Page Title

Text Box: enforce that restriction and do not acknowledge the excommunication, the severance from the Body of Christ. These Bishops cite to the possibility that an individual who has sought to have an informed conscience may not perceive the sin in abortion or the directive against abortion or that abortion is sinful. Such Bishops ignore the Divine Fiat - that a Divinely stated instruction prohibiting or requiring a specific act must be obeyed. It is not an informed conscience which would allow one who supports abortion to receive the Sacred Eucharist or to not be excommunicated; rather is is invincible ignorance. But invincible ignorance is impossible in the matter of abortion. “Invincible ignorance, whether of the law or of the fact, is always a valid excuse and excludes sin. The evident reason is that neither this state nor the act resulting therefrom is voluntary. It is undeniable that a man cannot be invincibly ignorant of the natural law, so far as its first principles are concerned, and the inferences easily drawn therefrom. This, however, according to the teaching of St. Thomas, is not true of those remoter conclusions, which are deducible only by a process of laborious and sometimes intricate reasoning. Of these a person may be invincibly ignorant. Even when the invincible ignorance is concomitant, it prevents the act which it accompanies from being regarded as sinful. The perverse temper of soul, which in this case is supposed, retains, of course, such malice as it had. Vincible ignorance, being in some way voluntary, does not permit a man to escape responsibility for the moral deformity of his deeds; he is held to be guilty and in general the more guilty in proportion as his ignorance is more voluntary. Hence, the essential thing to remember is that the guilt of an act performed or omitted in vincible ignorance is not to be measured by the intrinsic malice of the thing done or omitted so much as by the degree of negligence discernible in the act.” (Catholic Encyclopedia; TAUNTON. The Law of the Church

Text Box: (London, 1906); JOSEPH RICKABY, Ethics and Natural Law (London, 1908); SLATER, Manual of Moral Theology (New York, 1908); BALLERINI, Opus Theologicum Morale (Prato, 1898); TAPPARELLI, Dritto naturale (Rome, 1900); ZIGLIARA, Summa Philosophica (Paris, 1891).) There can be no union of Orthodox who do not allow those who are spiritually dead through commission, support, or failure to oppose abortion, and therefore are not permitted to receive the Sacred Eucharist, and Roman Catholics of the Latin (Western) Rite who do allow such individuals to receive the Sacred Eucharist. An Orthodox Priest can not even allow a Roman Catholic Priest who allows reception of the Eucharist by abortionists, to receive the Eucharist in the Orthodox Church. But, perhaps the Latin Rite of the Roman Catholic Church in the United States of America and elsewhere has a good reason for allowing supporters of abortion to receive Communion. Perhaps that reason is the same reason the laity are allowed to receive the bread element of Communion in their hands before consumption. Perhaps the Roman hierarchy knows or believes it no longer has valid Sacraments, and particularly no longer has the valid Eucharist. If this is the reason, then all the abortionists are receiving is a little piece of bread, and not Christ. That such a thought can even contemplated indicates the sorry state to which the Latin Rite of the Roman Catholic Church has fallen. Added to the matter of clinical abortion is the teaching of many Roman Catholic Priests, that artificial birth control is permissible. Often citing the medical need of some women to regulate their menstrual cycle, but usually simply approving individual desire to avoid pregnancy, these Priest ignore the simple fact that artificial birth control medication or implements do not prevent conception. What they do is dislodge the baby from the womb or not allow it to attach itself to the womb. Thus the baby is expelled and dies from starvation, exposure, or toxic bodily

Text Box: wastes of the mother. Apparently, since there are no torn apart body parts readily visible as the result of these so called “contraceptives” the doctrine of, “out of sight, out of mind”, is being practiced. Covering the matters of homosexuality, lesbianism, lax application of Dogma to the practitioners thereof, and the permissible attitude extended to those who engage in these deviancies, would entail a repeat of what has been presented regarding abortion. Liturgical Discipline After some forty years of having abandoned its Canonical Divine Liturgy and substituted for it a loosely compiled amalgamation of disassociated and simplistic “almost” prayers and a few real prayers, and the officially sanctioned ignoring of the liturgical rubrics, combined with the officially commanded removal of the Sacred Eucharist from its altars, there not only is little continuity in the praying of the Roman Catholic New Mass from parish to parish, but little continuity from Priest to Priest, and often even by the same Priest from day to day. A good example is the Easter midnight Mass held (not prayed, not celebrated, but held) at a Roman Catholic Benedictine Monastery. Beginning in the mid 1980’s and continuing to this day, this monastery used the blessing of Baptismal water as a vaudeville side show. The lights are extinguished. When the lights are brought back several young monks appear on the lower steps of the Altar. Vested in alb and cincture, they each hold a large container of water (five to ten gallons) and pour the water from their vessels into large tubs or basins, allowing the water to spill over into other containers. Then they, or other young monks, depending on some unfathomable circumstances, dance ringing little finger cymbals or finger bells, all stopping at the same time with heads tilted and smiles on their faces. There also is the practice at several Roman Catholic parishes of using a

Go to page