We don’t need no steenkin’ doctrine

We don’t need no steenkin’ doctrine

The official relief agency of the England & Wales bishops’ conference believes the Church’s teaching on artificial contraception is “too simplistic.” Specifically, it thinks that the Church is wrong to say that using condoms to prevent the AIDS is immoral and doesn’t work anyway. (Abstinence does work best, as shown by the program put in place in Uganda which has shown the highest drop in AIDS infections in Africa.)

Why doesn’t it surprise me that CAFOD takes this stance when its executive director in 2001 held a “commitment ceremony” with his homosexual partner.

This second Mass was a special celebration for Pendergast, an ex-Carmelite, and his homosexual partner Julian Filochowski, the director of CAFOD: the Catholic Agency for Overseas Development, which is Britaind Welsh bishops will do anything without having the full force of Cardinal Ratzinger’s CDF come down upon their heads. And, I suppose, whether we’ll actually see the full force coming from the Vatican. What have we come to when an official agency of the Catholic Church feels no compunction about publicly spitting on the Church’s infallible teachings, spreading scandal and confusion among the faithful, and we get a big yawn from our bishops (and most of the clergy and laity to boot.)

Share:FacebookX
6 comments
  • 8:33:26 -0500

    https://www.bettnet.com/?p=4140

    The Ignatius Insight web magazine interviews James Akin of Catholic Answers about the complaint filed with the IRS by “Catholics” for a Free Choice in regard to Catholic Answers’ voters guide for Catholics. CFFC claims the voters guide is partisan political activity and thus Catholic Answers should have its tax exempt status revoked. They quote Catholic Answers President Karl Keating:

    “In a brazen attempt to silence anyone who opposes legalized child-killing in America, the nation’s leading pro-abortion Catholicdience is more non-catholic than that,  just lost their California tax-exempt status on the basis of what sound like legitimate criteria.  They don’t behave like a Catholic institution, but rather a secular one.  The state of California is right on that one.

    Now, this whole thing about CFFC and Catholic Answers.  IF you use the criteria set forth by the state of California, at least, the CFFC is more likely to face loss of tax exemption than Catholic Answers.  This on the basis of Catholicity of employees, Catholicity of target audience, description of goal as a Catholic institution with a religious goal, etc.

  • Well, this whole thing is getting weird and kind of funny.  Catholic charities, whose workforce is 70% non-catholic and whose target audience is more non-catholic than that,  just lost their California tax-exempt status on the basis of what sound like legitimate criteria.  They don’t behave like a Catholic institution, but rather a secular one.  The state of California is right on that one.

    Now, this whole thing about CFFC and Catholic Answers.  IF you use the criteria set forth by the state of California, at least, the CFFC is more likely to face loss of tax exemption than Catholic Answers.  This on the basis of Catholicity of employees, Catholicity of target audience, description of goal as a Catholic institution with a religious goal, etc.

Archives

Categories