The Diocese of Worcester must clean house

Years ago, Father Robert E. Kelley of the Worcester Diocese admitted in a sworn deposition that he sexually molested "50 to 100" young girls while he was an associate pastor at St. Cecilia's parish in Leominster from 1976 to 1983.  Some believe he may have abused up to 200 minors.  And yet, this serial abuser is well provided for by the Diocese.  See here: http://lasalettejourney.blogspot.com/2013/03/the-diocese-of-worcesters-partners-in.html

Meanwhile, the same Diocese which has rallied to the support of a monster (twice convicted and sent to prison) has shown nothing but hostility toward Magisterial teaching while shunning those who are orthodox and committed toward the truth.  Readers of this Blog know full well that Robert Spencer's invitation to speak at the "Men's Conference" was rescinded (see here: http://lasalettejourney.blogspot.com/2013/02/what-is-real-reason-for-bishop-robert.html ) and that I have been ostracized because of my promotion and defense of the Church's authentic teaching, especially in the area of sexual morality.

While orthodox Christians are routinely ignored and relegated to the margins of this troubled diocese, numerous priests came to the defense of Fr. Kelley after he was sentenced.  In a letter which appeared in the Worcester Telegram & Gazette, a large number of Worcester priests said:

"We the undersigned Priest wish to express our objection to the front page picture of Father Robert Kelley in the Saturday issue of March 31, 1990. For the priest who pleaded guilt and for all who were involved, this curt procedure and sentence were tragic enough. The use of such a picture was sensational and in poor taste. It added to the heavy pain already felt by the entire Catholic Community and its priests."

It was signed by the following:

John Francis Burke OLO Good Counsel Wor
GabrielGibbs, O.S.B St Benedict, Harvard
Paul W. Lemire St Bonficice, Lunenburg
Terrence T. Kilconye St Vs Hosp Wor
Timothy M. Brewer OLO Good Counsel Wor
Edward M. Ryan St Bernards, Fitchburg
Thomas V. Walsh St John, Clinton
John F. Madden Ascension, Wor
W.J. OHalloran, S.J. Holy Cross, Wor
Rocco Piccolomini Holy Angela, Upton
Thriburse F. Millett St Peters Wor
J. Brendan Nally OLO Rosary, Clinton
James A. Huston OLO the Angela Wor
George Mahoney OLO the Angela Wor
Edmund G. Heddad Vianney House Wor
John W. Reilly St Josephs Auburn
John F. Gee St Michaels, Mendon
Richard F. Harrington St Bernards, Fitchburg
Thomas J. Markey St Bridgid, Millbury
George Holland OLO the Angels, Wor
Edward Sheenan Vianney House Wor
Gerald C. Dion St Roach, Oxford
Leo ONeil St Leo, Leominster
Stephen Johnson Retired, Mancheoug
Henery A. Doneghue Sac. Hrt, W. Boylston
Author A. Oullette St Marys Southbridge
William McGovern 222 June St Wor
Bernard R. Reilly Sac. Hrt, Hopedale
Paul OConnell Christ the King, Wor
Joseph Jurgelonis St Francis, Athol
Joseph G. Loiselle Holy Name, Wor
Edward Ryan Worcester
Peter R. Connelly St Benediticts Harvard
Brian P. OToole Notre Dame, Southbridge
John Dyer St Joseph, Leicester
John F. Cahill St Josephs, Auburn
Michael Broderick St Luke, Westboro
Leo J. Battista St Annas, Leominster
Edward D. Niccolls Holy Family, Leominster
Raymond J. Page Retired, Brookfield
George J. Ridick St Catherine, Wor
Thomas M. Barry St Annas, Barre
Thomas J. Needham Imm Con, Leominster
John J. Foley Good Shepard, Linwood
Charles F. Munroe St Leo, Leominster
James F. Carmody St Patricks, Whitinsville
William g. OBrien Imm Con, Wor
James B. OShea OLO Lourdes, Wor
Leo F. Barlett Sacred Heart, Wor
John Joeph McKenna Holy Angela, Upton
Eusiquio Munex St Marys, Milford
Eugene F. Berthisume St Peters Northbridge
Michael DiGeronimo St Annas Leominster
Thomas Mahoney St Andrews, Wor
Peter P. Hamernik St. Stanislous, W. Warren
James F. Hoey OLO Lake, Whalom
Chester J. Misiewicz St Aleyius, Gilbertville
J. Raymond Bedard St Rose of Lima. Northbro
Ronald Lajoie St Anthony, Dudley
Charles Dumphy Blss Sacrament, Wor
Thaddeus X. Stachura St Joseph, Webster
Leo J. ONeil Cht Chp.H C. W. Boylston
John J. Bagley OLO Angela, Wor
Maurice L.Gilbert St Joseph, Wor
John J. Foley Retired, Holyoke
Edmond J. Tinsley 15 Ripley St, Wor
Richard T. Carney St Joe, N. Brimfield
John J. OBrien Retired, Holyoke
Raymond M. Goodwin OLO Fatima,Wor
Joseph J.LaBran S.J Holy Cross, Wor
Robert Grattareti St Joseph, Charlton
Paul J. Tougas St Marys of Hills, Boylston.
James J. Aquino OLO Loertta, Wor *
James G. Champion St Marys Shrewsbury
William McGovern 222 June St Wor
Ronald Provost St Joseph, Barre
Andre M. Remillard St Richards, Sterling
Thomas G. Landry St Marys Jeffery
Marcus Murlough Retired, Barre
Peter Joyce Retired, Holyoke
Cryil LaBeau Sacred Heart, Wor
Bernard E. Gilgun St Annas Shrewsbury
Richard McGrail St Joseph, Leister
Joseph Mahoney St Pauls Wor
John E. Horgan St Marks Hudson
John J. Keliher OLO Rosary, Wor
James a. Mongelluzzo St Pauls Wor
John F. Connell Holy Cross E Templeton
Cornelius F. OLeary St Marian, Otter River
Charles E. Lenk St John, E Brookfield
Joseph F. Szwach OLO Jena Gara, Clinton
Thomas F. OBrien St Anna, North Oxford
Wayne F. Benton OLO Lourdes, Wor
John J, Moriety Soc of St James, Boston
Ronald G. Herbert Retired, Oakham
Earnest Allega St Rose, of Lima, Wor
George L. OBrien Holy Cross Colg, Wor
James J. Lynes St Marys Southbridge
Michael Rey St Marys Milford
Charles J. Dumphy Holy Cross Colg. Wor

The photo of Father Robert Kelley crying was "in poor taste" for these clerics.  But nothing was said about the rape of innocent children.  Was that considered by these priests to be "in poor taste"? Where was their outrage over Fr. Kelley's evil treatment of these innocents?

Years ago a friend of mine (whose husband was a Deacon in the Worcester Diocese) was told by a priest of the diocese that there were many devils in ministry.  At the time she didn't know what he meant.  Now, she says, she does.  If we are to have an authentic reform within the Worcester Diocese, the Bishop is going to have to clean house.  Priests who engage in (or tolerate) dissent, homosexual behavior, sexual abuse of minors, liturgical abuses, and so on, must be sent packing.  There will have to be a house cleaning.  And that will require the Cardinal Virtue of Fortitude.

Let us pray!


*  See here:  http://lasalettejourney.blogspot.com/2005/10/still-more-on-fr-aquino-courtesy-of.html


Related reading here:

http://lasalettejourney.blogspot.com/2011/09/what-is-going-on-at-saint-josephs.html

Read More

"Even in the Church....all one hears about from the pulpit is social justice.."

In my last post, I noted how I am viewed as "strange" or as somehow "fringe" by liberal counterfeit Catholic wreckovators within the Worcester Diocese because I promote and defend the perennial teaching of the Church regarding the "Last Things," or what theologians refer to as "eschatology."

Our "modern world" hates to be reminded of death, judgement, heaven, hell, purgatory and the end of the world.  And anyone today who speaks or writes about these things must be demonized and cast as a freak because the "New Church" Catholics are uncomfortable with these realities.  Pope John XXIII would not have understood this spiritual sickness.  He used as a motto for his whole life the followin, entitled "Four Future Things":

Death, than which nothing is more certain;

Judgement, than which nothing is more strict;

Hell, than which nothing is more delightful;

Paradise, than which nothing is more delightful.

(Journal of a Soul, Appendix 6).


An anonymous individual, who may hardly be described as '"a bright light," left a comment here accusing me of being more Calvinist than Catholic because I adhere to the Church's teaching regarding eschatology.  I was accused of having "little mercy."  And I am not entirely surprised.  So many Catholics have been fed on chaff rather than wheat for so long that authentic Catholic teaching seems to them as something evil or hard-hearted.  Years of consuming a diet of false compassion have wrought much havoc in the souls of these mental and moral midgets.

Father Albert, a Dominican priest, writes, "If Pope Leo XIII in his encyclical on the Holy Rosary could speak (over a century ago) of the forgetfulness of man concerning future goods, what would he say today!  The future goods and the future evils that await all of us after death are buried in total oblivion!  The present life seems to be the BE-ALL and END-ALL of all things.  Even in the Church, since Vatican II, all one hears about from the pulpit is social justice.  To speak of Heaven, Hell, Purgatory, Death and Judgement is considered strangely bizarre.  Meditation on the Glorious mysteries of the Holy Rosary brings us back to reality!" (Dedicated Decades, Winter 2013, pp. 32, 33).

But then, most clerics (be they priest or deacon) no longer pray the Holy Rosary.  They prefer worldly things to the Holy Rosary.  Once prayer is abandoned, doctrine follows.

Today the Catholic Church is infested with many effeminate priests and deacons who are spiritually unable to offer the faithful the sound doctrine and the hard truths which they need to hear.  And parishes are emptying.  One reader noted how Our Lady Immaculate Parish in Athol used to offer four Masses every Sunday.  Today the parish offers only one Mass on Sunday.

By

their fruits ye shall know them.  Related reading on Pope Francis here.

Read More

Many priests today encourage (or enable) the laity to live in a state of spiritual ruin

Pope John Paul II, in his Encyclical Letter Dominum et Vivificantem, No. 46, says that: "..whoever rejects the Spirit and the Blood remains in 'dead works,' in sin. And the blasphemy against the Holy Spirit consists precisely in the radical refusal to accept this forgiveness, of which he is the intimate giver and which presupposes the genuine conversion which he brings about in the conscience. If Jesus says that blasphemy against the Holy Spirit cannot be forgiven either in this life or in the next, it is because this 'non-forgiveness' is linked, as to its cause, to 'non-repentance,' in other words to the radical refusal to be converted. This means the refusal to come to the sources of Redemption, which nevertheless remain "always" open in the economy of salvation in which the mission of the Holy Spirit is accomplished. The Spirit has infinite power to draw from these sources: "he will take what is mine," Jesus said. In this way he brings to completion in human souls the work of the Redemption accomplished by Christ, and distributes its fruits. Blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, then, is the sin committed by the person who claims to have a 'right' to persist in evil-in any sin at all-and who thus rejects Redemption. One closes oneself up in sin, thus making impossible one's conversion, and consequently the remission of sins, which one considers not essential or not important for one's life. This is a state of spiritual ruin, because blasphemy against the Holy Spirit does not allow one to escape from one's self-imposed imprisonment and open oneself to the divine sources of the purification of consciences and of the remission of sins."

Many who believe themselves to be Catholic accept the distorted notion that they may do whatever they desire, satisfying their every appetite, addiction and fetish and that the Merciful God will somehow overlook their sins.  And this because their parish priest seldom speaks of sin, death, hell, purgatory or judgement.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church defines sin thusly:

"Sin is an offense against reason, truth, and right conscience; it is failure in genuine love for God and neighbor caused by a perverse attachment to certain goods. It wounds the nature of man and injures human solidarity. It has been defined as 'an utterance, a deed, or a desire contrary to the eternal law.'" (CCC, 1849).

How are Christians to respond to sin and sinful structures? Again, the Catechism teaches:

"The duty of Christians to take part in the life of the Church impels them to act as witnesses of the Gospel and of the obligations that flow from it. This witness is a transmission of the faith in words and deeds. Witness is an act of justice that establishes the truth or makes it known. All Christians by the example of their lives and the witness of their word, wherever they live, have an obligation to manifest the new man which they have put on in Baptism and to reveal the power of the Holy Spirit by whom they were strengthened at Confirmation." (CCC, 2472).

This duty, this obligation, of the laity to "act as witnesses of the Gospel and of the obligations that flow from it," is too often misunderstood by even those within the Church who emphasize evangelizing in love but who disassociate love from truth. This is unfortunate since an authentic evangelization is always rooted in truth. There is no genuine love in evangelization without the truth. In the words of Archbishop Oscar Romero, the martyred Archbishop of San Salvador:

"A preaching that does not point out sin is not the preaching of the gospel. A preaching that makes sinners feel good so that they become entrenched in their sinful state, betrays the gospel's call. A preaching that does not discomfit sinners but lulls them in their sin leaves Zebulun and Naphtali in the shadow of death.

A preaching that awakens, a preaching that enlightens -- as when a light turned on awakens and of course annoys a sleeper -- that is the preaching of Christ, calling, "wake up! Be converted!" this is the church's authentic preaching. Naturally, such preaching must meet conflict, must spoil what is miscalled prestige, must disturb, must be persecuted. It cannot get along with the powers of darkness and sin."

How serious is this obligation to speak the truth in love as witnesses of the Gospel? Again, Archbishop Romero:

"Not just purgatory but hell awaits those who could have done good & did not do it. It is the reverse of the Beati-tude that the Bible has for those who are saved, for the saints,"who could have done wrong & did not." Of those who are condemned it will be said: they could have done good & did not."

I remember some years back, at a spiritual conference which featured Catholic mystic Eileen George of Meet the Father Ministry (an apostolate which is approved by the Diocese of Worcester, Massachusetts), how Mrs. George publically rebuked (in a strong but loving way) two homosexual men who were in attendance. She told them (without ever having met these men before) that the Lord Jesus had revealed to her that they were living in a homosexual relationship and that He was very sad. She told these two men that they needed to repent and leave that sin behind.

How many priests today lack such courage to proclaim the truth in love?  At Our Lady Immaculate Parish in Athol, the "pastor" and his "pastoral team" have failed miserably in this regard and the parish is suffering as a result.  While Fr. Krzysztof Korcz has all the time in the world to jar pickles and write homilies in which he manages to say absolutely nothing for ten minutes, one never hears him mention the reality of sin, hell and judgement. 

And because the "pastoral team" at Our Lady Immaculate has lost the sense of sin, anyone who has the audacity to write or speak about sin and its disastruous effects will be shunned and ostracized.  This explains why I was blocked from leaving posts at the North Quabbin Catholic Community Facebook page and why several anonymous individuals - including one who refers to himself as "Dr. Lobotomy" - Deacon Linderman? - have left hate-filled comments accusing me of lacking charity for speaking plainly about sin.

While the parish has considered taking what it considers to be a more "tolerant" approach toward homosexual persons (see here), orthodox Catholics faithful to the Church's Magisterium (like myself) find no welcome.



The apostasy continues to spread. See here. Pickles anyone?

 

 

 

Read More

Why the mainstream media will not tell the truth about the homosexual movement

It should come as no surprise that The New YorkTimes published a 1,225-word obituary entitled "Harry Hay, Early Proponent of Gay Rights, Dies at 90."  For, as Dudley Clendinen wrote in this long eulogy, Hay was the founder of the Mattachine Society which, "proved to be the catalyst for the American gay rights movement." (Dudley Clendinen, "Harry Hay, Early Proponent of Gay Rights, Dies at 90," The New York Times, October 25, 2002).

Harry Hay, who deserted the Catholic Church after having homosexual relations at the age of 14 (with a sailor ten years his senior), was himself a proponent of man-boy sex and gave a speech at an October 7, 1984 conference of NAMBLA (North American Man/Boy Love Association) in San Francisco.  See here.

Harry Hay spoke frequently at NAMBLA events and periodically came to the defense of the organization when other homosexual groups attempted to prevent it from partipating in "Gay Pride" parades.  See here.

So, one of the founders - some would say the founder - of the American "gay rights" movement, was a proponent of sexual relations between men and boys.  Why doesn't this trouble those in the mainstream media?  Because the mainstream media has bought fully into the radical homosexual agenda and is incapable of any objectivity whatsoever with regard to the subject of homosexuality.

This point is illustrated most eloquently in Phil Valentine's book entitled "The Conservative's Handbook."  Mr. Valentine notes that, "On September 26, 1999, thirteen-year-old Jesse Dirkhising was lured to the apartment of two gay men where he was repeatedly raped and then strangled to death, some reports say with his own underwear.  Where was the national outrage?  Here was a child  who was sodomized and murdered by two adult men and the mainstream media ignored it."  Mr. Valentine adds that the murder of Matthew Shepherd "sparked outrage across the country" because the mainstream media which virtually ignored the brutal rape and murder of little Jesse Dirkhising, "played up the crime and the subsequent call from the Left for federal hate-crime legislation to protect gays."

Then Mr. Valentine notes, "Unfortunately for little Jesse Dirkhising and his family, he doesn't fall into any protected group.  The crime against him wasn't based on race or religion or sexual orientation.  It was merely two deranged, perverted monsters who preyed upon an innocent little boy.  Was he any less dead than Matthew Shepherd?  There's no question that his death was more tragic - a young boy, repeatedly raped then killed.  Why did the media ignore it?  Because it didn't fit their definition of a politically correct story." (The Conservative's Handbook, p. 98).

But also because the mainstream media has its own agenda: to manipulate news to advance a liberal, pro-homosexualist ideology.  If two Catholic priests had sodomized and murdered little Jesse Dirkhising, the mainstream media would have covered the story for weeks if not months on end.  But because the perverted homosexual killers in question had no connection to the Church, the story was buried.

If a Catholic priest were to propagandize in favor of man-boy sex, the mainstream media would be "outraged" and would crucify the cleric without hesitation in countless editorials.  But because Harry Hay was a founder of the "gay rights" movement, his promotion of man-boy sex gets a "free pass."  Instead of rightly describing this pervert as a dangerous monster, he is celebrated by the mainstream media and eulogized as a champion of freedom and human rights.

The mainstream media doesn't want the American people to be fully informed about the homosexual movement.  For if they were, they would be rightly alarmed.

Sex between men and boys has long been a component of the sodomite culture.  See here.

Read More

Governor Chris Christie: Unbeliever or demoniac?

Governor Chris Christie says that homosexuality is genetic and that it is not a sin.  See here.  But he is simply wrong.  It is not genetic.  That myth has been thoroughly refuted.  See here.

Today we are living in the most decadent, violent and faithless period in the history of mankind. But many cannot see this because they have succumbed to satanic pride. Satan fell in love with his own beauty and wound up rebelling against God and leading other angels to do the same, drawing them to Hell. Today, bishops, priests, religious and laity, puffed up with satanic pride, have become enamored with themselves and their "intellectual prowess." And like their master, the father of all lies (John 8: 44), these too are now rebelling against God and His Holy Church. These sons of Hell spend much of their waking hours contradicting Sacred Scripture, denying dogma and popularizing immorality. These pseudo-intellectuals arrogantly divinize man's intellect while ridiculing the Word of God. Saint Paul spoke of these disciples of Lucifer in 2 Timothy 4: 1-4: "I charge you to preach the word, to stay with this task whether convenient or inconvenient - correcting, reproving, appealing - constantly teaching and never losing patience. For the time will come when people will not tolerate sound doctrine, but, following their own desires, will surround themselves with teachers who tickle their ears. They will stop listening to the truth and will wander off to fables."

In Romans 1, Saint Paul emphasizes the fact that there is a connection between a refusal to acknowledge and obey God and a subsequent degeneration of morality. And yet, with all the sex abuse scandals within the Church and all the sexual immorality and dissent, there has been very little discussion about this truth. False worship and pride in one's own intellect cause spiritual blindness and subject men to the destructive and degrading drives of fallen nature - most especially in the area of sex. Saint Paul tells us that people who fall into such spiritual blindness begin to encourage others to do so. And so infidelity spreads like a cancer.

There is an increasingly hostile attitude toward Sacred Scripture on the part of many who believe that they can "correct" God's Word. Still others, as you note, alter the scriptures because a particular verse convicts them. Contrast this arrogance with the Church Fathers. When confronted with such an arrogant approach to God's Word, they responded in no uncertain terms:

"They have not feared to lay hands upon the sacred Scriptures, saying that they have corrected them. Nor is it likely that they themselves are ignorant of how very bold their offense is. For either they do not believe that the sacred Scriptures were spoken by the Holy Spirit, in which case they are unbelievers, or if they regard themselves as being wiser than the Holy Spirit, what else can they be but demoniacs." (St. Hippolytus of Rome, "Fragment" in Eusebius, History of the Church, 5, ch. 28).

Read More

"If acts are intrinsically evil, particular circumstances can diminish their evil but cannot remove it." Does Pope Francis accept this truth?

The Holy Spirit assures us, through the Apostle St. Paul, that Christ is the head of the body which is the Church, while we are the members that suffer together and rejoice together: "If one member suffers, all suffer together; if one member is honoured, all rejoice together." (1 Corinthians 12: 26).

Which makes it all the more disturbing that Pope Francis, before his election to the Chair of Peter, asserted that private homosexual unions do not affect third parties or society in general.  The Catechism of the Catholic Church explains that, "..In the sanctorum communio, 'None of us lives to himself, and none of us dies to himself.'  'If one member suffers, all suffer together; if one member is honored, all rejoice together.  Now you are the body of Christ and individually members of it.'  'Charity does not insist on its own way.'  In this solidarity with all men, living or dead, which is founded on the communion of saints, the least of our acts done in charity redounds to the profit of all.  Every sin harms this communion." (CCC, 953).

Paragraph 817 of the Catechism assures us that "ruptures that wound the unity of Christ's Body...do not occur without human sin."  And "private" homosexual unions do not affect third parties?  God preserve us from such nonsense!

Granted that when an evil act, such as a homosexual act, is done in public, the resulting scandal compounds its intrinsic evil.  But an intrinsically evil act does not become good or neutral simply because it is performed in private.  The evil nature of the act remains unchanged.  Pope John Paul II, in his Encyclical Letter Veritatis Splendor, explains that, "If acts are intrinsically evil, a good intention or particular circumstances can diminish their evil, but they cannot remove it.  They remain 'irremediably' evil acts per se and in themselves they are not capable of being ordered to God and to the good of the person." (No. 81).

Pope John Paul II insists that, "No damage must be done to the harmony between faith and life: the unity of the Church is damaged not only by Christians who reject or distort the truths of faith but also by those who disregard the moral obligations to which they are called by the Gospel (cf. 1 Cor 5: 9-13).  The Apostles decisively rejected any separation between the commitment of the heart and the actions which express or prove it (cf. 1 John 2: 3-6).  And ever since Apostolic times the Church's Pastors have unambiguously condemned the behavior of those who fostered division by their teaching or by their actions." (Veritatis Splendor, No. 26).

Read More

Pope Francis: "If there's a private (homosexual) union, then third parties and society aren't affected."

 "The real responsibility, then, lies with individuals.."



In his book entitled On Heaven and Earth, published in 2010, Pope Francis, speaking about homosexual sex, wrote: "If there's a private union, then third parties and society aren't affected."  And some argue that he is in full continuity with Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI.  See here.

Im beginning to wonder.

Pope Francis should understand that at the root of all social injustice is personal sin.  When people deny God and objective moral limits, they have a tendency to become selfish and to regard others as mere instruments to their own ends.  The teaching magisterium explains: "Having become his own centre, sinful man tends to assert himself and to satisfy his desire for the infinite by the use of things: wealth, power and pleasure, despising other people and robbing them unjustly and treating them as objects or instruments.  Thus he makes his own contribution to the creation of those very structures of exploitation and slavery which he claims to condemn." (Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Instruction on Christian Freedom and Liberation, No. 42).

Pope John Paul II, in his Encyclical Letter Sollicitudo Rei Socialis, No. 36, says further, "If the present situation can be attributed to difficulties of various kinds, it is not out of place to speak of 'structures of sin,' which....are rooted in personal sin, and thus always linked to the concrete acts of individuals who introduce these structures, consolidate them and make them difficult to remove.  And thus they grow stronger, spread, and become the source of other sins, and so influence people's behavior."

Thirs parties and society are not affected by homosexual unions?  Really?

In No. 36 of Sollicitudo Rei Socialis, Pope John Paul II continues: "The God who is rich in mercy, the Redeemer of man, the Lord and giver of life, requires from people clear-cut attitudes which express themselves also in actions or omissions toward one's neighbor.  We have here a reference to the 'second tablet' of the Ten Commandments (cf. Exodus 20: 12-17; Deuteronomy 5: 16-21).  Not to observe these is to offend God and hurt one's neighbor, and to introduce into the world influences and obstacles which go far beyond the actions and the brief lifespan of an individual."

Pope John Paul II developed this theme in his Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Reconciliatio et Paenitentia, No. 16, saying that, "Whenever the Church speaks of situations of sin, or when she condemns as social sins certain situations or the collective behavior of certain social groups, big or small, or even of whole nations and blocs of nations, she knows and she proclaims that such cases of social sin are the result of the accumulation of and concentration of many personal sins.  It is a case of the very personal sins of those who cause or support evil or who exploit it; of those who are in a position to avoid, eliminate or at least limit certain social evils but who fail to do so out of laziness, fear or the conspiracy of silence, through secret complicity or indifference; of those who take refuge in the supposed impossibility of changing the world, and also of those who sidestep the effort and sacrifice required, producing specious reasons of a higher order.  The real responsibility, then, lies with individuals.  A situation - or likewise aninstitution, a structure, society itself - is not in itself the subject of moral acts.  Hence a situation cannot in itself be good or bad."

Read More