
Everson v. Board of Education (1947): The United States Supreme Court rules that the First Amendment requires neutrality towards religion and erects a "high and impregnable...wall of separation between church and state."
Engel v. Vitale (1962): The United States Supreme Court rules that public school teachers are prohibited from opening class with non-sectarian prayers.
Abington School District v. Schempp (1963): The United States Supreme Court rules that a state cannot require recital of the Lord's Prayer and reading of Scripture in public school class rooms even when students have the opportunity to opt out of such recitals.
Epperson v. Arkansas (1968): The United States Supreme Court rules that a state cannot prohibit teaching of evolution in public schools without violating the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.
Wallace v. Jeffree (1985): The United States Supreme Court rules that it is unconstitutional for a state to pass a law allowing voluntary silence or prayer at the beginning of public school classes.
Lee v. Weisman (1992): The United States Supreme Court rules that non-sectarian prayers delivered by ministers or rabbis at public high school graduations violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.
SANCTITY OF HUMAN LIFE
Griswold v. Connecticut (1965): The United States Supreme Court rules that a state statute prohibiting distribution of contraceptives to married couples is an unconstitutional infringement upon the "right of privacy" which emanates from the penumbras of various amendments in the Bill of Rights and the Fourteenth Amendment.
Eisenstadt v. Baird (1972): The United States Supreme Court rules that a state may not prohibit distribution of contraceptives to unmarried persons without violating the "right to privacy."
Roe v. Wade (1973): Building on Griswold and Eisenstadt , the United States Supreme Court rules that the "right to privacy" means that a woman has the right to terminate her pregnancy. (Over 38 million babies have been aborted in the United States since this decision, more than the entire population of the state of California).
Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1990): In a plurality opinion, the U.S. Supreme Court reaffirms the central holding in Roe, while abandoning the trimester framework and modifying the ability of states to regulate abortion. The plurality holds that respect for the rule of law and the dignity of the Court demands that Roe not be overruled.
FAMILY VALUES
Jancobellis v. Ohio (1964): The United States Supreme Court overturns the conviction of a theatre owner who violated a state obscenity law by showing an obscene movie. The Court rules that his First Amendment rights have been violated, because in the Court's view the dominant theme did not appeal to prurient interest in violation of "contemporary community standards."
Romer v. Evans (1996): The United States Supreme Court rules that Colorado's Amendment 2, which precludes special legal protections based upon sexual orientation, violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, because it is "born of animosity" and based upon a "bare desire to harm a politically unpopular class, homosexuals."
Sept. 2, 2000 ,Volume 15, Number 34 WORLD ON THE WEB, Marvin Olasky
Perhaps the most observant current viewer of Christophobia is not a Christian but an Orthodox Jewish rabbi. Daniel Lapin wrote in his book, America's Real War, "The educational bureaucracy expects the state to accommodate every possible bizarre cultural mutation and lifestyle, but finds prayer at graduation an intolerable and fatal compromise of state neutrality toward religion." Why else would such illogic reign if fear were not involved?
Some Jewish leaders would point to the Holocaust to say that their fear has an objective basis, yet the faith that animated Hitler was not Christianity but a racist version of Social Darwinism's emphasis on survival of the fittest. And the reason Hitler could put his faith into practice is because of a powerful government apparatus; although the left hates to admit it, National Socialism was one type of socialism.
That's why Rabbi Lapin's fearless statement makes sense: "Those of us who venerate freedom, be we Jewish or Christian, be we religious or secularized, have no option but to pray for the health of Christianity in America. No other group possesses both the faith and the numbers sufficient to hold back the ever-encroaching, sometimes sinister, power of the state."
|
|
|
|
|
FreeRepublic , LLC PO BOX 9771 FRESNO, CA 93794
|
|
|
|
Catholics have been out front on this... but the NATION lacks the political balls it takes to crush the feminism that underlies the death cult of abortion rights. We really cannot blame THE CATHOLICS, for our national lack of conscience. It may just be an irrepresable aspect of the "end times," where evil doers will "wax worse and worse..."
We are living in the season of the "falling away" where catholics are not catholics and christians are not following christ. Born agains are not born agains and the holiness movement flat out isn't... holy that is.
Lots of folks to blame, and millions of victims, but NO significant change is in the wind. We are in a time of the lost.
Maybe it's time to look up for our redemption is drawing nigh???
White House assistant Horace Busby, at a private dinner in 1964, hosted by Cass Canfield (Planned Parenthood), said that Catholic leaders in big cities wanted more done to provide birth control to people on welfare rolls.
"In this sense, the issue has become more of a Negro issue than a Catholic one."
If you really believe that life begins at conception, then you can't also be in denial about the fact that all birth control horomones and devices are capable of causing "abortion," as in, a fertilized egg does not/can not implant in the uterus.
Inside the Minds of Priests on the Abortion Issue
As we approach the 30th anniversary of abortion-on-demand, some pro-lifers have expressed a frustration that unborn babies are still being killed, even though the numbers are decreasing. What would help end this modern day holocaust? It’s a common opinion among pro-life leaders and educators that abortion would end sooner if the churches would actively educate and motivate the members of their congregations and parishes regarding this issue. A positive development toward this end has been a project by Priests for Life who commissioned a credible survey of priests on the abortion issue.
Protestants also take note. The survey reveals information that may shed light on how you too can approach your pastors to activate the abortion issue within non-Catholic churches.
Wirthlin Worldwide, a highly respected polling firm, surveyed over 500 priests across the nation by telephone. In part, the study was designed to "measure priests' general awareness of abortion and abortion issues in the US and discover how priests address the issue of abortion in their own ministry."
The results provide a snapshot, revealing areas where individuals and pro-life organizations have an opportunity to work with priests to promote education and motivation within more Catholic parishes. Priests' Knowledge of Abortion
The research showed that a majority of priests are generally informed regarding the basics on abortion. 65 percent knew that abortion was legally available throughout the nine months of pregnancy. 68% were aware that most abortions are performed for social or economic reasons – the reason for over 98% of all abortions done.
Most priests substantially underestimated the number of abortions done in the US each year. Only 7% said there were over 100,000 abortions performed annually. The reality is that, every year, over 1.3 million unborn babies die on the altar of "choice". Further, 57% felt that the rate of abortion is lower in their community compared to the general population. Only 4% thought that it was higher.
Abortion rated as the most important issue with about half of those polled (52%). It was closely followed by poverty (43%) and drug abuse (34%). Euthanasia and assisted suicide came in fourth (26%). (The percentages do not add up to 100 because respondents were able to select more than one answer.) How They Address the Abortion Issue
The priests were asked, as representatives of the church, how often did they mentioned the abortion issue. 19 percent said once or twice a year, 40% said every few months, 25% mentioned abortion every few weeks and 14% mentioned it weekly or more. How often do they preach on abortion? 32% admitted that they never dedicated an entire homily to abortion, while 55% did once or twice a year. Only 10% preached exclusively on abortion every few months and 2% did so every few weeks.
When they do preach about abortion, 78% talk about the rights of unborn babies, 60% about post-abortion healing and forgiveness, 56% speak to the issue of harm to women and how this action offends God and 44% address the need to change the law.
A vast majority (76%) felt that they addressed abortion about the right amount, while 22% felt they were not addressing it frequently enough. The two most common reasons given for not addressing it enough was that there are too many issues to deal with (29%) and that abortion is a sensitive issue (15%). Only 1% indicated a concern that there would be a woman in the congregation that may have had an abortion.
When asked in what other ways did they address the abortion issue, a wide variety of reasons were given, the most common being counseling (40%), community involvement (34%) or in general meetings or sessions (24%).
The poll seems to indicate that a majority of priests are open to further education. 36% felt that a majority of the people they serve know all they need to know about abortion. 59% felt they didn't know enough. It also appears that the members of Catholic parishes are eager to hear more on this issue. When asked how receptive a majority of the people were to abortion discussions, 87% felt they were very or somewhat receptive, while only 9% felt they were not very or not at all receptive.
A valuable result of the poll shows which abortion-related activities priests would most likely promote. 71% said the distribution of educational material in the parish, 59% indicated a special mass, 37% would allow a guest speaker for an evening event, while 27% a guest weekend preacher. 32% would participate in a prayer vigil at an abortion clinic. 77% would be very or somewhat likely to place a local or national hotline phone number on the cover of the parish bulletin that refers people to alternatives to abortion.
While 40% of the priests polled said that there were no obstacles to make it more difficult to address the abortion issue, 23% indicated that the issue was very emotional, 14% noted a lack of interest on the part of the congregation and 12% said it didn't fit in the church. Their Personal Response
When asked how important the abortion issue was to them personally when voting for candidates, 37 percent said it was extremely important and 37% indicated it was very important. 25% said that it was only somewhat or not very important.
Researchers asked them how important should the abortion issues be for Catholics when deciding who to vote for. 31% responded extremely important and 42% said very important. 26% indicated only somewhat or not very important.
Perhaps one of the most revealing results of the research was that the priests polled clearly felt that the responsibility for ending abortion was not theirs. Who should bear this responsibility? A full 62% said laity in the church, 16% indicated the government and only 11% said the clergy. How We Can Assist Them
What would help priests to personally feel more equipped to address the abortion issue? The research shows 41 percent said training on counseling, while 39% said resources for preaching and the opportunity to share experiences regarding pro-life activities with other priests. 34% wanted ideas for parish and school activities.
We now have a better idea of how priests obtain most of their information on abortion (73%) from literature from pro-life groups and (56%) from their diocese. The most helpful venues for pro-life information were short newsletters (49%) and videotapes (22%). Pro-life web sites may be a wealth of information because about half (46%) of those polled use the Internet to get information.
Priests for Life was familiar to 84% of the priests polled, with 78% of them having a very or somewhat favorable impression of the organization. As a result, you may want to have them assist your efforts to reach out to more Catholic clergy. Contact Priests for Life, PO Box 141172, Staten Island, NY 10314. Phone 718.980.4400. www.priestsforlife.org
Another contact for Catholic resources is the Secretariat for Pro-Life Activities, US Conference of Catholic Bishops, 3211 4th St., NE, Washington, DC 20017. Phone 202.541.3070. www.usccb.org/prolif
Û
It may just be an irrepresable aspect of the "end times," where evil doers will "wax worse and worse..."We are living in the season of the "falling away" where catholics are not catholics and christians are not following christ. Born agains are not born agains and the holiness movement flat out isn't... holy that is.
Lots of folks to blame, and millions of victims, but NO significant change is in the wind. We are in a time of the lost.Û
And we must come to the realization that when a society has reached a state in which abortion and other attacks on life are not only tolerated; not only legalized; not only accepted as normal; but are positively embraced by millions of people as the very solution to what ails that society—then we must realize that something has not only gone seriously wrong, but went wrong a long time ago, long before the Sixties, long before any of us was alive.
We need to understand that the anti-life movement is a secondary cancer, a metastasis of a primary tumour that began to grow when the West began to lose its religious sensibilities, its sense of communal obligation, its norms of respect and due deference for the elderly, the wise, the experienced, those who govern in our name, its standards of gentility and politeness, when people began twistedly to interpret manners as hypocrisy, noblesse oblige as exploitation, civic duty as state oppression, state patronage as a human right, love of neighbour as poking one’s nose into the business of others, hypocrisy as the greatest vice of all (to which I reply—better double standards than no standards), and proper autonomy as the right to do as one pleases.
The primary cancer is as deep as it is old, and it is almost certainly terminal. But for us—as campaigners, writers, thinkers, activists—its terminal nature cannot be of prime concern. What we must attend to is the enrichment of our thinking about pro-life issues by studied consideration of just how the anti-life culture is rooted in a much broader social pathology.
Knowledge is the greatest natural weapon against the culture of death. Once put into the hands of our youth (in significant numbers) they will be able to defeat this beast via the voting booth when they can vote. To maintain the youths’ ignorance on the sanctity of Life (in significant numbers) is the Enemy’s greatest hope for survival. Read about this in The Missing Key of the Pro-Life Movement
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.