|
Previous Posts
Archbishop Chaput weighs in against "Obama Catholics"--and for...?
Denver's Archbishop Charles Chaput combines an intellectual's depth with the doughty persona of a politicker, which is what he used to be--he worked for the RFK campaign and later, even as a priest, was a campaign volunteer for Jimmy Carter. Some say he's still a political operative, though for the
posted 11:18:53am May. 20, 2008 |
read full post
»
The Hagee-Donohue ticket: "Liberals' worst nightmare"
The elaborate courtship of Texas televangelist John Hagee--who is covering McCain's evangelical flank--and the Catholic League's Bill Donohue, who accused Hagee of anti-Catholicism for his "Great Whore" sermonizing and other standard anti-papist barbs, always seemed to hold about as much suspense as
posted 10:54:05am May. 19, 2008 |
read full post
»
An olive branch to divorced-and-remarried Catholics?
An item in the current edition of The Tablet of London hints at a possible opening for divorced and remarried Catholics to receive communion--even though many do, obviously, their ban from the altar under church law remains one of the sorest pastoral points in the US church. It is also a sore point
posted 6:00:00am May. 17, 2008 |
read full post
»
The key to Benedict...
It is summed up in a response recounted by Father Jim Martin, a Jesuit and author who posts (and edits) at America magazine's blog. Father Martin has a post on "Three Unreported Papal Stories" from last month's visit. The third is the payoff:
Third: Another priest friend serving as a secretary to on
posted 5:12:35pm May. 16, 2008 |
read full post
»
Guerilla tactics and the "Communion Wars"...Doug Kmiec is denied communion for backing Obama
It seems that the former Reagan adviser and Catholic conservative legal scholar from Pepperdine, Doug Kmiec--heretofore a man with impeccable judicial and pro-life credentials--has been barred from communion for his support for Barack Obama. In a posting yesterday, Kmiec did not give details, but wr
posted 12:37:21pm May. 16, 2008 |
read full post
»
|
posted April 2, 2008 at 12:41 pm
Regarding your question in the survey about birth control:
There are those of us who differentiate between barrier methods of birth control (ie., condoms,foam,diaphragm,sponge)that prevent egg and sperm from uniting to start a new life and other methods which work by preventing the implantation of a very tiny embryo where egg and sperm have united to start a very tiny human being but then these united cells are prevented from implanting in the woman’s uterus. Every form of chemical birth control (ie., the pill, Norplant, Depro-Provera injections, RU-486, the mini-pill) has the ability to cause early abortions. The IUD irritates the uterus and makes it hostile to the developing embryo and prevents it from implanting to continue its journey to becoming a full-term baby. For the pill and others mentioned above, the birth contrl usually suppresses ovulation but not always, and then the possibility of conception followed by early abortion can occur. To me there is a huge difference between preventing the union of egg and sperm and preventing the further development of the human being whose life has already been started.