Vatican II: misinterpretations and our modern moral malaise

Pope Benedict has chosen October 11, 2012 to begin the Year of Faith because it will mark the 50th anniversary of the start of Vatican II. Pope John XXIII opened the council's first session, and it was closed by Pope Paul VI on 8 December 1965. Present at the meetings was Bishop Karol Wojtyła, who became Pope John Paul II. Father Joseph Ratzinger, participated as a theological consultant, who is now Pope Benedict XVI.

Some like the Marcel Lefebvre over the years have argued against the validity and the interpretation of Vatican II. Lefebvre was in fact excommunicated for his defiance. With the Year of Faith, Pope Benedict lovingly invites the faithful to re-examine the documents of Vatican II, and more importantly to see how the teachings support and enrich the Church's tradition.

A recent lecture given by Fr. Johannes Grohe, professor of the History of the Church titled, "The Second Vatican Council in Relation to the Ecumenical Councils", emphasizes the continuity of the Church. He was speaking at the Pontifical University of Santa Croce for an academic celebration on St. Thomas Aquinas. In his talk Fr. Grohe said, "The Second Vatican Council is - and must remain - for the Catholic Church an expression of the solemn and supreme Magisterium in our time."

For those who exploited the council documents with liberal and personal interpretations, Fr. Grohe points out that this approach is erroneous, "One cannot renounce the need for a reception of the fundamental texts of Vatican II any more than one could renounce the work of other ecumenical councils in the past". Fr. Grohe stressed "that the Council opened on October 11, 1962, by John XXIII "was not intended to define new dogmas", but to propose "with supreme authority - for the entire Christian community - traditional doctrine in a new way and with a new pastoral attitude". Thus all the documents are valid and have 'universal value' and "are binding, and must be accepted even by those who wish to enter into communion with the Catholic Church". In total, there are sixteen documents from Vatican II. Why not, if you have not read any, begin by reading one them for the Year of Faith?

During the last 50 years, the progressivists have helped to promote a false 'spirit of Vatican II'. One is over the post-Vatican II liturgy of the new Roman Missal and the Tridentine Mass. Another misleading idea about Vatican II is that it gave the green light to all kinds of social/political issues with serious moral consequences. On the misconceptions about contraception, it was Paul VI that made the Church's position clear in 1968 with his encyclical, Humanae Vitae. Sadly the majority of Canadian bishops, as did those from most Western countries, didn't listen: they essentially instructed the faithful to follow their conscience on moral issues. But now think of the many issues that have wreaked so much moral havoc in these societies, including our own: abortion on demand, women priests, married priests, gay bishops, gay marriage and same-sex marriage.

The list goes on with schools and institutions that call themselves Catholic but are, in effect, Catholic-in-name-only. Consider the current battle in our schools against the secular "Equity" policy. What about the liberal use of condoms to fight AIDS, and government funding for abortions and embryonic stem-cell research. The Year of Faith can be time to re-visit Vatican II with the "spirit of truth" and re-discover what it means to be Catholic and to follow the teaching of the Church. Had we lived the true intentions of Vatican II, not the lies and sometimes deliberate misrepresentations, Canada today and the entire West would be a much better place. With the Year of Faith, Pope Benedict proposes to all of us another chance.

We conclude with the prophetic words of Pope John XXIII as he opened the Council proceedings in 1962, "The greatest concern of the Ecumenical Council is this: that the sacred deposit of Christian doctrine should be guarded and taught more efficaciously. That doctrine embraces the whole of man, composed as he is of body and soul. And, since he is a pilgrim on this earth, it commands him to tend always toward heaven."

"This demonstrates how our mortal life is to be ordered in such a way as to fulfill our duties as citizens of earth and of heaven, and thus to attain the aim of life as established by God. That is, all men, whether taken singly or as united in society, today have the duty of tending ceaselessly during their lifetime toward the attainment of heavenly things and to use for this purpose only, the earthly goods, the employment of which must not prejudice their eternal happiness." What are you, your family and your church going to do for the upcoming Year of Faith?
 Lou Iacobelli

Whitney Houston's life and death: a time to tell the truth

As you read the following three statements, try to guess where they are taken from: 1. "Life and physical health are precious gifts entrusted to us by God. We must take reasonable care of them, taking into account the needs of others and the common good. Concern for the health of its citizens requires that society help in the attainment of living-conditions that allow them to grow and reach maturity: food and clothing, housing, health care, basic education, employment, and social assistance." (2288)

2. "The use of drugs inflicts very grave damage on human health and life. Their use, except on strictly therapeutic grounds, is a grave offense. Clandestine production of and trafficking in drugs are scandalous practices. They constitute direct co-operation in evil, since they encourage people to practices gravely contrary to the moral law." (2291)

3. "If morality requires respect for the life of the body, it does not make it an absolute value. It rejects a neo-pagan notion that tends to promote the cult of the body, to sacrifice everything for it's sake, to idolize physical perfection and success at sports. By its selective preference of the strong over the weak, such a conception can lead to the perversion of human relationships." (2289)

I don't know what your answer is, but these quotes are from the Catechism of the Catholic Church. Are you surprised? We shouldn't be because as baptized Christians we ought to be familiar with the contents of the text that should be our guide in explaining and living our faith. What does this have to do with the death of Whitney Houston? Normally Everyday for Life Canada doesn't cover these events. But we thought that her death is a symptom of so much that is morally wrong with our modern society, that we decided to respond. If I were still teaching in a high school classroom, this would be my lesson.

The early death, at 48, of Whitney Houston - like that of Michael Jackson, Kurt Cobain and Amy Winehouse - has made and continues to make all the front pages and screens of the mainstream/social media. The reaction, for the most part, has been one of shock and dismay. Already, both her friends and the media, have hailed her as a princess of song, a goddess and an angel. She was kind to everybody; she will be missed, and some have said that her legacy will be that of having had one of the best female voices of all time. The accolades and the hyperboles will no doubt continue.

But as a Christian society, whether in life or in death, we should be telling each other the truth, not scandal and lies. As a society we are in denial about the need to respect, first of all our own body, and secondly that of others, including their souls. Why aren't Whitney's friends telling the truth: she died probably because of her indulgence with drugs, prescription or illicit, and alcohol. Her decline was made easier because her friends overlooked the demon in her life only to focus on her success, fame and wealth. For many Whitney was an asset, not a person first.

Perhaps she herself was in denial about her temptations. In short, she abused her life and was abused by others. Just think of the doctors that prescribed her the legal drugs. Take away the fame, and this modern tragedy takes place in so many homes, with the difference that it doesn't make media headlines, but the pain and the loss is no less.

Where were her applauding friends and fans in showing a concern for her health? Where was her ex-husband who seems so concerned about her death? Was there anyone helping her exercise the virtue of temperance? or to avoid the soul destructive use of drugs? Nobody, even those who believe in "the cult of the body", can escape the moral and physical consequences of the way we live our lives. We are responsible for the choices we make. In the end, they help to define the meaning of our lives. We cannot and must not try to gamble, sing or drug our way into heaven.

We don't ask these difficult questions because we are judging her, only God can be the one to judge, but we say these things to try to come to terms with the truth of her death. We do this hoping that her fans, young people and all of us can learn to avoid the destructive moral deceptions inherent in the life of a "star". We are all confronted by the same temptations. By glossing over the truth of her death, as a Christian society we continue to make it very hard to follow the Commandments and thus a Christian life. We cannot encourage indirectly or directly anyone to do evil for, "Temptations to sin are sure to come; but woe to him by whom they come." (Lk 17:1)

We are made in the image of God. If we truly believe that, then we must respect our physical health and our lives as coming from God. Both our bodies and our souls are not ours, but are gifts entrusted to us for a time. By taking good care, of not just of our own bodies, but also helping to take good care of the lives of others, we help to build the common good and more importantly we hope through the mercy of God to save our immortal souls: this is truly the "greatest love of all".

Eternal rest grant unto them, O Lord, and let perpetual light shine upon them. May the souls of the faithful departed, through the mercy of God, rest in peace.
Posted by Lou Iacobelli at 7:40 AM

Who will protect Ontario's school children?

The provincial government in Ontario has now for years been pushing school boards to accept a radical social/sexual indoctrination agenda. In 2010, the McGuinty Liberals had to withdraw the Health and Physical Education curriculum because it contained explicit sexual material that many believed to be inappropriate for young children. Parents were outraged that their government would try to teach children what Christians see as immoral content with little or no consultation.

In 2011, schools began implementing the "Equity and Inclusive Education Strategy", and presently the proposed Bill 13, if passed, will see the legal protection of dozens of socially constructed sexual "orientations". There is a campaign by provincial governments in Canada to normalize the LGTB, lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender life-style, and in a number of provinces to establish gay/straight alliances in schools. In Ontario, this is now clear because McGuinty has rejected the Catholic document called "Respecting Difference" on how to deal with the issue of bullying in schools. It was released this past week by the Catholic trustees and backed by the Ontario Bishops.

In all these adult efforts pushing for political correctness, who is speaking for the children? Who will protect Ontario's students from this psychological and moral abuse? School boards and teachers' unions have not been there to defend students. In fact, to help schools normalize and promote the LGBT life-style, boards are using resource Internet guides written by activist groups like Egale for grades 7-12 called MyGSA. According to Egale, the website is for youth and educators across this country for "safer and inclusive education". The Toronto District Board of Education website currently links and endorses this site.

The Ontario Secondary School Teachers' Federation, the public teachers' union, has already developed a number of guides that are friendly and promote the LGTB agenda. One is called, Creating Spaces: Embedding Equity in Education, and another is titled, Shout Out: Against Homophobia, Biphobia, Transphobia and Heterosexism. I leave the suggestive titles and made up words to speak for themselves. All this is happening because our government, our school boards and teachers' unions are all in full support of instructing political correctness. Very sadly, however, children have only one line of defence left: their parents must protect them.

Parents can no longer trust governments, school boards and teachers' unions

Why are our governments using tax payer money and partnering with Egale to offer training workshops on “LGBT”? This sexual indoctrination in our schools and our society is the result of policies deceptively called, "Inclusive and Equitable" education. Of course it helps, at least in Ontario, to silence and buy the co-operation of many voters with the Liberals' decision to fund All-Day Kindergarten. This unnecessary extra schooling is pedagogically unsound. The added year will also cost Ontario taxpayers billions of dollars; nevertheless, this is of little importance to politicians interested in getting votes and appeasing consciences. Did the government ever bother to ask if all-day early schooling is good for children and makes them "happier"?

The Liberals didn't consult with Ontario parents and citizens if they wanted the LGTB curriculum. We think we know why: the majority of parents and students don't consider the LGTB agenda a priority or something they would endorse. The LGTB is completely politically driven and socially manufactured. As a result, the ruling government can toss aside even the mere appearance of passing "Equity" policies and laws democratically. Why do you think they had the effrontery never to mention the LGTB issue during the election if they believe it's so important?

When schools boards, governments and unions put politics and self-interest at the expense of parents and children they begin to forget that they are paid to serve the people and not rule over them. Why concern yourself with a consultation process when you can simply get bureaucrats to approve the deception of "Equity" education. The government merely instructed the ministers of education, got the school boards and trustees on side with more programs and money. Then they launched a political campaign about the need to end bullying in schools and to do that, among other things, it mandated and encouraged schools to implement the doublespeak of the "Equity and Inclusive Education Strategy".

The last step was to collaborate with gay activists to provide the schools with the resources to accomplish the task. If you listen to the LGBT rhetoric, it seems that governments have now decided that one of the most important issues facing Ontario and the nation is the protection and support of students with a dozen different sexual orientations. But please read on, regrettably there's more.

Egale’s MyGSA website goes further and lists for visitors, these could be young students, homosexual organizations like Outrage!, Stonewall, PFLAG, and pro-abortion groups like Planned Parenthood. The website’s recommended resources includes a book for teens called Coming Out: A Handbook for Men that includes sex advice involving grotesque sexual acts not worth mentioning here. To suggest that this material is a good resource for students is psychologically and morally abusive. People in authority are taking advantage of their positions and tempting students to sin by exploring immoral behaviour. Parental warning: your children can be visiting websites like MyGSA fully endorsed by some teachers, your local school board, teachers' unions and our provincial government. Parents should not trust any of this.

Who will protect the children?

Given all this evidence, it's only natural that parents be suspicious of governments and their political educational agenda. Politicians may be working to please people's sexual orientations and get re-elected, but who is there to protect the children and their souls? Isn't it part of a government's responsibility to keep children from harm? And to be building the common good? Don't students have the right to their moral and sexual innocence? Parents are the ones who have the right to teach their children when it comes to morals and human sexuality. The government, the schools boards and teacher unions that ought to be defending students instead are introducing programs that are abusive to their moral and sexual wellbeing. This is a betrayal of the trust students have for adults.

In addition,there is a total disregard of Christian values that are based on natural law. Governments must stop imposing this biased and misguided manufactured view of the person and human sexuality. The push to normalize the LGTB sexual agenda has no natural, moral or legal basis. The acceptance of the LGTB lifestyle has been masked as "human rights" and turned into a topic of taboo because anyone who dares to disagree is quickly attacked as being "homophobic" or bigoted. But shouldn't a truly "Equity and Inclusive" policy make plenty of room for those who don't accept it? But we digress here since this principle would be true only if the policy had been developed and passed democratically.

In the end, the only true hope is for parents to protect their children's morality and true sexuality; they must act quickly before the province and school boards turns the children against their parents on these issues. Our government is now bullying Christians: it's high time for parents to reclaim their rights and to push back. If parents don't defend their children from this Orwellian nightmare, who will? We hope that parents reclaim the fundamental responsibility and God given right and freedom to raise their children with Christian morals and values. Dear reader if parents don't do this, who will protect Ontario's children?
Posted by Lou Iacobelli