Month: January 2013

Homosexual Marriage at the Dusk of Liberty

83 Comments

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/aoiusa/public_html/wp-content/plugins/sexybookmarks/public.php on line 388

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/aoiusa/public_html/wp-content/plugins/sexybookmarks/public.php on line 394

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/aoiusa/public_html/wp-content/plugins/sexybookmarks/public.php on line 400

– By Fr. Johannes L. Jacobse

To define homosexual coupling as marriage violates natural law. It takes one male and one female to create a child and constitute a family. A male-to-male or female-to-female coupling is naturally sterile; biologically closed to the creation of new life. A homosexual “family” then, is necessarily an artificial creation.

Marriage is not a creation of the State; it predates the rise of the State. When the State codifies heterosexual marriage, it simply affirms what already exists in nature. However, when the State decrees that a homosexual coupling is a morally licit marriage, it arrogates unto itself an authority to define human relationships that do not exist in nature and thus violates natural law.

The State codification of same-sex couplings as a marriage means that moral relativism is being crafted into law. This creates a new conflict. A society cannot live with the tension between the State and nature and thus is left with two available choices: 1) deny the arrogation of authority by the State, or 2) destroy the definition of natural marriage altogether. The first is the choice of anyone who believes that the moral tradition and/or natural law references an authority higher than the State. The second will be favored by those who see the State as both the source and judge of morally licit human relationships.

President Obama has declared that “gay rights” is a centerpiece of his second term agenda. This is a dangerous development. The arrogation of authority by the State to define what kind of relationships are morally licit as well as the employment of the machinery of the State to enforce the polices that flow from it will justify an encroachment into personal life seldom seen in human history.

Furthermore, the ground is being tilled for the persecution of Christianity because Christians, by the mere fact that they believe in God, testify allegiance to an authority to which even the State must be subject. The State will necessarily refuse that reasoning because it strikes at the heart of its arrogation of moral authority (see my essay: The Artist as Vandal: Culture and the Desecration of Religious Symbols).

In the long run, Christians won’t be prosecuted for objecting to homosexual marriage as such. They will be prosecuted for denying that the State has the power to define what is morally licit under the legal rubric of civil rights. The drafters of the Manhattan Declaration understand this.

We are one step closer to the catacombs. Bishops and priests need to take special note because they will become the first targets of the coming hostility in order to demoralize the faithful. Clergy who today still hope for compromise with the homosexual cultural agenda must recommit to the moral tradition and bear the scorn that comes with defending it. If they don’t, they will fall from the faith and lead others with them. Clergy who are practicing homosexuals need to be removed from office because their internal confusion fosters greater moral confusion in the Church at a time when more moral clarity is needed.

Fr. Gregory Jensen: A Field Guide for the Hero’s Journey – Part 1 [Book Review]

4 Comments

Source: Koinonia

The Pursuit of Freedom & Wealth. Though both are good neither freedom nor wealth are morally sufficient ends in themselves for the human family. Like freedom, wealth is for something. Actually strictly speaking wealth and freedom are both in the service of human flourishing. In the Christian tradition this means that both human freedom and all the myriad forms that wealth takes are only fully realized in love and love is always necessarily sacrificial. We strive to be free and wealth so that we are able to love fully and without reservation or compromise.

Too often freedom and love are seen as sui generis, as almost Platonic ideals that are simply “there.” My own ministry as a priest has taught me to be wary whenever conversations about practical matters turn theoretical. Freedom and wealth, their morally legitimate uses, the conditions that foster or obstruct their realization and growth, are all matters of prudence. When we try and discuss prudential matters as if they were simply a matter of principle, our conversation quickly becomes a source of conflict and degenerate into mere posturing. While there is no guarantee that of practical agreement, understanding that freedom and wealth are at the service of love offers both critics and apologists of democracy and the free market a potential more fruitful foundation for their discussions and even their disagreements.

But this brings us to a challenge that is both pedagogical and cultural.

Prudence along with justice, temperance and courage, is a cardinal virtue. Unfortunately as contemporary Western culture has become more secularized it has formed generations of men and women who are deaf to the music of human virtue. Many of us embrace a vision of human life that counsel spontaneity not habit as the mark of a life well and fully lived. And since any discussion of virtue necessarily brings with it a discussion of tradition such a conversation is an affront to the atomistic individualism that is at the center of contemporary culture.

None of this is to say that we don’t form our life by habit or the shared meaning embodied in tradition. We do but we are unconscious to this fact and so we live in bad faith relative to both our convictions and our own humanity. The great irony is that the more we seek to live according to the modern dictates of authenticity, individuality and spontaneous self-expression in word and deed, the more we live lives of mere habit in conformity to the opinions of others that we have uncritically made our own.

No, for all that we seem to live in a world of options, we are really and truly anything but free, anything but wealth. Why? Because we lack the very virtues that make freedom and wealth possible and humanly meaningful.

This brings me to Jeff Sandefer and Fr Robert Sirico’s new book, A Field Guide for the Hero’s Journey. The book’s subtitle describes the authors respectively as “a serial entrepreneur and an entrepreneurial priest.” Both men are affiliated (as am I) with the Acton Institute “a non-profit research organization dedicated to the study of free-market economics informed by religious faith and moral absolutes.”

At first, I have to say, I didn’t particularly like the book and I only kept reading out of a personal respect for Fr Robert and a sense of obligation since I said I would write a review. So more out of guilt than gladness I read.

And as I read something unexpected and wonderful happened—I began to see myself in a new light.

The book reminded me that once the language and the idea of virtue were as foreign to me as it is to most contemporary men and women. If I am no longer the book’s intended reader I once was because, like the authors I felt “like something big [was] missing from [my]life.” Like so many of the people I meet on a regular basis, I felt “trapped, bored, stuck in a meaningless routine” thinking myself “too ordinary to ever do something special” and just as afraid that, if I tried, I’d only fail.

While I certainly don’t want to suggest that 27 years of marriage to a woman who loves me and who I don’t deserve (much less does she deserve me—though in both cases this reflects my shortcomings and failings not hers!) and 15 or so years as a priest haven’t been a source of joy, strength and personal satisfaction—because whatever my failings they are this. But as with the other areas that give my life meaning, that meaning is only accessible to me because somewhere along the line others took the time to foster in me not only the cardinal virtues but also the theological virtues of faith, hope and love.

This is all a long winded way of saying that thanks to dedicated teachers, priests, friends, loved ones and more people than I could hope to know much less name, I came to see that I too could lead a meaningful life and that, like the authors and the many people they’ve counseled over the years I could decide “to journey heroically” through my own life instead of “merely marking time.”

Well, what has all of this to do with freedom and wealth, with democracy and the free market? This is the question I’ll answer in my next post.

Metropolitan Hilarion Blasts Anglicans for Renouncing the Faith

6 Comments

Metropolitan Hilarion

In a recent speech at Villanova University, Met. Hilarion (Alfeyev) of the Russian Orthodox Church said that dialogue between the Orthodox and Anglicans are under threat because of the abandonment of the Christian moral tradition by the Anglican communion. Orthodox and Anglicans find themselves “on different sides of the abyss which separate Christians of a traditional direction and Christians adhering to liberal teachings.”

I mentioned in the comments on another thread that one Orthodox prelate speaking with this clarity was the recently removed Met. Jonah of the OCA. Met. Jonah was home grown in a sense in that he was an American born Orthodox bishop who has a keen understanding of the currents underlying the Western cultural drift.

Met. Jonah’s removal was American Orthodoxy’s loss (See: Removing Metropolitan Jonah Hurt the American Orthodox Church) although long term it may prove to be a blessing because he will be able to speak unencumbered by lesser men who don’t grasp the seriousness of the crisis in Western culture. We need American leaders who 1) understand the complexity of the issues we face, and 2) are able to teach others how the Gospel of Christ, particularly the knowledge of inward orientation of the human person, is the antidote to the debilitating dehumanization — the radical depersonalization — that many of the progressive and liberal theological ideas foster.

The fact is that there is a vacuum in American Orthodox leadership that is being filled with with a new generation of ostensibly Orthodox writers and speakers who are steeped in progressive ideas and seek to conform the Orthodox moral witness to them. This is a minor problem so far but without the clear lines such as Met. Hilarion offers below (and as Bp. Chaput in the Roman Catholic Church and others do for their flock), increasing moral confusion is the inevitable result and the antidote to radical dehumanization and depersonalization remains hidden under a bushel.

Source: Virtue Online | David Virtue

Orthodox and Anglican Churches are on different sides of the abyss, says Russian Orthodox leader.

The future of ecumenism is in great peril with the gap widening between orthodox and progressives, says Metropolitan Hilarion of the Russian Orthodox Church a noted theologian and church historian.

Speaking before an audience at Villanova University, a Catholic institution on Philadelphia’s historic mainline and one of the oldest in the US, Hilarion said that when the holy fathers of the first millennium abided in unity and while it was subjected to many serious trials, it was the foundation upon which dialogue between Christians was successful and fruitful. “Fidelity to the Christian tradition is the proper means for the restoration of unity among Christ’s disciples.”

The orthodox leader blasted parts of the Anglican Communion for abandoning the faith and said renunciation of the truth by some Protestant denominations makes it difficult for the Orthodox Church to continue co-operation with them.

“I regret this, but dialogues with Protestants and Anglicans which we have had for decades are now under threat because of processes taking place in the Protestant communities of the West and North. I mean the continuing liberalization in the field of theology, ecclesiology and moral teaching. Certain denominations have legitimized the blessing of same-sex unions and the ordination of people openly declaring their non-traditional sexual orientation.”

Hilarion said he was obliged to speak about this because he wanted to preserve the good that was being achieved during the years of dialogue between Orthodox, on the one hand, and Protestants and Anglicans, on the other. “In defending the two-thousand-year-old tradition of the Church, we remain true to this dialogue, yet at the same time we see that Protestants and Anglicans are growing away from us by accepting innovations which we find unacceptable.

“I am not speaking of this in the walls of a Catholic university because I am afraid to criticize Anglicans and Protestants to their faces. Every time the opportunity arises, I speak openly of our concern in direct dialogue with our brothers from the Anglican and Protestant communities. In 2010 at a festive dinner at the Nicaea Club in London in the presence of the Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams I stated the sad fact that the Orthodox and Anglican Churches are to be found on different sides of the abyss which separate Christians of a traditional direction and Christians adhering to liberal teachings. Recently I spoke of the same things at the old Episcopalian seminary at Nashotah House, a contemporary of your University.”

The Metropolitan added that dialogue with Protestants and Anglicans has reached a dead end, but dialogue with the Roman Catholic Church has a future because, like the Orthodox Church, the Catholic Church does not think of itself as being outside of Tradition and strives to teach and live in accordance with the tradition of the apostles and holy fathers.

“In my view, the significant improvement and strengthening of relations between our Churches that can be seen in recent years is connected to an awareness that we are united by a common heritage, thanks to which both Orthodox and Catholics can and must together bear witness to the world of the eternal values of the Gospel.

“The Orthodox and Catholics encounter the same challenges which modern times lay down to the traditional way of life. In this instance we are dealing not with theological problems but with the present and future of humanity. It is in this sphere that Orthodox and Catholics can interact without compromising their ecclesiastical identity. In other words, while not yet being the one Church, being separated by various theological and ecclesiological problems, we can find ways of interacting which would allow us to respond jointly to the challenges of the modern world.

“Together we can help people realize what the traditional Christian values are – the family, the worth of human life from conception to death, the upbringing of children, the integrity and indissolubility of marriage. All of these concepts in the modern secular world are subjected to a radical re-evaluation.”

Hilarion said that in Western society today, the traditional family way of life has, in effect, been destroyed. As a result, there has been a gradual decline in the populations of Western nations. “This is a very simple and real indication of the spiritual health or spiritual disease of a particular nation. If the population of a country is increasing this means that there are in the nation healthy forces which allow this to happen; if the population decreases, this is a sign of disease.” The disease in society is an absence of the traditional notion of the family, he said.

“At the basis of this worldview there lies the destruction of the traditional family way of life. If we speak of Christian communities, the traditional way of life of the family is preached only by the Orthodox and Catholic Churches. At the official level it is the Orthodox and Catholic Churches which defend the integrity of marriage, believe abortion to be a sin and call for an end to it, and believe that euthanasia is unacceptable.”

Hilarion continued, “The ‘Foundations of the Social Concept of the Russian Orthodox Church’ with the Catechism of the Catholic Church which outlines the official teaching of the Catholic Church on these problems, then everywhere you will see that their positions are similar. This means that we can combine our endeavors in order to jointly protect traditional values such as the family, giving birth, how children are brought up and the integrity of marriage. This is the field where we can and must today interact with Catholics.

“In this regard, I am convinced that co-operation of all Christian confessions, and first of all between the Orthodox and Catholic Churches, is greatly needed for the protection of human life and its inalienable dignity as well as the family. Therefore we who are united by faith in Christ and a two-thousand-year-old Christian tradition have to bring with renewed strength the good news to the world of the family and marriage as institutions created by God.

“In accepting the challenge of the real world, the Christian family is to be as before the hope and pledge of a Christian civilization. It is essential to protect and support a cultural tradition which is favorable to the family, the indissolubility of marriage and the need for marital fidelity by taking an active part in the creation of legislation that favors the family and its natural foundation and by imparting to society the ideals of the majesty and perfection of the family vocation.”

The Orthodox leader said that protecting of Christians from discrimination is another area of cooperation between the Orthodox and Catholics.

“Unfortunately, in the countries of the so called Arab Spring, as well as in a number of other countries of the Middle East, Africa, Asia and Oceania, Christians are subjected to discrimination, persecution and repression.

Media Ignores Religious Persecution

The media ignores the problem of religious persecution. “In planning military intervention in a particular country of the Arab world or in preparing the overthrow of the existing regime in a particular country with the help of outside forces, Western strategists completely fail to take into account the fact that the main victims are often local Christians.”

Hilarion cited several examples. “In Iraq only one tenth of a million-and-a-half Christians that lived there ten years ago have survived. In Egypt we are witnessing a mass exodus of Christians. There are practically no Christians left in Libya. Ninety five percent of Christians have abandoned Homs in Syria. We, Orthodox and Catholics, must raise our voices jointly in defense of Christians subjected to persecution and repression in these countries, as well as in Afghanistan, Pakistan, India, Indonesia, the Philippines, Nigeria and in a number of other countries as well.

“The countries of Europe have traditionally defended the interests of Christians in the Middle East and in Eastern Asia. In the present circumstances we hope that the resolution adopted by the European Parliament on January 2011 on the position of Christians in the context of religious freedom, as well as the declaration of the Committee of Foreign Ministers of the European Union on 22 February, will have practical consequences. They were a result of active participation by the Christian Churches in this direction. We hope that the USA will join us in the defense of Christians.

“Today Christians are subjected to harassment not only in those countries where they comprise a minority but often in those countries with ancient and deep-rooted Christian traditions. Certain European countries are trying to limit the manifestation of Christian faith in public life by claiming that they are thereby observing the rights of adherents of other religions and atheists. This situation demands that Orthodox and Catholic show solidarity in their actions in protecting the Christian identity of Europe and America.

“The Christian communities of Syria and other Middle Eastern countries are crying out for help at a time when the Western media ignore their pleas for aid. Politicians too are closing their eyes to this unprecedented wave of persecution. We, the Orthodox and Catholics from around the world, have to raise our voice in defense of Christians and the Christian traditions of the Middle East. It is our duty to appeal constantly to political leaders, international organizations and the media by reminding them of this humanitarian tragedy unfolding before our eyes.”

Hilarion observed that it is essential for Orthodox and Catholics today to perceive each other not as rivals but as allies in the cause of the defense of Christians’ rights. “We must develop interaction outside of the success or otherwise of theological dialogue, independent even of how relations between the Orthodox and Catholics take shape in concrete regions around the world. We must build this interaction from a common strategic task since we are dealing with the future of humanity. It is upon our joint endeavors that the future of Christianity in the third millennium will primarily depend.”

Tolerance is Not a Christian Virtue

21 Comments

Roman Catholic Apb. Chaput

– Hang on to your hat folks. The title does not say Christians should be intolerant. It says instead that tolerance is not an end itself but merely an important working principle in moral discourse and inquiry. Below is a summary of the point given by Abp. Chaput of the Roman Catholic Church. It is taken from a recent speech he gave back in 2009.

He spoke to a Catholic audience thus the reference to Catholics, but the principle applies to all Christians particularly his conclusion that “a healthy democracy requires vigorous moral debate to survive.”

Source: Dover Beach

Archbishop Chaput of Philadelphia said in the last year that evil preaches tolerance until it is dominant and then it tries to silence good…We need to remember that tolerance is not a Christian virtue.

Charity, justice, mercy, prudence, honesty — these are Christian virtues. And obviously, in a diverse community, tolerance is an important working principle. But it’s never an end itself. In fact, tolerating grave evil within a society is itself a form of serious evil.

Likewise, democratic pluralism does not mean that Catholics should be quiet in public about serious moral issues because of some misguided sense of good manners. A healthy democracy requires vigorous moral debate to survive.

The America of 2013

11 Comments

America is in a very deep moral crisis.

Source: American Thinker | Steve McCann

Americans take great umbrage whenever they, as a society, are portrayed by the residents of other nations as self-centered, avaricious and overbearing. While an egregious exaggeration in the past, is it an accurate description now? Who are the American people today and what sort of country is the United States in 2013?

How does one describe a society wherein a majority of the people, and their elected leaders, have embraced the following mindset?

a) The United States can commit to unlimited government spending as the long-term future of the nation is immaterial and will take care of itself.
b) Based on 66 years of unprecedented economic growth and prosperity, the good times will never end and America will under no circumstance experience massive national adversity as there is a bottomless pit of money to be siphoned from an equally bottomless pit of wealth.
c) Since the dollar is the international reserve currency, the United States, in order to cover its massive budget deficits, can arbitrarily create trillions of dollars out of thin air regardless of any consequence for the nation or the global economy.
d) There are no limits to personal behavior and the arcane concepts of decency, honor and integrity are from a bygone era.

In just four years the United States has accumulated nearly $6 Trillion in debt. The national debt is now $16.5 Trillion or 32.5% of the world’s total indebtedness (the U.S. accounts for 5% of the global population and 20% of the annual Gross World Product). Further, the total unfunded liabilities (state, local and federal) of the U.S., as of 2012, exceed $238 Trillion, or 3 times the annual Gross World Product (total economic activity of all the countries on earth). The United States is, today, the most indebted and bankrupt nation in the history of mankind.

Assuming other nations would still be willing to buy American bonds and the dollar has not been replaced as the world’s reserve currency, the expected level of government spending over the next four years will result in the national debt exceeding $21.5 Trillion (nearly 40% of the projected world debt in 2017). Interest costs, as the end-product of having to raise rates to attract lenders, will absorb nearly 60% of the total income taxes collected in 2017.

However, at some point before this scenario fully plays out, the rest of the world will no longer tolerate and subsidize a nation unwilling to change its profligate and self-centered ways. The financial collapse of the United States would not only have a devastating impact on the standard of living for the average American but for the vast majority of people around the globe.

How can a nation with any sense of decency allow this scenario to play out? None of this is a mystery to the politicians, academics, the media, Wall Street, major corporations and a substantial portion of the electorate. While there may be a considerable percentage of the population that could be categorized as “low-information” voters, this does not excuse the actions and attitudes of these people or the balance of the citizenry. The United States, and possibly the global economy, is being taken apart by the avarice and narcissism of its elites and the selfishness and ignorance of far too large a percentage of its inhabitants.

The vast majority of politicians, while paying lip service to fiscal restraint, are primarily concerned with re-election and continuing the standard of living, ego-gratification and wealth accumulation that comes with elected office. They have thus abandoned their moral and fiscal duty by pandering to the bulk of the American people who have been willingly indoctrinated to believe that by the mere circumstance of living in the United States one is entitled to and guaranteed a “decent” livelihood regardless of the cost to future generations.

The leaders, as well as a preponderance of the rank and file, within the public sector unions, are focused not only on siphoning as much money as possible from the treasuries of the states and federal government, but also impacting, through compulsory union dues, the election of politicians who will acquiesce to their never-ending demands. This modus operandi also extends to the private sector unions who are increasingly turning to government and the elected officials they also financially support to strong-arm their demands upon employers — which will compel many to choose either bankruptcy or offshore relocation.

The bankers on Wall Street, in order to protect their annual seven figure incomes, have become willing tools for the governing class in Washington D.C. either as: 1) foils in the propagation of class warfare; 2) well compensated accessories to the creation of money by the Federal Reserve; or, 3) intermediaries for massive political donations. All the while knowing that the government has designated their entities as “too big to fail” thus shifting any potential risk to the American taxpayers.

Additionally, far too many major corporations and well-heeled investors have turned their eyes to the government as the source of loans and guarantees for a myriad of investment schemes and projects. In the search for not only money but favorable regulatory treatment, they, in return, willingly contribute to the election of those who will not only continue these policies but will make certain there are few or no consequences for failure. That the ultimate objective of these politicians is to make certain the private sector is under the thumb of government bureaucrats seems immaterial to these so-called capitalists.

In the world of academia, the primary objective is no longer to educate but to make certain there is no end to the ever-increasing income stream that flows into the pockets of the institutions and individuals. If that means saddling students with unconscionable debts or demanding unlimited subsidies from the government then so be it.

The mainstream media has abdicated its responsibility to be a neutral chronicler of the abuse of power. In order to sustain their individual lifestyles and gain access as well as bask in the glow of the ever-growing power structure in Washington, they have become the propaganda arm of big government.

The entertainment industry, in their determination to promote an unfettered lifestyle, has for many decades advanced the notion that there are no limits to personal behavior. Further, since decency, honor and integrity are passé, the entertainment complex can justify grossing untold billions from the glorification of ever-increasing violence and depravity. All the while financially supporting those in the political class who claim to be in sympathy in these matters but who, in reality, are more dedicated to the concept of an all-powerful central government — a government which will eventually turn on these same supporters.

Regardless of the reason or circumstance, a majority of the people of this nation have been conditioned to believe the federal and/or state governments will always be able to ride to the rescue in any situation. The fact of the matter is: this nation cannot weather a severe financial crisis as it has squandered its ability to do so.

The United States in 2012 re-elected a man, Barack Obama, who is self-centered, unprincipled, and arrogant. From the perspective of the rest of the world, this is increasingly the image of the United States in 2013. While a substantial portion of the American populace do not subscribe to or live their lives this way, a majority does. For far too many, they do not care about what happens to their country, their progeny or other people around the globe.

The United States is rapidly becoming the egregious caricature first used in the 1950’s and 60’s — the Ugly American.

Fatal error: Uncaught Error: Call to undefined function nuthemes_content_nav() in /home/aoiusa/public_html/wp-content/themes/prose/archive.php:58 Stack trace: #0 /home/aoiusa/public_html/wp-includes/template-loader.php(106): include() #1 /home/aoiusa/public_html/wp-blog-header.php(19): require_once('/home/aoiusa/pu...') #2 /home/aoiusa/public_html/index.php(17): require('/home/aoiusa/pu...') #3 {main} thrown in /home/aoiusa/public_html/wp-content/themes/prose/archive.php on line 58