The Independent News Source
NCR on Kindle - NCR classifieds - YouTube - Twitter - Facebook - Email Alerts - RSS
Printer-friendly version
PDF versionPushing away the marginalized to reach out to the fringe
by Jamie L Manson on Jan. 04, 2012
If Cardinal Francis George has proven anything over these past few weeks, it's not that he can tell the difference between white pride and gay pride.
When the cardinal attempted to make a connection between those fighting for equal rights for LGBT persons and those fighting for the right to assert the supremacy of the white race, he also demonstrated that he needs a history lesson.
By looking at the history of the KKK, he might discover a cautionary tale suited to a hierarchy that continues to reach out to fringe conservative groups to find solidarity in the culture wars.
What is often overlooked about the Ku Klux Klan is that they view themselves as a deeply Christian organization. Their beliefs are grounded in biblical literalism (according to their bible, of course, God's chosen people are of European descent). Their national director is an evangelical pastor. The banner on their website declares that they are "loving the family."
Perhaps most remarkably, they insist that their cross burnings are in fact "cross lightings" that "symbolizes the Light of Christ dispelling darkness and ignorance" and "reminds us of the cleansing 'fire' of Christ that cleanses evil from our land."
In its earlier incarnations, the Klan targeted Catholics primarily because of the church's support of immigrants and its allegiance to a "Roman dictator." Although it is unclear whether a Catholic was ever lynched, in the 1920s, a priest was shot dead by a high-ranking KKK member for officiating at a wedding of a Hispanic man and a white woman.
But the intolerance of Catholics changed in 1974. Facing dwindling numbers of Protestant white supremacists, David Duke, leader of the Knights of the Ku Klux Klan, extended an invitation to Catholics -- provided, of course, that they were white.
Welcoming Catholics into the Klan not only helped to make the organization more mainstream, it also paid off in Duke's political career. When Duke won his bid for the Louisiana House of Representatives, he was elected in a district that was 80 percent Catholic. Two years later, in 1991, he ran for governor of the heavily Catholic state. The race was so close it forced a run-off election in which incumbent Gov. Edwin Edwards narrowly defeated Duke.
Duke managed to tap into an extreme segment of the Catholic laity who were intolerant of nonwhites and who believed Christian values can and should cleanse our godless culture.
The irony of Cardinal George's statement is that he likened LGBT persons to a fringe group of evangelical Christians during a time when the hierarchy appears to be bending over backward to appeal to fringe groups of evangelical Catholics and Christians.
Subscribe to NCR
Want to read more about important issues in the life of the Church? A subscription to NCR will keep you up to date and informed.
Witness the development of the new ordinariate for Anglicans seeking asylum in the Roman Catholic Church. Facing dwindling numbers of priests and lay people in the United States and England, Pope Benedict XVI extended an invitation to the Catholic church to Anglicans -- provided, of course, that they opposed the ordination of women and the marriage of same-sex couples.
To make the transition smoother, the hierarchy put time, money and effort to develop an alternative system where entire Episcopal parishes could enter into communion with Rome en masse. There seems to be particular interest in the switch among Episcopalians in the conservative hotbeds in Texas -- like Houston, which will be the headquarters for the ordinariate.
It's remarkable how a hierarchy that routinely appeals to the unchangeable nature of its doctrine of the priesthood to defend its stance against women's ordination can become so flexible about its priesthood when reaching out to those who will help toe their misogynist line. It's extraordinary the lengths the hierarchy will take to welcome a fringe group of evangelical Episcopalians who support their anti-gay marriage agenda.
This welcoming of fringe figures is also glaringly obvious on an individual level. When Newt Gingrich expressed interest in joining the Catholic fold, Monsignor Walter Rossi gladly offered him seven months of personalized, weekly catechetical lessons.
Rossi is the rector of the Basilica of the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception in Washington, D.C., where Callista -- Gingrich's mistress-of-seven-years-turned-wife -- sings in the choir. Gingrich, known to have left both of his ex-wives while they were seriously ill, was awarded two annulments and a sacramental marriage by the hierarchy.
How did Newt repay the church leaders who welcomed him so warmly? By painting himself as the crusader who would realize the new evangelism's wildest dreams of restoring moral order through politics and politicians.
Gingrich vowed to set up a special commission to examine the myriad ways that liberties guaranteed to religious groups (think Christian ones) are being compromised by issues like mandated coverage for contraception, same-sex marriage rights and the overall secular destruction of our Christian society.
The real tragedy behind these stories is that the hierarchy is using its creativity, its money and, saddest of all, its sacraments to welcome individuals that will bolster its drive to exclude many of its baptized faithful.
The Roman Catholic Church is not like the KKK any more than LGBT people are like the KKK. However, there is a lesson to be learned from the story of David Duke's welcoming of fringe, conservative Catholics in an effort to save his organization, which was dying under the weight of its own moralism, antipathy and intolerance.
Our church was founded on Jesus' call to honor everyone's dignity as beloved children of God and to be one with the poor, the suffering and the outcast.
Today, we are watching our churches devolve into institutions that seek unity with those who share in certain unjust beliefs and solidarity with those who practice certain forms of discrimination.
A church that was founded to reach out to those on the margins is increasingly choosing to welcome only the fringe.
[Jamie L. Manson received her Master of Divinity degree from Yale Divinity School, where she studied Catholic theology and sexual ethics. Her columns for NCR earned her a first prize Catholic Press Association award for Best Column/Regular Commentary in 2010.]
| Editor's note: We can send you an email alert every time Jamie Manson's column, "Grace on the Margins," is posted to NCRonline.org. Go to this page and follow directions: Email alert sign-up. If you already receive email alerts from us, click on the "update my profile" button to add "Grace on the Margins" to your list. |
perhaps helpful within this
perhaps helpful within this historical and theological context, as in so very much, we may learn from reflecting on the great James Cone's latest book from Maryknoll's Orbis Books, titled "The Cross and the Lynching Tree" well summarized and reviewed here by Notre Dame's Andrew Prevot
http://catholicbooksreview.org/2011/cone2.htm
"The Roman Catholic Church is
"The Roman Catholic Church is not like the KKK any more than LGBT people are like the KKK."
Since 1979, tell it to Fr. Hans Kung, Friar Leonardo Boff, Fr. Balasuriya, Fr. Anthony De Mello (posthumously), Fr. Jon Sobrino, and myriad others, to many now to remember; tell it to Sr. Elizabeth A. Johnson and so many more we have forgotten.
Since 1979 the institution deconstructs to a point precisely like the KKK in its immoral, violent, unjust, irrational rage.
Yet the Roman Catholic Church, most honestly incarnate in the humble and in the poor and the abandoned and the voiceless and the powerless and forgotten ones unheard, is not like the KKK, but the victims of the KKK.
Charles, in my view, your
Charles, in my view, your comment, "Yet the Roman Catholic Church, most honestly incarnate in the humble and in the poor and the abandoned and the voiceless and the powerless and forgotten ones unheard, is not like the KKK, but the victims of the KKK," says it all. You clearly and articulately distinguish the real Roman Catholic Church ["......the humble, the poor, the abandoned, voiceless and powerless and forgotten ones unheard'] as distinct and separate from the hierarchical institutional Roman Catholic Church. The hierarchical institutional church is comparable to the KKK as a fringe group of radical right-wingers, while the Body of Christ [the poor and downtrodden, etc.] are the victims of these fanatics. Such a hierarchy has nothing to do with Jesus as the Body of Christ ["the People of God"] anymore than does the KKK.
Very well said, Charles, and thank you Jamie for bringing this to everyone's attention.
Actually, the man said "you
Actually, the man said "you don't want them to become like the KKK...." "Don't want them to become" -- that means they're not like the KKK. Not like. The unsimile may have been unfortunate, but the grammar is all on the cardinal's side. And, according to the statistics, heterosexuals are not the fringe group out there.
Connie, technically you are
Connie, technically you are correct. But, I would argue that placing the LGBT community in the same sentence as a group as hateful as the KKK is more than unfortuate. I say this for two reasons; one is that, unfortunately, most lisen in a way that does not to pick up the subtlety of such a distinction. And, all to often, in this world of inflamatory language, the intent is to lead the listener to such a parallel and then deny any intent by explaining the techical gramatical structure of the sentence. The other reason is that, rightfully, the bishop is held to a higher standard. And, I am unaware of his apologizing for any unintended cosequences that such a statement can bring.
There is so much hate being promoted by our pundits and to see our church leaders show such insensitivity tends to place them in the same box of the hate-promoted pundits. I believe that this is both sad and serious.
Yours in Christ,
John David
The hateful "LGBT community"
The hateful "LGBT community" may not be violent but it is still exclusively harmful.All homo- and trans-sexual tendencies humans may have need to be suppressed,and a "community" seeking to facilitate evasion of that obligation hurts everyone in it and everyone exposed to it.One does not help those afflicted by such tendencies by dealing with them through the distorted prism those tendencies create,but by forcing the disregard of those aspects for their better natures.
Louis, I know from you other
Louis, I know from you other posts that you feel very stronly about the LGBT community, but this latest seems to be the beginning of a justification for an ungodly oppression of the LGBT community. It is siminlar to what was used to justify some of the horrors perputrated by some of the missionaries of yesteryear. It truly frightens me.
Yours in Christ,
John David
Louis, I am not quite sure
Louis,
I am not quite sure just what you are saying. I think you are saying that the LGBT community is hateful and harmful (to its members? to the larger community?), and those who are LGBT are actually afflicted and their tendencies must be suppressed (by harmful reparative therapy? by electroshock? by lobotomies? by imprisonment? by other means?).
Your comments reveal much more about yourself than they do about those of us who are LGBT. It has become quite clear in the last sixty plus years through psychological and sociological studies and through the lives of LGBT people, that being LGBT is not a psychological illness or threat to society, and that LGBT people are often as effective and as loving and positive at parenting as the best of straight people. It has become clear that same sex relationships are often quite positive for both the partners and for society as a whole. It has also become clear that attempts to suppress and/or change the sexual orientation of LGBT people are not only destructive to LGBT people, but also unsuccessful as well.
LGBT people are often quite angry at those people in power (including Catholic bishops) who have attempted to change and destroy them and have opposed their civil rights and have lied about them in their attempts - just as those who have been physically sexually abused have been quite angry at their oppressors. In fact, the opposition to the sexuality of LGBT people is a form of psychological sexual abuse which is quite harmful, and has led to self hatred and suicide in way too many people.
The anger is not hatefulness. The anger is healthy, just as the anger of those who are oppressed for any other reason and of those who who have been sexually abused is healthy. Better to be angry than to be depressed and suicidal and self destructive. Being angry is the first step towards action, and acceptance, and even forgiveness. The many LGBT people I know, are living quite productive and positive lives and are not stuck in their anger.
George Weinberg, in his book Society and the Healthy Homosexual starts off his first chapter, entitled Homophobia, by saying "I would never consider a patient healthy unless he has overcome his prejudice against homosexuality...The person who belittles homosexuals with evident enjoyment is at the very least telling me that he wants to establish his own sense of importance through contrast with other people - a tenuous business."
I am not the only person who has been struck by the number of publicly and privately antigay people who have in time been revealed to be privately acting on their homosexual impulses. It is an example of the person who is protesting too much. That person is often attempting to hide their inner sexuality from not only themselves, but from the world at large. When one sees a person who is not just passingly against homosexuality, but who is very strident about their antipathy, one may well wonder just why that person is so strident.
That is why I wonder about the Roman Catholic bishops, from pope on down, who find it so important to oppose civil protections for LGBT people and the legalization of civil same sex marriages by organizing parish committees, ordering sermons, sending DVDs, secretly funding the National Organization of Marriage in its campaigns of lies, claiming that same sex parents do emotional violence to the children they raise, and suspending priests who oppose their messages. If those same bishops expended the same level of effort in fighting poverty, in addressing the dangers of climate change, in pushing for universal health care, in opposing unjust wars, one might be able to say they were at least not fixated to the point of obsession about this one issue.
Both John David and John
Both John David and John Patrick speak to your vehemence and vitriol about any post which has any positive or compassionate reference to the subject of homosexuality or LGBT. Honestly, and with all charity Louis, your posts are evidence of anything but a loving attitude. I have no idea where you have gotten the notion or idea that Jesus would approve of such an attitude as yours and I do not recall anywhere in the teachings of Jesus that reflect as such towards those who are homosexuals. You can quote me of His outrage at the money changers, the woman caught in adultery, etc., etc., but homosexuality is not a recent discovery or activity, so why did He not address it? I humbly suggest some further reading on your part in professional journals related to the topic and once you have realized that homosexuality is not a choice then you will arrive at the following conclusions, a) God created them lesbian gay, bisexual and transgender, b) thus they are created in His image c) they are your brothers and sisters d) since it is in their nature to be attracted to the same gender then they are acting naturally....hence, the sin against nature occurs when one chooses to acting contrary to it. Finally, why would you condemn someone in the LGBT community to perpetual chastity? Somehow I sense your own desires might be so repulsive to you that the only way you can resist them is to attack them in others.....
Update. On the 7th of this
Update. On the 7th of this month, Cardinal George did apologize for his comment. I was pleased that his apology went beyond the standard "to whom my comments may have injured". I would like to think tha this is a begining of a more respectful dialogue.
Great, Connie. I thought I
Great, Connie. I thought I was the only rational person that immediatly made that distinction. As you can see, it's not what other wish to correctly read as it spoils their fun being miserable.
Give me a break. You are
Give me a break. You are supporting activists who want to break up Masses?
If they wanted to break up
If they wanted to break up Mass, why did they come to an agreement with the pastor of the church to change the time of the parade? The paraders seem to be the reasonable, accommodating, human side of this debate.
Bravo Jamie LGTB NCR staff
Bravo Jamie
LGTB NCR staff and readers will now reembrace the 1998 American Psychological Association's charism in its Psychological Bulletin with its insigtful engendering of vocabulizations empowered by a value neutral adult child sex. We strive for unlimited hospitality with our lesbian sisters as they intersectionize the delectible 13 year old exploring eroticism with her ardent adult mentor in the Vagina Monologues so prominently feautred in our progressive Jesuit youth paradigm.
Lets all rejoice at the NCR's exquisite confrontation of the homophobic modality of repressive heirarchy.
Gee Whiz, Fr. Fontaine, have
Gee Whiz, Fr. Fontaine, have you been practicing the new and improved Mass too much? Your erudite verbiage is consubstantial to your intentional obfuscation of issues. You transsubtantiate the issue of LGBT rights to include pedophilia. I surmise you have confected your own straw man (homo balinbarnus) and counter his arguments with great facility.
And I do rejoice that NCR, its readers, and its staff can be exquisite in their confrontation with those who think that rules are more valuable than people. While our Lord notes that rules are important, Jesus chooses compassion over the dictates of the Father regularly in all Gospels. Here's to both of us praying on that.
Matt Connolly
Amen! ...well said,
Amen! ...well said, Jamie. This is a distressing direction within the 'reform of the reform' hierarchical notion of "evangelization" which actively seeks the most mean-spirited and exclusive individuals and groups under the banner of "real" Catholicism. Vatican sheep-stealing within the Anglican communion specifically sought out those who couldn't get along within their own faith family because they don't like anyone outside of their ultra-conservative tribe.
.
The GOP-TP primary circus itself is a sad commentary on how two professed Catholic Christians have specifically targeted both the poor and minorities in their appeal to win votes. Gingrich proudly proclaimed his Dickensian desire to end child labor laws and put poor children to work as janitors in public schools, while simultaneously declaring that as president he would have "federal marshals round-up 'activist' judges" who defend the marginalized.
.
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57335118-503544/newt-gingrich-poo...
.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/12/19/1046926/-Gingrich-Just-the-Late...
.
Mr. 'More-Catholic-than-the-pope, I-go-only-to-a-Latin-Mass' Santorum, specifically named "blacks" in his rant about welfare/Medicaid, as if African Americans are disproportionately in poverty by choice. Both men, like Cardinal George himself, et al., demonize the LGBT community at every available opportunity in the most inflammatory of terms and comparisons.
.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/03/rick-santorum-entitlements-blac...
.
The discriminatory NC Family Policy Council, actively supported by the bishops of Charlotte and Raleigh, recently used gun-cross-hair imagery in the Winter 2012 edition of their publication to insinuate that the LGBT community was "gunning" for heterosexual marriage — the implied message for the violent fringe is to 'get them' before they 'get us'. The article and image were in support of a state amendment to ban same-sex unions over and above what current law already bans ...and zealots know full-well that suggestive violent imagery works to intimidate minorities while inciting a religious fringe to, in the name of God, kill people they view as an 'evil' threat.
.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/12/29/north-carolina-gay-marriage-sni...
.
You called it correctly: "Pushing away the marginalized to reach out to the fringe" ...for an unholy purpose. Welcome to the Roman Catholic Church 2012.
.
http://www.religiondispatches.org/archive/politics/5534/in_2012_bishops_...
.
"Today, we are watching our
"Today, we are watching our churches devolve into institutions that seek unity with those who share in certain unjust beliefs and solidarity with those who practice certain forms of discrimination."
The Church discriminates against no one. Like Christ said all are called to go and sin no more. Now there are those who do not want to stop sinning and they then claim the Church discriminates against them. But the call to repentence is still there. The church still invites them in. But as long as their sin and pride keeps them out they will blame the church instead of themselves.
If they feel they are marginalized or discriminated against it is the love of their own sin, not the church that makes them feel that way.
It is difficult to discern
It is difficult to discern which "Anonymous" you are. In your comment you say "The Church discriminates against no one. Like Christ said all are called to go and sin no more."
----------
As a matter of fact, the Catholic Church hierarchy does discriminate, especially the USCCB, members of some state bishops' conferences, and several archdiocesan or diocesan ordinaries. This is especially true in aggressive attempts to derail or undo equality and civil rights towards persons of homosexual orientation and their families. I refer to actions by the Archbishop of Minneapolis-St.Paul in recent weeks to form ad hoc committees at the parish level and the recitation of a prayer he wrote petitioning God's blessings for successful passage of a referendum vote barring same-gender marriage or civil unions during the Prayers of the Faithful at all Masses in the archdiocese. The action by Cardinal George in the matter of the Chicago Pride Parade is disgraceful and unwarranted, especially since the matter was quickly resolved by the parade organizers working with the local pastor and city representatives.
In your words, "...all are called to go and sin no more," you are in effect acting as judge and jury claiming that a worldwide community is composed of sinful persons...people you don't know, never met, or not privy to their lived personal or shared lives.
Much, if not all, of the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church, including that held forth as authentic teaching by the magesterium, is structured around and built upon Thomistic philosophy and the premise of "Natural Law" set forth by St. Thomas Aquinas. This is especially true of church teaching in matters of human sexuality and its expression.
Roman Catholics, including the hierarchy, MUST be aware that that which was proposed by St. Thomas Aquinas was based upon his experience, studies and his understanding of the world about him. He was not privy to later findings in biology and the physical sciences such as the natural existence of homosexuality and homosexual activity in the animal kingdom, nor unisex or the changes in sexuality -- female to male or male to female -- in some species of animals and microorganisms in their life cycles.
We must be mindful that rules of logic stipulate that propositions advanced or built upon false, questionable, suspect or undetermined premises may lack truth, or at least be questionable, suspect or undetermined.
Since past and current Catholic church teachings on matters of sexuality, and human sexuality in particular, still refer to outdated and questionable premises of Thomistic Natural Law, they are at least suspect and questionable as foundations for the rightful formation of personal conscience and assessment of sinfulness, morality, and social order.
Commenting on paragraph #16 of the "Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World Gaudium et Spes", promulgated by Pope Paul VI, December 7, 1965, , theologian Fr. Joseph Ratzinger (now Pope Benedict XVI), as chair of dogmatic theology, University of Tubingen, Germany, wrote in 1968:
Over the pope as the expression of the binding claim of ecclesiastical authority, there still stands one's own conscience, which must be obeyed above all else, if necessary even against the requirement of ecclesiastical authority. This emphasis on the individual, whose conscience confronts him with a supreme and ultimate tribunal, and one which in the last resort is beyond the claim of external social groups, even of the official church, also establishes a principle in opposition to increasing totalitarianism.
Bill
The KKK are as Christian as
The KKK are as Christian as "Catholics for Choice". I.e. not Christians at all
Reading some of these
Reading some of these comments, I see that the knee-jerk anti-Jamie commenters are out in force. Hey -- did any of you even read the column?
Sheesh!
--Andy Jo--
The author at the beginning
The author at the beginning of the article shows contempt for Catholic teaching, indeed for the natural law when she gives away her bias by saying: "those fighting for equal rights for LGBT persons". By equal rights it is clear she supports the oxymoron of homosexual marriage.
What a disgraceful newspaper this is!
Dear PaulF, Much, if not all,
Dear PaulF,
Much, if not all, of the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church, including that held forth as authentic teaching by the magesterium, is structured around and built upon Thomistic philosophy and the premise of "Natural Law" set forth by St. Thomas Aquinas. This is especially true of church teaching in matters of human sexuality and its expression.
Roman Catholics, including the hierarchy, MUST be aware that that which was proposed by St. Thomas Aquinas was based upon his experience, studies and his understanding of the world about him. He was not privy to later findings in biology and the physical sciences such as the natural existence of homosexuality and homosexual activity in the animal kingdom, nor unisex or the changes in sexuality -- female to male or male to female -- in some species of animals and microorganisms in their life cycles.
We must be mindful that rules of logic stipulate that propositions advanced or built upon false, questionable, suspect or undetermined premises may lack truth, or at least be questionable, suspect or undetermined.
Since past and current Catholic Church teachings on matters of sexuality, and human sexuality in particular, still refer to outdated and questionable premises of Thomistic Natural Law, they are at least suspect and questionable as foundations for the rightful formation of personal conscience and assessment of sinfulness, morality, and social order.
Natural law branches Eternal
Natural law branches Eternal Law where the buck stops. Man is designed by God in His Eternal Law to procreate.
What??? Please refer to the
What???
Please refer to the two creation stories in Genesis, especially that part of creating a "companion" for Adam utilizing a "rib from Adam." In that story, the first human "Adam" possessed paired male and female attributes which were split to form separate male and female beings or identities.
Using your assessment, as well as that alluded by some members of the Vatican and Roman Catholic hierarchy that God's creative purpose of male and female is for procreation, then the largest group of dissidents or non-conformists with God's eternal law (as you refer to it) are Roman Catholic clergy and hierarchy living and keeping within their vows of mandated celibacy.
Bill
Why then, Paul, are you
Why then, Paul, are you reading this noble Catholic newspaper at all?
Quo vadis?
Same sex attraction is a
Same sex attraction is a perversion/disorder. Wouldn't being "proud" of that be, in one sense, worse than being proud of something meaningless like skin color?
John, where are you a priest?
John, where are you a priest?
You must be a while
You must be a while heterosexual male.
Or, perhaps (just perhaps), you're a white, closeted, self-loathing gay male?
Can't help but wonder.
if you are a Catholic priest,
if you are a Catholic priest, I wonder how you would treat a LGBT person who came to you in the sacrament of reconciliation.....someone who is so intrinsically disordered must be particularly repugnant to you....I further wonder if you see yourself as Christ embracing the wounded and outcast, or rather as one who judges them......
What are equal rights for
What are equal rights for LGBT persons? If it is to be treated with respect as human persons, then I agree with the author. If you are talking about the "right" to engage in sinful activity or to live in same-sex "marriage" then you have not understood the Church's constant teaching (or at the very least you disagree with this teaching). I myself am gay, but I am liberated by the truth however difficult it may be. Please don't fight for my "right" to live in sexual union with a person of the same sex. Fight rather for my right to be seen as a child of God deserving of respect. And this exactly is what Cardinal George is doing. He is a good shepherd who loves all of his flock, but who does not capitulate to untruths.
Dude, your 'right' as a gay
Dude, your 'right' as a gay person [or a straight person] is to marry whomever you are in love with. As long as that 'right' is denied you, either by the state or a church, you are being denied something that is yours by virtue of your humanity. Any religious institution that denies you a basic human right cannot claim the title of Christian.
It is a 'truth' that some people are 'LGTB' and some people are 'straight'. That is the considered scientific conclusion based on evidence as we now know it. Cardinal George is NOT performing his pseudo-role as a 'good shepherd' when he acts and speaks in a way that ignores science and betrays the love of Jesus. When he acts and speaks that way, he is performing more in the role of a fakir or shaman and adds nothing positive to his position as priest in the Christian tradition. You are a 'child of God' regardless of what Cardinal George believes and because of the fact that you are a follower of Jesus. Cardinal George, in all his splendid robes and attended by his servile minions, can not come between you and your love of Jesus.
Marriage unites male to
Marriage unites male to female,and no one has the right to escape censure for calling anything else a marriage.There can never be a valid justification for any same-sex sexual activity and the total irrelevance of desire for such regardless of its cause must be stressed specifically to those attempting to justify gratifying such desire.Friends don't let friends start or stay in same-sex sexual relationships.
(I am not religious myself...but it is stupefying that anyone would deny that the unique importance to humanity of male-female relationships merits specific protection that no same-sex relationship can possibly deserve).
Complete nonsense. No one has
Complete nonsense. No one has the right to marry whomever they are in love with. I can't marry my mother, my sister, my cousin, multiple lovers etc. No marriage is not an all inclusive right to legalize whatever relationship seems attractive to people at the moment.
Marriage is not just about the people involved. It is a reflection of the Trinity and as such is to be open to the possibility of life as can only be accomplished between a man and a woman.
It may be a scientific fact that same sex attraction is inherit in some people, so what? The root of many sins is inherent in people, that does not make it right to act on those impulses. I have an inherent desire to mate with many women that does not make adultery ok. We are asked to resist sin, not glorify it, and let it define who we are.
Anonymous, don't be absurd.
Anonymous, don't be absurd. This is a discussion on marriage, not on incest, bestiality, polygamy, etc. We are talking about marriage and who has the legal and moral right to marry. All the examples you give are outside the realm of legality and morality. We need to constantly update our understanding of the purpose of marriage: when the human population needed to be increased, theologians taught that the purpose of marriage was procreation. Now that we have evolved intellectually and theologically, we understand that the purpose of marriage is to consummate a loving relationship between two committed individuals who are legally and morally free to marry. Obviously that does not include a person's mother, sister, dog, cat, etc. Be reasonable.
Jesus loved everyone, as you
Jesus loved everyone, as you say, but he did not condone sin! He didn't walk among us to advocate a feel-good free-for-all, he came to show us the way, through love. But we can't twist His message of love - he's calling all of us sinners to repentance, including those guilty of sexual immorality.
When you ask that others not
When you ask that others not fight for your right "to engage in sinful activity," you enter into a very dangerous area of politico-moral theology, or politico-moral enforcement. We have been through laws of miscegenation based on many people's understanding of the black races as belonging to the biblical Ham. We have witnessed slavery justified biblically in both Testaments with such citations as, "Slaves, obey your masters."
The Taliban demands strict adherence to Sharia law. How far shall we legislate biblical law? The Puritans went after dancing, card playing and even the external celebration of Christmas. Prohibition went after drinking, or at least selling alcohol. To say that there should be no public area open to anyone who opts for things that you consider sinful can quickly devolve into horrendous persecution. The church fully supported the Crusades and killed many Moslem citizens, ordinary people, in the process.
If homosexuality is not a sin, but an objective moral disorder - just as blindness is an objective physical disorder - then sinning while being homosexual is less of a sin than sinning while having no such moral disorder. That makes other sexual sins to be much more serious - such as practicing birth control, which is an entirely free-will act. Firing teachers, for example, for refusing to be tested for the use of birth control pills, etc. should be much more acceptable to you than the firing of homosexuals for acting out of an "objective disorder." Did not Jesus say in John's Gospel that the man born blind was sinless.
Your desire to close off all areas where sin can be committed would lead to a completely policed religious state, as in Saudi Arabia today. Your only hope would be that you always fall on the side of the police.
In light of this discussion,
In light of this discussion, how may we read the recent belated apology?
A public relations consultant's intervention?
Someone PASTORAL got to him?
Good questions, Charles, for
Good questions, Charles, for which I do not have answers.
I would love to see you
I would love to see you produce evidence that there is a growing Catholic demographic in the KKK. I seem to recall one yahoo who was a 'grand dragon' or some such who called Pope John Paul II a great man - and he was. When asked the name of the pastor of the Catholic church he frequented, he was unable to do so. And he admitted to having problems with the Catholic Church's stances on racial equality.
In fact, your charge is baseless, designed only to whip up discord and give the pro-choice 'Catholics' some sort of moral outrage they can chew on for a while. This is the tactic of the liberal wing in any organization. When they can't argue on merit, they use flawed logic and ad hominem attacks to give themselves legitimacy. From their bastion of smugness, they hope to shame opposition. Sorry, won't work.
I have no doubt that the rainbow sash folks - some of them not even Catholic - will show up at the Cardinal's church (probably on the Feast of the Epiphany) and disrupt the Mass and take communion. Because there is nothing like fighting for tolerance and acceptance by being intolerant yourself, right?
Why did Cardinal George make such an analogy? Frankly, I'm not sure. But to link a growing Catholic-KKK conspiracy is the sheerest height of folly and something that a person who earned the accolades and diplomas this author has garnered should not have stooped to champion in this commentary.
This is why I will not purchase this schismatic magazine.
I think Cardinal George made
I think Cardinal George made a mistake in comparing gay ideologues to the KKK, but gay ideologues do have a scary resemblance to the Jacobins of the French Revolution.
Post new comment