Thursday, 9 February 2012

Jesuit University Places Tenure Ahead Of Souls

Dr. Daniel Maguire

Have the Jesuits somehow fallen prey to Satan and are they being used by Satan to destroy the Church from within? This may seem like a huge generalisation but the number of incidents seems to support this theory. I have on two previous occasions written about my concerns that, so often, the source of much of the dissidence within the Church comes from Theologians and Priests who are from Jesuit Universities. I wrote about this is in two of my previous post’s, one titled Catholic Q Mass – Jesuit Folly and, the other, “Jesuit University: Dissent, Sacrilege, Support for Same-Sex Marriage”.

Sadly, today again I read of a Theology Professor, from Marquette University, making various controversial statements that contradicts and openly attacks Church teaching, while the Jesuit University defends his actions.

Marquette University is definitely a Jesuit University. The “About Marquette” page, on the Marquette University website, reads:

Marquette is a Catholic, Jesuit university in Milwaukee, Wis., dedicated to serving God by serving our students and contributing to the advancement of knowledge.[i]

On the 30th of January 2012, Dr. Daniel Maguire, a Theology Professor of the Marquette University, wrote this letter to the New York Times:

[My emphasis – Bold and/or Underlined]
To the Editor:

Traditional Catholic teaching rests on a tripod, including the hierarchy, the theologians and the sensus fidelium, the experience-fed wisdom of the laity. These three sources of teaching are, as Cardinal Avery Dulles said, “complementary and mutually corrective.” An accurate look at Catholic teaching on contraception today shows strong support for the position that contraception is not only permissible but even mandatory in many cases.

The American bishops are at odds with other bishops in the Catholic world, with the vast majority of Catholic theologians and with 98 percent of the Catholic laity who have used contraceptives. They are even at odds with Pope Benedict XVI, who has approved the use of condoms “in the intention of reducing the risk of infection.” That concession logically ended the taboo on condoms since it said health care concerns can require the use of condoms. [Anyone who follows the news, or who read the book Light of the World, knows that this was definitely not what Pope Benedict XVI said. In fact, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith issued a statement to correct any incorrect interpretations of Pope Benedict XVI’s statement in Light of the World.]

The bishops’ claim that their religious freedom is threatened is bogus. The threat is to the religious freedom of their employees and to the conscientious freedom of the diverse public they serve in their tax-supported institutions.

Milwaukee, Jan. 30, 2012[ii]

I fail to understand how anyone, with even an iota of intelligence, can possibly claim that the Obama Healthcare bill is not an attack on religious freedom. As a Catholic, I do not believe in the use of contraception or in abortion. If I am forced to provide contraception or abortion to others, against my conscience, this is most certainly an attack on my religious freedom, regardless of whether you agree with my belief in this regard or not. This is not rocket science. 

Dr. Maguire is well known for his many controversial statements. In 2007, Dr. Maguire made statements, in two pamphlets that he published, that “abortion, contraception and same-sex marriage are morally permissible under Catholic doctrine.[iii] (What nonsense!) In addition, Dr. Maguire is on record for stating that he does not believe that Jesus died for our sins.

We sat in Maguire’s living room as he told this story. I noticed a wilted Easter lily but not a single religious image or crucifix. Maguire said he doesn’t believe Jesus died for our sins and called it heresy that makes God look like a sadistic monster. Jesus died for standing up to the unjust and exploitative Roman Empire, he said.[iv]

I fail to understand why a Catholic University would permit this person to continue to teach at the University. I cannot begin to comprehend the harm that this man must be doing. However, despite the havoc that this man is creating, the University actually defends Dr. Maguire on the basis of him having tenure at the University. (You can read the nonsensical response from Marquette University here.)

It’s amazing that tenure is deemed of greater importance than the hundreds of students that he is misleading with his false teaching. Wise move (NOT) by the Jesuit University! Allow this man to teach his flawed academic views, with no thought for his students, who are at risk of falling prey to his erroneous teaching and, as a result, these students are in danger of being led straight to hell. All because this man's tenure is more important than the souls of his students.

[i] Marquette University Website, About Page, Recovered Feb 9, 2012
[ii] New York Times, The Church and the Birth Control Ruling, Feb 5, 2012
[iii] Campus Notes, Theology Professor Lauds HHS Mandate, Says Pope Supports Condoms, Feb 9, 2012
[iv] Ibid

1 comment:

  1. Actually, the history of the church is filled with many heretics like Maguire.

    It is obvious, from what you say, that he lacks orthodoxy, that he is a pretender, pretending to be what he is not; not being Catholic. It is obvious that his university cannot be taken seriously.

    It is also obvious that Maguire has not carefully read nor understood Pope Benedict XVI regarding the use of condoms. Obviously, Maguire lacks certain abilities and skills, especially lacking in comprehension.

    Without going too far, the man also does not understand that the Church follows an orthodox line and has done this for 2000+ years. She has faced all the heretics, their twists and snaking around every bit of theological thinking. There is nothing new under the sun and the Church is hardly likely to kow-tow to this man's thinking or will she kow- tow to one hundred thousand thousand of these conspirators.

    Personally, I think the Jesuits may rather aghast, having nothing important to say, rather embarrassingly hiding behind a flimsy excuse, labelling the man’s status alongside the right of tenure.

    I guess that, here, they too may be giving credit to manure by erroneously confusing the word with tenure.