From Today’s Gospel Mark 10:15
For my “personal well-being“, why don’t I just “fly away” “behind the appearances of religiosity and love for the Church” and accept Bishop Zurek’s governing “by clericalism”;…
…besides, is there really anything my posts can do to change Bishop Zurek if he isn’t already aware of the duplicity I see when he exercises his God given power without humility but with a detached and haughty attitude;…
… also, can it not be argued that my posting has actually had the opposite desired effect of stoking up his clericalism, and instead of making him more of a servant of the People of God who washes the feet of my brothers and sisters, he has become more of a master who crushes them under his feet;…
…furthermore, hasn’t Pope Francis’s exhortation to “remain vigilant towards the “spiritual worldliness” of clericalism” caused me to appear as one the Holy Father describes as being “absorbed in the climate of criticism and anger that one breathes around, instead of being the kind of people who, with evangelical simplicity and meekness, with kindness and respect, help their brothers and sisters to come out of the quicksand of intolerance”; …
…nonetheless, given all of these good arguments for why I should accept Bishop Zurek’s clericalism, doesn’t my conscience still tell me, “It’s the Kingdom of God, not Bishop Zurek’s clericalism that you need to accept;…
…and you’re not to accept the Kingdom of God as a rational adult seeking personal well-being, but as a child: i.e., in total dependence upon and obedience to the gospel”;…
47. The Church consistently reminds us that “the dignity of every human being has an intrinsic character and is valid from the moment of conception until natural death. It is precisely the affirmation of such dignity that is the inalienable prerequisite for the protection of a personal and social existence, and also the necessary condition for fraternity and social friendship to be realized among all the peoples of the earth.”[88] On account of the intangible value of human life, the Church’s magisterium has always spoken out against abortion. In this regard, Pope St. John Paul II writes: “Among all the crimes which can be committed against life, procured abortion has characteristics making it particularly serious and deplorable. […] But today, in many people’s consciences, the perception of its gravity has become progressively obscured. The acceptance of abortion in the popular mind, in behavior, and even in law itself is a telling sign of an extremely dangerous crisis of the moral sense, which is becoming more and more incapable of distinguishing between good and evil, even when the fundamental right to life is at stake. Given such a grave situation, we need now more than ever to have the courage to look the truth in the eye and to call things by their proper name, without yielding to convenient compromises or to the temptation of self-deception. In this regard, the reproach of the Prophet is extremely straightforward: ‘Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness’ (Is. 5:20). Especially in the case of abortion, there is a widespread use of ambiguous terminology, such as ‘interruption of pregnancy,’ which tends to hide abortion’s true nature and to attenuate its seriousness in public opinion. Perhaps this linguistic phenomenon is itself a symptom of an uneasiness of conscience. But no word has the power to change the reality of things: procured abortion is the deliberate and direct killing, by whatever means it is carried out, of a human being in the initial phase of his or her existence, extending from conception to birth.”[89] Unborn children are, thus, “the most defenseless and innocent among us. Nowadays, efforts are made to deny them their human dignity and to do with them whatever one pleases, taking their lives and passing laws preventing anyone from standing in the way of this.” [90]It must, therefore, be stated with all force and clarity, even in our time, that “this defense of unborn life is closely linked to the defense of each and every other human right. It involves the conviction that a human being is always sacred and inviolable, in any situation and at every stage of development. Human beings are ends in themselves and never a means of resolving other problems. Once this conviction disappears, so do solid and lasting foundations for the defense of human rights, which would always be subject to the passing whims of the powers that be. Reason alone is sufficient to recognize the inviolable value of each single human life, but if we also look at the issue from the standpoint of faith, ‘every violation of the personal dignity of the human being cries out in vengeance to God and is an offense against the Creator of the individual.’”[91]In this context, it is worth recalling St. Teresa of Calcutta’s generous and courageous commitment to the defense of every person conceived.
PARAGRAPH 47 of Declaration of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith “Dignitas Infinita” on Human Dignity
…accordingly, given the grave situations such as abortion in our world today, don’t I “need now more than ever to have the courage to look the truth in the eye and to call things” in my local Church, such as clericalism, “by their proper name, without yielding to convenient compromises or to the temptation of self-deception”…
We have to accept that technological products are not neutral, for they create a framework which ends up conditioning lifestyles and shaping social possibilities along the lines dictated by the interests of certain powerful groups.
From Paragraph 107 of ENCYCLICAL LETTER LAUDATO SI’ OF THE HOLY FATHER FRANCIS ON CARE FOR OUR COMMON HOME
…subsequently, isn’t the only thing about Bishop Zurek’s clericalism I have to accept is that it is not neutral, for doesn’t it “create a framework which ends up conditioning lifestyles and shaping social possibilities along the lines dictated by the interests of certain powerful groups”, …
…and isn’t that something from which I can’t just “fly away”❓