|
 |
Answers to Some Questions
Question 1.) How can you affirm that it would be
seriously sinful for a Catholic legislator to vote in favor of the proposed
charter of rights presently before the House of Commons?
Answer: If a charter of rights is made, and its wording
does not include a clause specifically protecting the right to life of the
unborn, then there is a danger that the courts will interpret the charter to
mean that the unborn are not protected, and furthermore that any mother may
legally kill, or procure the death of, her own child as long as it is in the
womb. If such an interpretation were made possible (by the exclusion of a
clause to protect the right to life of the unborn), then the State would be
giving legal protection to mothers killing their children by abortion.
If this danger exists by not now putting a clause in the
proposed charter of rights specifically protecting the unborn, then the
legislators have an obligation before God and before their fellow citizens and
all mankind, to do their duty now by either defeating the charter of rights
altogether from being passed, or by having a clause put into the charter of
rights which protects the unborn from abortion.
There is a further obligation for the lawmakers to act now,
since there is a real possibility that, by not including in the charter of
rights the specific protection of the unborn, that Abortion on Demand will be
locked-in in a few years' time.
The Members of Parliament and Senators of today will not be able
to excuse themselves from guilt (if a charter is passed that does not protect
the rights of the unborn) in a few years' time by saying, "We did not know that
by passing this charter in 1981, we in effect locked into the Constitution
abortion-on-demand by 1987" or whenever the Supreme Court of Canada follows the
criminal example of the Supreme Court of the United States of January 22, 1973,
which permitted millions of babies to be murdered, since the right to life of
the unborn was not specified in the U.S.A. Charter of Rights.
Since the danger is real, that the unborn may lose their rights
and protection of the law by the passing of the charter, then a clause
protecting their rights needs to be put into the charter now.
In conclusion then, all Members of Parliament are under strict
obligation no matter what party they belong to, to not vote for the Charter of
Rights as long as it is without a clause protecting the unborn.
It is especially important that all of us and especially the
leaders and legislators of Canada be vigilant at this time. We have a situation
where a Charter of Rights is about to be framed which is unjust toward the
unborn. Unless one is attentive, it is not apparent what very serious
consequences this Charter may well lead to. If we do not act now, it will be
much more difficult to save ourselves later. For at the moment all it will take
to make this Charter part of the Constitution is the passage of this Charter in
the Parliament of Canada and the Parliament in England. For future changes it
will take the passage in the Parliament of Canada plus seven or possibly even
nine other parliaments - that is the Parliaments of seven or nine Canadian
Provinces, in order to rectify any errors and defects of the present Charter.
Of course the legislators in Britain are also under serious
obligation before God not to pass the Charter if it does not have a clause
specifically protecting the unborn from abortion.
Then these Members of Parliament presently sitting, as well as
the Senators, as well as each member of the House of Lords who, if they pass
this Charter without the clause being added to protect the unborn, will have to
answer for a lot of innocent blood on their hands before the tribunal of God,
and even before the tribunals of men when finally just legislators and just
judges are appointed. The Nazi executioners were not let off the hook by saying
to the judges at Nuremburg: "We did not know; we were only following orders."
In time, since innocent blood cries to Heaven for vengeance, the blood of the
innocent will be vindicated by God. And whether it be through trial and judge
that these lawmakers who are criminal (if they pass this legislation) are
punished, or whether it be through other means, the Providence of God will hear
and vindicate the blood of these innocent babies who are being murdered.
But the obligation of all people, especially Members of
Parliament and Senators, is to do all they can to prevent the establishment or
even the danger of establishment into Canada's Constitution of the criminal
negligence of not protecting the unborn. And let no one plead, "I did not
know," or "I was under pressure", or "I can't impose my opinions on others."
The Members of Parliament and Senators accepted the job, and so they have the
responsibility and God will judge them for their own individual actions and
lack of action, regarding the fulfilling of their obligations, or for being
criminally negligent.
The danger of leaving the unborn unprotected specifically by law
and thereby opening the door to abortion-on-demand, is very real and very
likely to take place, seeing how courts in the U.S.A., against all precedent,
interpreted the Constitution contrary to all previous legislation by declaring
that since it was not specified in writing in the U.S.A. Charter of Rights,
therefore it ruled that the unborn did not have the right to protection by the
State, and further the State could now pay for the killing of the unborn. There
is a very real possibility that abortion-on-demand will be locked into the
Constitution by not specifically protecting the unborn. Therefore all Members
of Parliament and Senators have a strict obligation to either defeat the
charter as it is proposed or else to amend the charter to specifically protect
the unborn before passing the Charter. It is an obligation that all Members of
Parliament have by the very fact that they are obliged to protect the innocent
by their very office.
Question 2.) Regarding the question: "How can you call
abortion murder, because we don't know when the fertilized egg receives an
immortal soul?"
Answer: No one today would regard a fertilized egg in the
womb of his mother to be anything but individual, separate and distinct from
the mother who carries it. Biological science today confirms this beyond a
shadow of a doubt.
It is also certain that this individual being is human. It
cannot be anything else, for do we find a rose growing on a fig tree? Or do
horses generate rabbits? Neither then do humans generate anything but humans.
Regarding the question as to when the immortal soul is joined to
this individual human in his mother's womb, there may still be different views,
but it is undeniable that God intends to infuse the human soul (if He has not
already done so) into this incipient human life. And to snuff it out willfully
is a crime against the Creator. It is also a crime against the human who has
been killed.
It is also certain moral teaching of Catholic theology that if
someone is certain that there may possibly be someone alive in a certain place
then he cannot act in such a way as to endanger the lives of the persons who
might be there. One cannot follow a probable opinion, but one must rather take
the safer course when it is a question of endangering someone's life, even
though we are not certain that a person is so endangered. To not take the safer
course, even though it may turn out later that no one was present, one still
commits a mortal sin guilty of hellfire for not having taken the safer course.
For example, one may not start rolling rocks down a hillside which could cause
death to anyone who may be at the bottom even when one has an opinion that
there probably is no one in the path of the rockslide. One must in this case
take the safer course and not endanger the life of anyone who might be there.
One could only start such a rockslide if one were certain that no one was
there. So too one may not commit abortion on an opinion that says maybe the
person in the womb has not yet got a human soul and therefore it is not murder.
Because, like the example above, one cannot follow even a probable opinion in
this matter, but one must take the safer course and not endanger the human life
and the immortal soul of the baby in the womb.
Furthermore, even if it ever became certain at some future time
that the fertilized egg did not yet have an immortal soul during the first
stage of its development, still abortion is a grave sin worthy of hellfire,
since it is a serious crime against God the Creator who clearly intended to
give this human being an immortal soul.
So mothers and doctors and legislators are still under strict
obligations by their very office, to protect the baby in the womb, from the
first moment of conception until it is born, under pain of mortal sin. And
those who procure abortions, including those who pay for them, at whatever
stage of life of the baby in the womb, those same abortionists are
excommunicated ipso facto.
Answer to Question 3.
In response to those who may affirm after reading all this (even
though they may have some high office or university degree) still say that we
Catholics or we Christians or we believers cannot impose our opinion or
morality on others, we give the following answer:
To see the fallacy of this argument for not protecting the
unborn, let us transfer the argument by considering excluding from protection
of the civil authorities, the Jews or members of the Liberal party, or simply
anyone who dares to speak out against injustice, or anyone or any group simply
who is unpopular. Then the charter of rights, then the law of the land, would
read as follows: "All persons are prohibited by law from being killed except
the following: Jews, and members of the Liberal party (or any individual or
group considered undesirable by anyone else). How would Jews feel then? How
would members of the Liberal party feel about this? Would they be secure if we
told them that we really can't impose our morality on others who feel that all
the evils in Canada are caused by the Jews or by the Liberals or by any group
which is simply unpopular?
Either we will not discriminate against the unborn, by giving
them the full protection of the law and the enforcement of such laws by the
civil authorities who are authorized to enforce the law, or we open the door to
allowing any other group or individual to be butchered savagely by those who
are more powerful. It is the beginning of the end of rule by law. It is the
beginning of the end of civilization. It won't take very long, as history is
measured, for complete anarchy and bloodshed and revolution to sweep our
country. The hour is late. Let us wake up before it is too late.
Answer to Question 4.
The objection is raised that we live in a pluralistic society
and it is against the principles of such a society to speak of God or morality
or religion as this seems wrong and intolerant.
We must either be for God or against Him. We must be for Jesus
Christ or against Him. We must acknowledge Him before men or He will not
acknowledge us before His Father, that is, for non-profession of our faith we
would be guilty of hellfire. On Judgment Day we cannot plead our negligence
toward God in this matter of protecting our defenseless brothers by saying that
there were others in our society, a few or many, who did not believe in God or
who did not believe in Jesus Christ, so we could not speak out lest we lose our
wealth or position or honor through the evilness of other men. The Martyrs gave
up their lives rather than deny Christ. What danger are we in now compared to
theirs? But if we don't act now, then in a few years we may well be asked to
formally deny Christ, to deny the existence of God, or forfeit our lives.
Our Lady said that militant atheism would enslave the whole
world if we did not heed Her requests. It will spread its errors throughout the
whole world if we do not listen to Her in time. Already we see how far the
militant atheists and the Secular Humanists, who are allies of the militant
atheists, have succeeded. Little by little, God and our God-given rights have
been excluded from being publicly recognized and protected within Canada,
resulting in sixty-five thousand murders a year through abortion. In the U.S.A.
one and a half million murders a year by abortion are the result of effectively
excluding God from the public life of America. If we do not speak up and stand
up and fight this creeping militant atheism in our midst now, it will become
bolder and even more aggressive, and soon we shall ourselves become slaves of
the atheistic tyrants.
To answer the question simply then, either the militant atheists
and the Secular Humanists will impose his morality, his beliefs, and his
criminal injustices on us throughout Canada and the U.S.A., first by subverting
our laws, institutions and customs, and when enough subversion has gone on,
then, by force of arms through revolution and invasion, we will have their
religion honoring Satan imposed upon us. Or else we will turn back to God and
to Jesus Christ, the King of our society, and acknowledge Him publicly not only
in our Churches but also throughout our cities, towns and villages, in our
legislatures, courts and schools. We will acknowledge Him by public
demonstrations of faith in our streets as well as in our family circles and in
the privacy of our own rooms. Not only will we acknowledge Him with
nice-sounding phrases, but effectively showing in our actions in the schools,
courts, and governments, that we do as a nation give our full allegiance and
loyalty above all to God our Creator and Jesus Christ our King and Savior.
Either the militant atheists and the Secular Humanists will
enslave us under the oppressive yoke of their supposed non-religion (which is
really the forerunner of the large religion of Satan to be headed by his chosen
one, the Antichrist) or we will bear the sweet yoke of Jesus Christ. There are
only two bases on which to build a society. Either we build a society based on
the love of God or else we build one on the love of mankind excluding God, this
latter being idolatry of self and it puts us into bondage to Satan. St.
Augustine, in the City of God, which he wrote long ago, shows us this, and the
same is still true today. It is up to us. Either you will be for Jesus Christ
or against Him. You cannot sit on the fence. As Jesus said: "He who is not with
Me is against Me, and he who does not gather with me scatters." (Matt. 12:30).
We will be one country under God, or we will deny God in
practice if not in theory, by our laws which are so negligent in their wording
as to discriminate against the unborn. Will we say to Pilate today, as the
democratic crowd did of old, "We have no king but Caesar."? Will we say, in
effect, that we only acknowledge civil authority, but we do not acknowledge
that civil authority comes from God and is answerable to Him. What we would be
saying if we do not acknowledge Christ the King openly, is that we prefer to
have the manipulators of public opinion, rather than God, rule over us.
A Final Word
We pray and hope that priests and bishops will continue to speak
out clearly about the duty of citizens and the duty of lawmakers, and the duty
of doctors, especially those who vote on committees at hospitals, to not allow
one abortion. We pray that it will be clearly understood by all that to not do
their duty in this matter, no matter what pressure is applied to them, to vote
in favor of this crime in general or in specific instances, is a mortal sin and
worthy of hellfire, even though they themselves may not be the ones to apply
the knife to put to death the babies.
But should other leaders be found to quiet the consciences of
those who may be uneasy and begin to fear for their salvation, let all
concerned know that the judgment of God will still be executed upon them if
they do not effectively change. And to the excuse that those legislators may
offer to God, that some educated people or even some clergymen reassured us
that we could vote in favor of not protecting the unborn, will not God answer
that those clergy were blind and leaders of the blind and both of you will fall
into the pit? We pray God that no such persons among the clergy be found in
Canada today. "Be gone from Me, accursed to eternal fire," are indeed
terrifying words to hear from God.
To those who would say to God on Judgment Day, "But we believed
some clergy who told us that we could vote this way." Will not God answer, "I
warned you that scandals would come and woe to the world because of them, but
you are still guilty because you did not inform your conscience according to
the teaching of My Church, but chose to follow the false opinions of bad
clergy. You knew where to find the teaching of My Church, but you chose to
remain ignorant. When someone brought this to your attention, did you not
choose not to examine it lest you might be obliged to follow what I teach?"
Will He not then say, "You have been willfully blind and there are none so
blind as those who will not see. Be gone from Me into eternal fire."
Pray then, especially the Rosary, that this error will be seen
for what it is. Pray before it is too late.
Return to Table of Contents
|
|
Printer friendly
|
|