Skip to main content

Flashback: Remember when Francis and his Trad & Conservative Enablers cry "SCHISM" it means they are AFRAID!

Remember when Francis and his Trad and conservative enablers cry "SCHISM" it means they are AFRAID!

What are they afraid of?

They are AFRAID that it will finally get through the cowardly and apparently not too bright heads of the few faithful bishops that:

Zero valid popes in the history of the Catholic Church have committed the sacrilege of instituting as the Vatican's official teaching that unrepentant adulterous couples can profane the Holy of Holy Jesus Christ who is true God by having unrepentant sinners receive Him in the Most Holy Eucharist.

Nor have any of ALL the valid popes in history even come close to ambiguously teaching such a blasphemy which could be taken in either a orthodox or heretical way (for all the conservative and traditionalist Francis apologists).

Next to this sacrilege against the Most Holy Eucharist, the proposed Amazonian Synod heresy of women's ordination is a minor sacrilege.

Maybe these cowardly and apparently not too bright bishops might, finally, realize:

Francis is in SCHISM from ALL valid popes in the history of the Catholic Church.

Maybe they will, finally, join Bishop René Gracida and investigate if the Francis conclave was invalid which even Cardinal Raymond Burke says is a valid possibly.

Or, maybe because it is their infallible belief that there can never be a invalid pope or antipope then they will do what Doctor of the Church St. Francis de Sales said:

"The Pope... when he is explicitly a heretic... the Church must either deprive him or as some say declare him deprived of his Apostolic See."
(The Catholic Controversy by St. Francis de Sales, Pages 305-306)

Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church.


-  LifeSiteNews, "Confusion explodes as Pope Francis throws magisterial weight behind communion for adulterers," December 4, 2017:

The AAS guidelines explicitly allows "sexually active adulterous couples facing 'complex circumstances' to 'access the sacraments of Reconciliation and the Eucharist.'"

-  On February 2018, in Rorate Caeli, Catholic theologian Dr. John Lamont:

"The AAS statement... establishes that Pope Francis in Amoris Laetitia has affirmed propositions that are heretical in the strict sense."

- On December 2, 2017, Bishop Rene Gracida:

"Francis' heterodoxy is now official. He has published his letter to the Argentina bishops in Acta Apostlica Series making those letters magisterial documents."

Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church by the bishops by the grace of God.


Jack said…
I'm not perfectly sure that Bergoglio has overstepped his bound with Amoris Laetitia.

I don't think the text is saying that those truly guilty of the sin of adultery may receive Holy Communion, but that due to the confusion of our times there are souls who are in relationships which may be, or may possibly be, adulterous objectively speaking, but without the person themselves having the subjective crime of adultery in their soul.

In any case, there's clearly a difference between a woman who abandons her husband for a richer or more attractive man, and a woman who is herself abandoned by her husband and who then remarries to help with her burdens. In the first case the woman clearly has the heart of an adulteress; and while the second may still be in an adulterous union objectively speaking, whether she really has the heart, the will, the crime of adultery in her soul is more doubtful. The argument of some is that those who are abandoned like that are expected to make a heroic act of abandonment to divine providence, remain separate from their adulterous spouse, and struggle alone to raise their children. Of course this is the most heroic and meritorious thing to do, and the most faithful to the Sacrament of Holy Matrimony, and one could argue that by giving Holy Communion to those who fail to make this heroic act we are in some way snubbing those who do succeed in making it. There's also the danger that by giving pastors the right to administer Holy Communion to those in these situations, that some may be far too lax and give Holy Communion to those who clearly are adulterers in their hearts. There's also the argument that we simply shouldn't run the risk of sacrilege and keep the stricter discipline for safety's sake. The mind of Bergoglio and those like him is that Holy Communion is "medicine for the sick, not a reward for the perfect", and that it's better to give Holy Communion to souls in these doubtful situations than to cut them off.

In any case, this is all kind of moot. The fact is that the Vatican has already been doing this for about 200 years, because back in the 1800s priests asked if they could give Holy Communion to those who objectively were usurers (a mortal sin as grave as adultery), and the Vatican has allowed Holy Communion to be given to usurers since that time. So if Bergoglio is a schismatic for wanting to relax this discipline in regards to adultery, then those 19th and 20th century popes are all schismatics for relaxing the discipline in regards to usury. The 19th century popes thought that the discipline could be relaxed because modern conditions made it more ambiguous as to whether people were actually guilty of the crime of usury, and now in the 21st century Bergoglio is saying that modern conditions make it more ambiguous as to whether people are actually guilty of the crime of adultery. There really is no difference.
Jack said…
Also I'd like to say that, while being initially very suspicious of and opposed to Amoris Laetitia, my position has had to soften towards it somewhat when reflecting that I'm essentially using its teaching myself. I'm a single/unmarried man. I sincerely would like to have been a priest or a religious, and was praying for such a vocation daily, but I've been cut off from it seeing as over the last few years my desire to be a with a woman and to have children has become so strong that I can only say St. Paul's teaching applies to me: "But if they cannot exercise self-control, they should marry. For it is better to marry than to burn with passion."

In any case, in prayer I've discerned that God does want me to marry, and I'm at peace with this. Despite praying for it sincerely and repeatedly, I simply haven't been given the grace to be celibate.

Unless the reader has experienced something like this his or herself, they won't know what I'm talking about. Of course I've had desires since I was a young man, but in recent years there is a qualitative difference: I don't just want to lie with a woman, I have a real need to have a child with one. I know that women often experience this burning need for children when they get to a certain age, but I'm experiencing it as a man. It's a constant groaning pain, an ache that I feel physically in my heart (and sometimes in the pit of my stomach) throughout the day; it sometimes makes prayer difficult to impossible; and often even the sight of a woman causes me to feel as though I'm being pierced through the heart. Though my body aches constantly, my soul's at peace because I'm confident that the Lord does want me to marry and that in the future I will marry; but my current circumstances prevent me from marrying right now or in the very near future.

Anyway, the reason that this relates to Amoris Laetitia is that in this situation I've been struggling direly with the sin of onanism (objectively, a mortal sin). I detest it with all my heart and would like nothing more than to be perfectly chaste, a grace for which I pray daily. The reason that it's relevant is this: after struggling with it for a long time and going through the cycle of sin–confession–communion–sin–confession–communion–sin, etc., I was beginning to wonder whether my sin (objectively mortal) was really a mortal sin actually/subjectively, because I cannot describe how much I detest it, want to be rid of it, and only fall into it due to weakness/frailty. On one of the Church's great feast days, a holy day of obligation, I was feeling sad in the morning knowing that I wouldn't be able to receive Holy Communion, because I felt I had to go to confession and that I wouldn't be able to confess in time for Mass. Regardless, I prayed to Our Lady to give me some special grace that day (I didn't specify what grace, just that I wanted to receive some grace). Anyway, when it came to the part of the Mass where the people go up to receive Holy Communion, I suddenly had the strong urge to go up and receive. I can only testify, on my own behalf, that this wasn't what I was praying for in the morning, and that the thought of receiving Holy Communion in a state of mortal sin and committing a sacrilege is abhorrent to me. I got in the line for Communion and continued to pray, and my conscience was soothed and made peaceful, and I received Holy Communion.
Jack said…

Since that time, I've been receiving Holy Communion regularly while still habitually committing this sin (which the Church objectively speaking considers mortal, and which I detest), without confessing it except every now and then. Confessing this sin is extremely humiliating for me because of its shameful nature. I know some might say that I should allow myself to go through the stress and humiliation of repeated confessions as part of the penitential and healing process, but, again, I can only testify on my own behalf that this cycle of sin-confession–sin–confession was doing me more harm than good, since I was being severely tempted to despair. I still thoroughly detest it, and I'm still praying for the grace to be chaste as I wait for the day to come when I can marry and finally be able to deal with this in a way that is not so humiliating, degrading, and saddening for me.

Therefore, it seems I'm currently living out what Amoris Laetitia basically envisions: I'm objectively committing what is a mortal sin against chastity, but regularly receiving Holy Communion because I've discerned that the guilt is not actually mortal due to mitigating circumstances. The difference is that Amoris Laetitia says that this discernment should be done with a pastor, whereas I did it myself (although really I believe Our Lady intervened, and when I have confessed this sin at least two priests have voiced the opinion that it may possibly not be mortal due to my circumstances). Perhaps there's a difference because even now I sincerely wish to give this sin up and never to commit it again, whereas I think Amoris Laetitia envisions that those in these possibly adulterous relationships need not even have the will to give them up; but either way, my position towards the text has had to soften, seeing as if I (a habitual onanist who would sincerely rather not be) can put myself forward for Holy Communion, then I can't be dogmatically opposed to others (habitual adulterers who would sincerely rather not be) from receiving either. My final comment is that in these times when I've been tempted to despair, Holy Communion is one of my few – and is the greatest of my – consolations. So I sympathise when people speak of Holy Communion being a "medicine for the sick, not a reward for the perfect." Even if some happen to it disingenuously, in cases like my own it is genuine.
Jack said…
One final note: I still nevertheless support the Dubia and believe that Bergoglio has an obligation to answer them in accord with Catholic teaching. I don't think the teaching of Amoris Laetitia of relaxing this discipline should in any way make the Church's teaching on Holy Matrimony ambiguous, which is why the Dubia ought to be answered.
I can answer the Dubia like this:

1. It is asked whether, following the affirmations of “Amoris Laetitia” (nn. 300-305), it has now become possible to grant absolution in the Sacrament of Penance and thus to admit to Holy Communion a person who, while bound by a valid marital bond, lives together with a different person “more uxorio” (in a marital way) without fulfilling the conditions provided for by “Familiaris Consortio” n. 84 and subsequently reaffirmed by “Reconciliatio et Paenitentia” n. 34 and “Sacramentum Caritatis” n. 29. Can the expression “in certain cases” found in note 351 (n. 305) of the exhortation “Amoris Laetitia” be applied to divorced persons who are in a new union and who continue to live “more uxorio”?
Yes. However, in certain cases the guilt is mitigated, and these persons are not to be treated as adulterers but as sincere penitents; for persons such as these, the discipline has been relaxed by Amoris Laetitia.

2. After the publication of the Post-synodal Apostolic Exhortation “Amoris Laetitia” (cf. n. 304), does one still need to regard as valid the teaching of St. John Paul II’s Encyclical “Veritatis Splendor” n. 79, based on Sacred Scripture and on the Tradition of the Church, on the existence of absolute moral norms that prohibit intrinsically evil acts and that are binding without exceptions?
Yes. Adultery is still absolutely prohibited according to the moral norm established in Sacred Scripture and Tradition.

3. After “Amoris Laetitia” (n. 301) is it still possible to affirm that a person who habitually lives in contradiction to a commandment of God’s law, as for instance the one that prohibits adultery (cf. Mt 19:3-9), finds him or herself in an objective situation of grave habitual sin (cf. Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts, Declaration, June 24, 2000)?
Yes. Pastors should always counsel these persons to abandon their adulterous unions and be faithful to their marriages.

4. After the affirmations of “Amoris Laetitia” (n. 302) on “circumstances which mitigate moral responsibility,” does one still need to regard as valid the teaching of St. John Paul II’s Encyclical “Veritatis Splendor” n. 81, based on Sacred Scripture and on the Tradition of the Church, according to which “circumstances or intentions can never transform an act intrinsically evil by virtue of its object into an act ‘subjectively’ good or defensible as a choice”?
Yes. Mitigating circumstances can never transform the crime of adultery into something good or defensible as a choice; however, mitigating circumstances can lower the guilt of the sin from mortal to venial; and in cases where it can be established with moral certitude that the person in the adulterous union is sinning venially and not mortally, they should not be barred from Holy Communion (which may provide them with the grace to live more righteously).

5. After “Amoris Laetitia” (n. 303) does one still need to regard as valid the teaching of St. John Paul II’s encyclical “Veritatis Splendor” n. 56, based on Sacred Scripture and on the Tradition of the Church, that excludes a creative interpretation of the role of conscience and that emphasizes that conscience can never be authorized to legitimate exceptions to absolute moral norms that prohibit intrinsically evil acts by virtue of their object?
Yes. No examination of conscience can ever legitimate an intrinsically evil act; however, a thorough examination of conscience in certain cases may show that an act which is gravely sinful in itself, may be committed with only a venially sinful intention by the person themselves due to mitigating circumstances.
"that it's better to give Holy Communion to souls in these doubtful situations than to cut them off."

Nope. That's not what the Church has taught for nearly 2000 years. I'd rather trust what Holy Scriptures has to tell us.

1 Corinthians 11:27-29
"So then, whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of sinning against the body and blood of the Lord. Everyone ought to examine themselves before they eat of the bread and drink from the cup. For those who eat and drink without discerning the body of Christ ."
"mitigating circumstances can lower the guilt of the sin from mortal to venial." Not always.

Which is worst? Murdering a stranger or your young child? Murdering your child is worst. But BOTH will earn you hell. Both are mortal sins. Neither is lessen to a venal sin.

A "lesser" form of adultery? Who are you trying to kid? I know of no one who doesn't know adultery is wrong. However I know several people who think it doesn't apply to themselves, only those "others". No one fools God.
Momma26 said…
Sorry Jack, you still need to go to Confession. Yes God knows your soul but you know it's wrong. Jesus said if your eye causes you to sin, cut it out... So you need to do everything you can to work on your stuff and then you pray and beg for the grace to overcome and you work on your triggers and run away if you have to! Take cold showers for penance. Mary help of Christians, pray for us in our need.
Fred Martinez said…
Dear Jack,

Please go to confession with a trustworthy traditionalist priest to advice you. As you struggle with your sin please stop going to Communion until you go to confession and make a firm resolution not to commit that sin because if you should die suddenly you are putting your eternal salvation in jeopardy. Many people have overcome that sin, but not by making sacrilegious Communions. Is it worth it? I will pray for you. Everyone who reads this please pray for Jack.
Dr. Bombay said…
Stop touching yourself, Jack. It's really not that difficult. No, really. It's not. Just stop doing it. Enough with the jesuitical justifications.
JFK & Momma26, You and I need not worry for all we say out loud and all we do for what we see as thruth and THE TRUTH. Jorge B feels our pain and his mercy not only endures forever but whereever: "Jack" is relyng on this, and so should we. Gujy, Texas
Charmaine said…
@Dr. Bombay - Seriously. My goodness.
Fr. VF said…
It is essential to understand that Canon 915 is totally indifferent as to the SPECIES of sin in question. Communion-for-adulterers, Communion-for-Pelosi, and Communion-for-gay-couples are not three different issues. They are the same issue: sacrilegious, scandalous distribution of Communion. It is mortal sin for the pastor and the bishop, each and every time it is permitted.
And it is mortal sin for someone as smart as our commentator J. Invincible ignorance this dude ain’t. Nor is an emotive urge and sophistry the same as a well formed conscience. Emphasis on well and rightly formed.

But is this not precisely the mass appeal of Antipope Francis: He confirms folks in their favorite sin, whatever that may be, as you rightly point out, Fr. VF. To Juan Carlos Cruz, notorious activist sodomfolk: “God made you that way!” And, “God loves you that way,” too!

J’s addiction is being encouraged by the false pope leading folks like him into Hell. And of course Antipope Francis declares There is no Hell! That’s exactly what you’d tell your mark.

Beware the Franciswock, my son / The jaws that bite, the claws that catch!
Beware the Jubjub bird, and shun
The frumious Bandersnatch!'

'Twas brillig, and the slithy toves
Did gyre and gimble in the wabe:
All mimsy were the borgogliove,
And the mome raths outgrabe.
To Jack: if you’re sincere, get thee to a confessional. With a darned good and holy priest. And get some psychological help too. Your addiction renders you unfit for marriage and true love. You are thus thwarting your deepest desire.

The penalty of sin . . . . Is sin.
Aqua said…
Fr. VF - That is the Faith I converted to at great personal cost; willingly, thankfully.

Over the past 10 years, I am in innumerable ways, no longer the man I was. I have been transformed, by Grace, because God is holy, I a, not and I desire true, holy communion with Him above all things,

And so ... I converted on a particular Confirmation day. And then - every day since then I have been converting again and again (sanctification). A long, hard slog that I now look back in with great affection; foundational. I have never had any other religious interest than that, and it wasn’t until I found the Catholic Faith that I found the object of what I desired.

A faith that leaves me where I was? I’d rather watch football.
Aqua said…
To Jack:

That is one of the most incredible, heartfelt posts I’ve ever read. Kudos and great credit to you for thinking this through, and being willing to acknowledge your sins.

You are not alone. I believe the sin you describe is a temptation for almost the entire population of men. It is also, 100%, grass fed, pure evil. Your conscience has been talking to you. Your conscience is talking to you now (or was) when you write this. (So has the devil). The sin is bad (not so bad). The sin will destroy you in this life (continence will destroy you), it will prevent true communion with Jesus (nothing will ever prevent communion with Jesus) and it will most assuredly deliver you to hell one dreadful day (God is merciful and will understand)

One of those voices is not of God.

Let me tell you: the sin can be licked. And it can only be defeated through ...... *CONFESSION* *RECONCILIATION* *PENANCE* ...... under the watchful spiritual care of a *holy Priest* ... *by the grace of God*.

The key? Onanism, masturbation, is the most selfish, self centered thing a man can do. Turn outward from self to God. Think constantly of God. Consider His Mother. Know that His Mother is there with you as you live, breath, decide, act.

The sexual urge must be directed to one objective and one only: procreating children. Period. If you cannot be married, then you can volunteer your time in teaching children or leading them in sports. Connect yourself to life. I chose adoption. We are now parents to 8. Never fixated on the sin, but on God, the author of life and love, and the life that you or others produce.

And finally: the proper Sacrament for your temptation is not Holy Eucharist; it is CONFESSION. Every week if you must. The suffering of standing in line (again) and the shame of being honest and the grace that God gives you in return ARE.THE.HEALING.REMEDIES.

There are man men who have been celibate their entire lives. At the end of your days you can look back on years of Onanistic masturbation dissipation .... or you can look back on disciplined taking up your cross daily and doing what Jesus did, and *finding Him*. You won’t find Him unless you take the hard road. The long slog.

It can be done. But only the right way. *Not* the Bergoglio way. The Way Of The Cross.
Aqua said…
To Jack:

The answers to the Dubia are not essay questions. They are yes. Or they are no. There are no mitigating circumstances. None. Evil must be renounced. Turn back for a quick look and you will turn into a “pillar of salt”, but for the grace of God.

Heaven depends on renouncing all sin and falling into the Way of the Cross behind Jesus.
May our good God bless you Brother Aqua. You are a true apostle of our Lord. Our king and our brother. Jesus Christ.

Viva Cristo Rey!
Aqua said…
Brother B: :) Amen to all Catholics on The Way.
Jack said…
Thank you for your prayers, and thanks to anyone who prays for me. Like I said, this is a sin I sincerely want to overcome. In fact, if there's any I could ask right now never to commit again it would be this one. My conscience is more or less at peace, in the sense of still receiving Holy Communion. I believe that Our Lord & Our Lady permit this given my situation, and that I'm not in a state of mortal sin. However, I understand the dangers of private judgement and so I will take your advice. I'm in contact with several good priests and I will speak to one tomorrow, God willing, probably outside of confession first because I will feel more comfortable describing the situation without the pressures of the confessional and the sacrament, but I will make a confession immediately afterwards, or after some preparation, if he advises it or if my conscience prompts it. Again, the thought of committing sacrilege by receiving Holy Communion in a state of mortal sin is abhorrent to me. Thank you again for your prayers.
Jack said…
Thank you for your compassion. I will speak to a priest and most likely make a confession afterwards as I described in my reply to Fred above. You say that this is a temptation that most men go through today. You are most likely correct. But like I was saying in my original post, the temptations I have now are different. I'm a convert. I had this habit in my late teenaged years, before my conversion. After my conversion I was able to overcome it with prayer, the intercession of Our Lady, confession, and generally a great deal of grace. I detested it then as I detest it now. I'm devoted to Our Lady, I love the virtue of chastity, I despise this sin. The temptations I have now are of a different degree, or even a different kind, than I had when I was younger. Back then it was the sensual desires than men normally have, as you say. Now it is a burning desire to have a child. The difference is like having a mere appetite, and starving from hunger. There's literally a groaning pain in my chest that I feel throughout most of the day. Before i wanted to enter seminary,seeing as with prayer I could reasonably expect to maintain the celibate life. Now in good conscience I couldn't even put myself forward for seminary. I know that I need to marry. Like St Paul says, not all are given the grace to be celibate, and it's better to marry than to burn. God willing I will be able to overcome this sin even before I marry, but it will take an extraordinary grace. Again, I appreciate that most men deal with temptations like these, but I have them to an extraordinary degree; which is why I need an extraordinary grace. God bless you.
Jack said…
I didn't appeal to ignorance but to weakness. I know full well that it is a sin. It's not knowledge that I lack, but strength. What do you think St. Paul was speaking of in this passage from Romans chapter 7?

For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, seduced me, and by it killed me. [12] Wherefore the law indeed is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good. [13] Was that then which is good, made death unto me? God forbid. But sin, that it may appear sin, by that which is good, wrought death in me; that sin, by the commandment, might become sinful above measure. [14] For we know that the law is spiritual; but I am carnal, sold under sin. [15] For that which I work, I understand not. For I do not that good which I will; but the evil which I hate, that I do.

[16] If then I do that which I will not, I consent to the law, that it is good. [17] Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me. [18] For I know that there dwelleth not in me, that is to say, in my flesh, that which is good. For to will, is present with me; but to accomplish that which is good, I find not. [19] For the good which I will, I do not; but the evil which I will not, that I do. [20] Now if I do that which I will not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.

[21] I find then a law, that when I have a will to do good, evil is present with me. [22] For I am delighted with the law of God, according to the inward man: [23] But I see another law in my members, fighting against the law of my mind, and captivating me in the law of sin, that is in my members. [24] Unhappy man that I am, who shall deliver me from the body of this death? [25] The grace of God, by Jesus Christ our Lord. Therefore, I myself, with the mind serve the law of God; but with the flesh, the law of sin.
Jack said…
I'm not justifying sin, neither am I justifying myself. If these things were really as easy as you imagine, we wouldn't need grace or a Redeemer.
Jack said…
Also, I will abstain from receiving Holy Communion tomorrow and until I have the advice of a priest. I'm also sorry if what I said gave cause to scandal for anyone. Please read the passage from St Paul's Epistle to the Romans I posted below, since it describes well my own feelings and sentiments in my current situation.
Jack said…
On my phone my recent posts appear under each of those to whom they are addressed; but on my computer, they appear by themselves at the bottom. So to clarify:

@Fred Martinez "Thank you for your prayers..." and "Also, I will abstain..."

@Aqua "Thank you for your compassion..."

@BrotherBeowulf "I didn't appeal to ignorance but to weakness..."

@Dr. Bombay "I'm not justifying sin..."
Aqua said…
@ Jack, That burning desire (in the chest) should be for God, not for kids. Any earthly desire (including “sex”, children, but not exclusively) should be seen purely with respect to God who is ultimately behind all desire. Conform all desire to its ultimate giver. Wanting children is one of the greatest goods, but wanting them too much and in the wrong way can be idolatrous. Same as desire for a spouse. Or food, drink, financial security (etc). All of it can be good, or evil, depending on if it assumes an improper place and importance.

I am also a convert (10 years). Protestant teaching on sin is not connected to Magisterial Constant Church Dogmatic teaching. Their theme, typically: there is no sin you can commit that can ever separate you from salvation. “Once saved, always saved”. The greatest sin is to worry about your sins. “Sin, and sin boldly” (Luther) because God’s Grace *alone* opens the door to heaven. “You.Must.Not.Work.your way to heaven”. And so, decades since birth I was taught by Baptist’s that there really was no such thing as sin after you “received Jesus into your heart”. “Masturbation was a normal male thing”. James Dobson (Focus On The Family President) actually put out a training video on this. “Masturbation is healthy for young men, as it keeps them from worse sin”. So wrong. I knew it even as I watched the “Protestant Pope” as a young teenager.

Fortunately, I have a good conscience and a fantastic Guardian Angel which, and who, encouraged me not to listen to this bad advice.

The Catholic Church has *always* taught (regardless what current Priests may or may not say) that masturbation is a Mortal Sin that disconnects you from saving grace, separates you from God and damns you to hell ... until confessed and repented and through penance reconnected again to God’s saving grace. Always. It’s a deal breaker.

And the Church has *always* taught that to receive communion while *not in a state of grace* is sacrilege and a grave offense in itself. Big, big no-no.

Re-training myself after decades as a Protestant has been a job between me and the Priest in many, many, many *confessionals* (all over the world), standing in line, examining, revealing in repentance .... and *only then*, always only then, through grace filled communion with my Savior. And not just related to this sin of masturbation, either. The Catholic Faith touches every aspect of life and my spiritual reformation has been multi-faceted. My biggest change is in my appreciation for “Life” issues. It is why we have adopted so many children. Knowing God - leads to love leads to life leads back to God. God and Life (children) and Love all go together. That has been my primary change in reference. Finding the positive (righteousness) is what leads away from the negative (sin).

God and Cross first. Always. Worldly wants,desires, ambitions subordinate to the Cross.
Jack said…
@Aqua, to clarify, when I say a "burning desire" I do not mean an emotional or sentimental desire. I think kids are cute of course, and I would be happy to have children for the sake of raising them in the faith; but make no mistake, God is the one and only thing I care about ultimately. I'm still quite sad that I wasn't given a vocation to the religious life, because I want to give everything to Him. The burning desire I'm talking about is simply a physical pain, an ache. I have a very strong, near overwhelming bodily desire – sorry to be quite crude – to make a woman pregnant and to father a child. This is in spite of my own feelings and sentiments. I really would rather live celibate and never marry.

The ignorance lay in thinking you could approach the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass which is both Calvary and Gethsemane and the Last Supper in a word the wedding feast of the whole Celestial Court—and partake there of—

Without a wedding garment.

The desire to impregnate a woman any woman is severely disordered. It completely disassociates sex from love and responsibility, including child rearing.

Not to realize this is to permit oneself to function at a sub-rational level.

My advice remains the same: Get thee to a confessional. And Catholic psych. professional.

All the best working through these issues.

Really don’t be misled by Antipope Francis that you can present for Holy Communion with the unwashed sin of Onan about you. Remember his fate.
No man left behind Bro. A.
Re Dr. Bombay—Yes you are @J. That’s precisely what you are doing by justifying receiving our Lord without confessing what is a known grave mortal (see the fate of Onan) sin.
Re Dr. Bombay—Yes you are @J. That’s precisely what you are doing by justifying receiving our Lord without confessing what is a known grave mortal (see the fate of Onan) sin.
Aqua said…
Brother B: Thanks for that corrective. Hard to know what one is dealing with in these anonymous forums. Your response to that last comment from Jack, spot on.

“Get thee to a confessional; counseling; possibly *Catholic* psychiatric help”.

And “beware the guidance of antipope Bergoglio”.
Jack said…

I have no wilful desire to impregnate any woman. I'm in love with a woman currently. I only want to be with her, and I would hate myself if I were to commit fornication with her or with anyone else. I pray for her daily, and I pray that I will marry her one day. I don't want to sleep with anyone except her, and I don't want to sleep with her until marriage. I only desire to have children for the kingdom of God. I only want to marry for the kingdom of God. These carnal desires I have are completely against my own mind and my own will. I don't want them; they cause me great distress. I have an immense respect for and love of marriage & true love, which is why I'm tempted to despair over my current situation.
Aqua said…
A troll.

Never seen such a prolific troll. They’re usually hit and run.

Live and learn.
Yes perhaps so, the thought crossed my mind. No matter. Perhaps we pierce a heart and soul in darkness, and ‘J.’ hits Confession and stops profaning the Blessed Sacrament—then we have a veritable son of the Widow of Naim, come back to spiritual life.

If not we’re just where we started, fools for Christ...fighting the Antipope, his minions and his evil ideas.
Jack said…
Like I said in my original post, I do still go to confession now and then. And I went to confession yesterday, thanks be to God. I don't know why it's difficult for either of you to understand how one can have a carnal/passionate desire that is contrary to one's own heart & mind, what St. Paul calls the "inner man". Everything I've said about myself is true. Also, BrotherBeowulf, it's an unjust assumption on your part to assert that I've been profaning the Blessed Sacrament or that I have the "unwashed sin of Onan" about me. Like I said originally, I detest my sin and I wouldn't approach Holy Communion if I didn't think that I was in a spiritual state to do so. The Church teaches that contrition can cleanse us of sin. The fact that you're having trouble understanding that I'm sincere and not a liar only goes to prove what I've been saying, which is that my temptations are a lot more fierce than most men's are. It's true that I'm in love with a woman and that I hate myself for being unchaste; it's true that I greatly fear falling into fornication and that I'm often tempted to despair; it's true that I have an immense respect for the dignity of women and of marriage, and this only makes my frustration over myself that much worse. Ask Our Lord & Our Lady about what it means to undergo this kind of temptation and I'm sure they'll let you know.
You’re a veritable St. Paul Bro. Jack.

Check out his reading for Mass yesterday 15th Sunday After Pentecost. Applies to us all. Galatians 5:25-26:

“Brethren. If we live in the spirit, let us also walk in the spirit. Let us not be made desirous of vainglory, provoking one another, envying one another. Brethren, and if a man be overtaken in any fault, you, who are spiritual, instruct such a one in the spirit of meekness, considering thyself, lest thou also be tempted.

“Bear ye one another’s burdens, and so you shall fulfill the law of Christ. For if any man think himself to be something, whereas he is nothing, he deceiveth himself. But let everyone prove his own work, and so he shall have glory in himself only, and not in another. For every one shall bear his own burden. And let him that is instructed in the word, communicate to him that instructeth him, in all good things. Be not deceived, God is not mocked; for what things a man shall sow, those also shall he reap. For he that soweth in his flesh, of the flesh also shall reap corruption: but he that soweth in the spirit, of the spirit shall reap life everlasting. And in doing good, let us not fail; for in due time we shall reap, not failing. Therefore, whilst we have time, let us work good to all men, but especially to those who are of the household of the faith.”
@jack: “I detest my sin and I wouldn't approach Holy Communion if I didn't think that I was in a spiritual state to do so.”

The first part is a good start. The second part—approaching because you feel good about it—is a nonStarter. If you’re in that state of sin what’d er you may think about it you have no business approaching the altar rail. Your conscience has not been rightly formed on this matter and you keep defending your right to holy communion, sin of self-abuse or not. You don’t have that right, son.
Justina said…
Dear Jack,
Sincerely yours in Christ,
Paul Jackson said…

Hopefully some encouragement for you.

Antipope Bergoglio and his band of bent brothers (especially McCarrick), a couple of visits to a Christian drug recovery and rehabilitation centre (not planned for my recovery or rehabilitation), plus wise words from a Catholic friend all shocked me into realising that my own multi-decadal addiction to and depravity in onanism was neither victimless nor excusable.

After taking my friend's advice and praying the Rosary daily for about four weeks, I had one reversion.

Since then - a little over three years ago now - I have not looked back.

I believe that this is entirely by God's grace and through Our Lady's intercession.
IloveJesus said…
This ambiguity never characterized Jesus. If your hand offends you, cut it off. It is better to enter into Heaven maimed than to go to Hell with your hand. Heaven or Hell, that's the clear choice that Jesus, Son of God, and Redeemer of sinners gives. Listen to Him.


Popular posts from this blog

Intel Cryptanalyst-Mathematician on Biden Steal: "212Million Registered Voters & 66.2% Voting,140.344 M Voted...Trump got 74 M, that leaves only 66.344 M for Biden"

  William Binney Binney at the Congress on Privacy & Surveillance (2013) of the École polytechnique fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL) Born William Edward Binney September 1943 (age 77) Pennsylvania , U.S. Education Pennsylvania State University (B.S., 1970) Occupation Cryptanalyst-mathematician Employer National Security Agency (NSA) Known for Cryptography , SIGINT analysis, whistleblowing Awards Meritorious Civilian Service Award Joe A. Callaway Award for Civic Courage (2012) [1] Sam Adams Award (2015) [2] Signature [ ] Former intelligence official with the National Security Agency (NSA) and whistleblower , William Edward Binney, whose occupation is cryptanalyst-mathematician explained that Joe Biden's "win" was impossible because "Biden Claims 13 MILLION More Votes Than There Were Eligible Voters Who Voted in 2020 Election" according to Gateway Pundit. Binney revealed "With 212Mil

"I love Cardinal Burke, but I've run out of patience": A Vatican expert who has met Francis & wishes to remain anonymous gave The Catholic Monitor an impassioned statement for Cardinal Burke & the faithful bishops: End the Bergoglio Borgata

Catholic Conclave @cathconclave @Pontifex thanks journalists for practicing omertà. The mind boggles at the scale of the possible coverups that this has enabled. How does he think a use victims feel when hearing this statement Quote Damian Thompson @holysmoke · Jan 22 Incredible! Pope Francis lets the cat out of the bag, thanking Vatican correspondents for their "silence" and therefore helping him conceal the scandals of his pontificate. Take a bow, guys! 8:23 AM · Jan 22, 2024 · 345 Views The moral crisis and "doctrinal anarchy" as Vatican expert Edward Pentin and others have written about in the Church caused by Francis has reached the breaking point where all faithful Catholics must pray for and demand that Cardinal Raymond Burke and the faithful bishops issue the correction and investigate if Francis is a n invalidly elected anti-pope . That is the purpose of this post. A Vatican expert who has met Francis and wishes to remain anonymous gave The Catholic Monit

Fr. Chad Ripperger's Breastplate of St. Patrick (Modified) & Binding Prayer ("In the Name of Jesus Christ, our Lord and God, and by the power of the Most Holy Catholic Church of Jesus, I render all spirits impotent...")

    Deliverance Prayers II  The Minor Exorcisms and Deliverance Prayers compiled by Fr Chad Ripperger: Breastplate of St. Patrick (Modified) I bind (myself, or N.) today to a strong virtue, an invocation of the Trinity. I believe in a Threeness, with a confession of an Oneness in the Creator of the Universe. I bind (myself, or N.) today to the virtue of Christ’s birth with his baptism, to the virtue of his crucifixion with his burial, to the virtue of his resurrection with his ascension, to the virtue of his coming to the Judgment of Doom. I bind (myself, or N.) today to the virtue of ranks of Cherubim, in obedience of Angels, in service of Archangels, in hope of resurrection for reward, in prayers of Patriarchs, in preaching of Apostles, in faiths of confessors, in innocence of Holy Virgins, in deeds of righteous men. I bind (myself, or N.) today to the virtue of Heaven, in light of Sun, in brightness of Snow, in splendor of Fire, in speed of lightning, in