No Reason to Resign

A Roman Catholic official in Colorado, Peter Howard, resigned, apparently because he said that Catholics should not attend Protestant services. I don’t know about mere attendance, but his reasoning is right on:

Such “active participation” in a Protestant liturgical service, therefore, acts contrary to our faith which professes fundamentally different beliefs in critical ecclesiological and theological areas.

The only problem is with the phrase “Protestant liturgical service”; how many Protestant services could be described accurately with those words?

At least he takes the ecclesiological and theological differences seriously. It is amazing that we live in an age where someone is apparently forced to resign because of such clear-headed theological statements. I have no problem saying that “active participation” in non-Lutheran services is wrong.

How can real unity be achieved unless we are ready to acknowledge real, concrete, and important differences in doctrine and practice?


How Surreal Can It Get?

Just wait. When clear moral choices become emotional quagmires. Of course, the woman’s moral clarity–if she ever had it–was lost before she came to this decision. The child was already the result of having sex with someone to whom she was not married. Someone said it: ethics is only complicated to the man who has lost his morals [anyone know to whom I should attribute that quote?]. Oh, but the moral arrogance still exists:

While I have no doubt there can be joys and victories in raising a mentally handicapped child, for me and for Mike, it’s a painful journey that we believe is better not taken. To know now that our son would be retarded, perhaps profoundly, gives us the choice of not continuing the pregnancy. We don’t want a life like that for our child, and the added worry that we wouldn’t be around long enough to care for him throughout his life. … As for that baby that will never be, I will remember him always. But I’m quite certain that I made the right choice for the three of us.

Personally, I like Chesterton’s “advice”: “Let all the babies be born. Then let us drown those we do not like.” – Babies and Distributism, GK’s Weekly, 11/12/32

[No particular reason for the hat-trick of abortion-related posts, but it does seem that much of the infamy of our present society stems from the liquidation of the next generations.]


A Vomit Moment

reading this.

“Most church organizations would not give me names and e-mail addresses for their clergy,” [Ignacio Castuera] said. “There were many organizations, both denominational and ecumenical, that didn’t want to get involved.”

Castuera, a United Methodist minister from the Watts section of Los Angeles and the first Planned Parenthood national chaplain, wasn’t surprised.

“The closer Jesus got to the cross, the smaller the crowds got,” the chaplain said. “This is pretty close to the cross because people have to take derision, ostracism, all that.”

Amazing, isn’t it, that more clergy didn’t want to go? I mean, how obsolete do one’s beliefs have to be if they don’t allow support of Planned Parenthood’s scorched-earth policy with respect to the unborn?


Purgatory and the Resurrection of the Dead


Question for my Roman Catholic friends:
What is the Roman position on purgatory and the Resurrection when Jesus comes again? Will the souls in purgatory receive their “get out of fire free card” or will they still have to be purged even after Jesus comes back? If they get out when Jesus comes back, how does that affect the guilt that still must be purged? Can’t find anything in your Catechism that discusses it.

Okay, I just looked at the online Catholic Encyclopedia and it says this:

The very reasons assigned for the existence of purgatory make for its passing character. We pray, we offer sacrifice for souls therein detained that “God in mercy may forgive every fault and receive them into the bosom of Abraham” (Const. Apost., P. G., I col. 1144); and Augustine (De Civ. Dei, lib. XXI, cap.xiii and xvi) declares that the punishment of purgatory is temporary and will cease, at least with the Last Judgment. “But temporary punishments are suffered by some in this life only, by others after death, by others both now and then; but all of them before that last and strictest judgment.”

[Here is the Baltimore Catechism on the subject. What is the status of this catechism in the RCC?]

So, I guess my question is, if purgatory ceases at the final judgment, have those people actually been purged of their guilt, since many, if not most, clearly will not have been there long enough. Can anyone clarify this? I’m just interested as an outside observer, as well as so I can explain the teaching correctly if asked.