October 17, 2015

Archbishop Blase Cupich VS Catechism of the Catholic Church

 “If people come to a decision in good conscience then our job is to help them move forward and to respect that,” he said. “The conscience is inviolable and we have to respect that when they make decisions, and I’ve always done that.” - Archbishop Blase Cupich

During the last October's "Family" Synod of 2014, I wrote a blog post called After the SYNOD: More Changes That Will Be Necessary (and re-posted here).  I posited then that numerous sections of the 1983 Code of Canon Law, The Catechism of the Catholic Church and even the Holy Bible would have to be changed in order for the upcoming changes to Catholic Doctrine and the forthcoming "Up Yours!" to God towards the 6th and 9th Commandments are enforced forced upon an unwilling majority of Faithful Catholics. Well, needless to say, the post may be more than a bit prescient as Archbishop Cupich may have just confirmed all that I wrote.

If one reads Article 6 of the CCC on Moral Conscience and scrolls down to Section III you will find the following (any emphasis mine):

III. TO CHOOSE IN ACCORD WITH CONSCIENCE

1786 Faced with a moral choice, conscience can make either a right judgment in accordance with reason and the divine law or, on the contrary, an erroneous judgment that departs from them.

1787 Man is sometimes confronted by situations that make moral judgments less assured and decision difficult. But he must always seriously seek what is right and good and discern the will of God expressed in divine law.

1788 To this purpose, man strives to interpret the data of experience and the signs of the times assisted by the virtue of prudence, by the advice of competent people, and by the help of the Holy Spirit and his gifts.

1789 Some rules apply in every case:

- One may never do evil so that good may result from it;

- the Golden Rule: "Whatever you wish that men would do to you, do so to them."56

- charity always proceeds by way of respect for one's neighbor and his conscience: "Thus sinning against your brethren and wounding their conscience . . . you sin against Christ."57 Therefore "it is right not to . . . do anything that makes your brother stumble."58

Furthermore, if one jumps down to Section IV there are these gems (again, any emphasis mine):

IV. ERRONEOUS JUDGMENT

1790 A human being must always obey the certain judgment of his conscience. If he were deliberately to act against it, he would condemn himself. Yet it can happen that moral conscience remains in ignorance and makes erroneous judgments about acts to be performed or already committed.

1791 This ignorance can often be imputed to personal responsibility. This is the case when a man "takes little trouble to find out what is true and good, or when conscience is by degrees almost blinded through the habit of committing sin."59 In such cases, the person is culpable for the evil he commits.

1792 Ignorance of Christ and his Gospel, bad example given by others, enslavement to one's passions, assertion of a mistaken notion of autonomy of conscience, rejection of the Church's authority and her teaching, lack of conversion and of charity: these can be at the source of errors of judgment in moral conduct.

1793 If - on the contrary - the ignorance is invincible, or the moral subject is not responsible for his erroneous judgment, the evil committed by the person cannot be imputed to him. It remains no less an evil, a privation, a disorder. One must therefore work to correct the errors of moral conscience.

1794 A good and pure conscience is enlightened by true faith, for charity proceeds at the same time "from a pure heart and a good conscience and sincere faith."60

The more a correct conscience prevails, the more do persons and groups turn aside from blind choice and try to be guided by objective standards of moral conduct.61

So then, if an openly homosexual Catholic "couple" or a Catholic heterosexual "couple" living in adultery with each other believes that they are not sinning and presents themselves for Holy Communion (and does so against the current teaching of the Catechism of the Catholic Church), then how can Archbishop Cupich stand behind his statement "...that pastors should respect the consciences of all Catholics who approach the sacraments" without violating the above Church Teaching and being complicit in another's sin? Can any priest in his diocese "respect the consciences of...Catholics" who approach the Altar rail if it is known they are unworthy through public actions (and at least homosexuality, if not also adultery, is pretty much a public action nowadays, is it not?) and proceed to handout the Holy Eucharist to them? Will they do so to respect the couple or their Bishop on earth? Or will they not do so to respect their Judge in Heaven?

Is it not true that #1791 & #1792 alone preempts any change in Doctrine? Or praxis, practice or whatever convenient term the liberals wish to apply to what they are demanding we must all accept - in violation of our Consciences? How can a priest, Bishop or Cardinal respect the Consciences of of the few while at the same time violating the Consciences of the many? Is this not against the greatest of the Three Theological Virtues - Charity? 

Vox Cantoris places it all in stark perspective with his post Blase Cupich, Judas Priest in which he writes: "Blase Cupich is a disgrace to the priesthood and the Church, Under his logic, as long as a murderer or a rapist or a producer of child pornography or a thief does so in good conscience, then the Eucharist is theirs."

Archbishop Cupich also stated (and I assume his tongue was not in his cheek) that "... I visit regularly with people who feel marginalized...". Well, I fear he and many of his brother Bishops who think like him, will be very, very busy trying to un-marginalize the majority of Faithful Catholics who will feel betrayed - and will have been betrayed - by what many have already written is a done deal. 

It may not be the Faithful Bishops and Cardinals who will walk away from the Synod in protest, but it may very well be the Faithful laity who will will walk run away from their parishes in disgust. 


Copyright 2015 David Heath - All Rights Reserved