Since way back in the 1970s I got to know a certain priest in my parish, Father Paul Marx. He’s the guy who founded The Human Life Center, which, elsewhere, became Human Life International. While I was doing some studies across the pond, he retired and made it known, without however, having any executive power, that he wanted me to be his successor. Meetings were set up at which I made it clear that I simply won’t compromise. That attitude was intolerable to the new weakness. That was decades ago. Things haven’t changed.
At that time I made an analysis of the appendix to the medical ethics policy of the US Bishops Conference at the time and sent it to a major conservative Catholic publication, trashing the Bishops presentation of cooperation in evil, which was to define sophistically what is forbidden formal cooperation as permissible remote cooperation. The famous editor wouldn’t publish it, however, saying that his friend, a Catholic priest, with whom he went to the same university was presently rationalizing abortion in Catholic hospitals, and my article would effectively contradict his friend’s policy for the Catholic hospital systems in his diocese. So, protecting friendship so as to promote murder.
I sent my own analysis of the Bishops’ policy permitting formal cooperation in murder to the Ratzinger’s CDF. It was passed on the moral theologian who then passed it up the ladder. The result was that the Holy See (it had to be Pope John Paul II) forced the USCCB to reverse their own ethical guidelines for the combination of state and church hospitals, forcing the USCCB, furthermore, to publish their recant, to the point of condemning bishops who followed previous guidelines and commanding those bishops to reverse everything they have done in view of the older guidelines.
That was all under John Paul II and, of course, Benedict XVI kept up the new status quo. The new more reasonable status quo continued up to the time of Bergoglio. Then all hell broke out. It was now all back to calling evil as good, formal cooperation with evil as permissible material remote cooperation.
The moral criterion that is used by the clever murderers is a lie. The bishops say that if only one tries to minimize the perception of anyone that they, the bishops, are doing evil, well, that minimization will make the actual murder into something permissible, indeed, laudable. “Did anyone notice our murder of babies in the womb? No? Great, we’re good to go!”
I was directed to speak to a certain moral theologian about all this, and he told me, Catholic priest that he was, about babies in the womb being murdered by chemical morning-after-pills. He cynically asked me: “It’s so small, so who’s going to notice anyway? So, whatever.”
At that point, I decided to speak to the icon of orthodoxy moral theologian in the USA at the time, Monsignor that he was, and he cynically asked me: “What do you want us to do, George, close the doors of all the Catholic hospitals? We need government money.”
Decades later, HLI is now rationalizing the mass murder of babies in the womb with all the clever sophistry that turns evil into good:
- “Oooo! Let’s use multisyllabic words like formal and material, proximate and remote, and add some others like mediate and immediate, and, like, stuff, you know, and confuse people so that they go ahead and get the “vaccine”, because, like, that’s politically correct right now.”
Well, I’m not confused, not yesterday, not today. Murderers and liars from the beginning don’t fool me at all. I’ve written ad nauseam on this. Here’s just a couple of posts which attack some of HLI’s rubbish even when I wasn’t at all following anything HLI was doing whatsoever. When they went weak, I lost interest.
- Follow the science. Prepare for death. Bishops, priests, what are you doing? (put up again the other day)
- I do NOT need absolution for when I popped that guy in 1972 ’cause it’s a long time ago (this is very useful about time not having to do with anything “remote” or “distant”, and very useful about mortal sin, Confession, and our last judgment.)