The following comes from a January 6 story written by Cardinal George in the Chicago archdiocese paper, Catholic New World.
At the beginning of the New Year, 2013, a law is being proposed in the Illinois General Assembly to change the legal definition of marriage in Illinois to accommodate those of the same sex who wish to “marry” one another. In this discussion, the Church will be portrayed as “anti-gay,” which is a difficult position to be in, particularly when families and the Church herself love those of their members who are same-sex oriented. What’s at stake in this legislative proposal and in the Church’s teaching on marriage?
Basically, the nature of marriage is not a religious question. Marriage comes to us from nature. Christ sanctifies marriage as a sacrament for the baptized, giving it significance beyond its natural reality; the State protects marriage because it is essential to family and to the common good of society. But neither Church nor State invented marriage, and neither can change its nature.
Nature and Nature’s God, to use the expression in the Declaration of Independence of our country, give the human species two mutually complementary sexes, able to transmit life through what the law has hitherto recognized as a marital union. Consummated sexual relations between a man and a woman are ideally based on mutual love and must always be based on mutual consent, if they are genuinely human actions. But no matter how strong a friendship or deep a love between persons of the same sex might be, it is physically impossible for two men, or two women, to consummate a marital union. Even in civil law, non-consummation of a marriage is reason for annulment.
Sexual relations between a man and a woman are naturally and necessarily different from sexual relations between same-sex partners. This truth is part of the common sense of the human race. It was true before the existence of either Church or State, and it will continue to be true when there is no State of Illinois and no United States of America. A proposal to change this truth about marriage in civil law is less a threat to religion than it is an affront to human reason and the common good of society. It means we are all to pretend to accept something we know is physically impossible. The Legislature might just as well repeal the law of gravity.
What is, then, at stake in this proposed legislation? What is certainly at stake is the natural relationship between parents and children. Children, even if they are loved and raised by those who are not their biological parents, want to know who their parents are, who are their natural family. The fascination with genealogical tables and the opening of adoption records are evidence of this desire to find oneself in a biological succession of generations. No honest “study” has disproved what we all know. Stable marriage between a husband and wife has safeguarded their children, surrounding them with familial love and creating the secure foundation for human flourishing. This natural desire, already weakened in a seemingly more and more promiscuous society, will no longer be privileged in civil law. It will be no more “normal” than any other “family” arrangement. If the nature of marriage is destroyed in civil law, the natural family goes with it.
As well, those who know the difference between marriage and same-sex arrangements will be regarded as bigots. This is where the religious question does come into play. Including “religious freedom” in the title of the proposed law recognizes that religious teaching based on natural truths will now be considered evidence of illegal discrimination and will be punishable by law. The title of the law is ironic if not disingenuous. Those who know that marriage is a union between a man and a woman for the sake of family will carry a social opprobrium that will make them unwelcome on most university faculties and on the editorial boards of major newspapers. They will be excluded from the entertainment industry. Their children and grandchildren will be taught in the government schools that their parents are unenlightened, the equivalent of misguided racists. Laws teach; they express accepted social values and most people go along with societal trends, even when majority opinion espouses immoral causes.
The legalization of abortion is a good example of how an immoral procedure that kills babies in their mother’s womb is first permitted legally in limited circumstances as a necessary evil and then moves in forty years to become a condition of human freedom, necessary to be preserved at all costs, an essential part of “reproductive health care.” We are on the same trajectory with marriage. Model laws creating same-sex unions as civil marriage have been part of legal education for decades. The media have engaged in a campaign on this issue for almost as long a time, desensitizing people to accept as normal something that had previously been recognized as problematic. We are at the end of a tremendous propaganda effort by those secure in their conviction that they are at the cutting edge of human development. But what we’re seeing is not particularly new. Two thousand years ago, the Church was born in a society with the values now being advanced as necessary for a fair society today.
Why this law? Since all the strictly legal consequences of natural marriage are already given to same-sex partners in civil unions, what is now at stake in this question for some homosexually oriented people is self-respect and full societal acceptance of their sexual activities. Because fair-minded people cannot approve of hatred or disdain of others, “same-sex marriage” becomes for many a well-intentioned and good-hearted response to help others be happy. But marriage is a public commitment with a responsibility that involves more than the personal happiness of two adults. Inventing “civil rights” that contradict natural rights does not solve a problem of personal unhappiness.
Some religious people have framed their acceptance of this proposed law as an exemplification of compassion, justice and inclusion. As attitudes, these sentiments have been used to justify everything from eugenics to euthanasia. If religion is to be more than sentiment, the moral content of these words has to be filled in from the truths of what human reason understands and God has revealed. Same-sex unions are incompatible with the teaching that has kept the Church united to her Lord for two thousand years.
The Catholic Church in this Archdiocese has consistently condemned violence or hatred of homosexually oriented men and women. Good pastoral practice encourages families to accept their children, no matter their sexual orientation, and not break relationships with them. The Archdiocese offers Mass and other spiritual help to those who live their homosexuality anonymously (Courage groups) and also to those who want to be publicly part of the gay community (AGLO, which celebrates its twenty-fifth anniversary this year). People live out their sexual identity in different fashions, but the Church consistently offers the means to live chastely in all circumstances, as the love of God both obliges and makes possible.
Finally, what is at stake in this proposed legislation was the subject of a few sentences in our Holy Father’s recent end of year address to his co-workers in Rome. Citing the Chief Rabbi of France, Gilles Bernheim, who recently spoke to the impact of the “philosophy of gender” as it affects proposed marriage laws in France, Pope Benedict commented: “The manipulation of nature, which we deplore today where our environment is concerned, now becomes man’s fundamental choice where he himself is concerned. From now on there is only the abstract human being, who chooses for himself what his nature is to be. Man and woman in their created state as complementary versions of what it means to be human are disputed. But if there is no pre-ordained duality of man and women in creation, then neither is the family any longer a reality established by creation. Likewise, the child has lost the place he had occupied hitherto and the dignity pertaining to him. Rabbi Bernheim shows that now, perforce, from being a subject of right, the child has become an object to which people have a right and which they have a right to obtain. When the freedom to be creative becomes the freedom to create oneself, then necessarily the Maker himself is denied and ultimately man too is stripped of his dignity as a creature of God, as the image of God at the core of his being. The defense of the family is about man himself. And it becomes clear that when God is denied, human dignity also disappears. Whoever defends God is defending man.”
That is what’s at stake now. Despite the seeming inevitability of “same-sex marriage” legislation, each responsible citizen should consider what he must now do, as a lame duck legislature, many of whose members are no longer accountable to their constituents, prepares to make a decision that will have enormous consequences for everyone. God bless you.
To read original story, click here.
In marketing, sound-bites count.
The French have provided some light here: Call it counterfeit “marriage”.
But in the long run, to successfully counter the “After the Ball” propaganda, we need more in-depth, expert marketing to convince the majority that real compassion is to help Same Sex Attracted youth avoid the deadly “gay” lifestyle.
We need to show that real compassion is to put first, children who are objectively happier and healthier within the intact biological family.
(Lifesite News has a dedicated Mark Regnerus page.) “Every little child wants a married Mommy and Daddy.”
We need to leverage our strength, that children are much happier when we help them evade secular sex-ed’s monomaniacal obsession that “kids are inevitably going to do IT”.
(Playboys do it with flair,
poets do it with wit,
I know I shouldn’t care,
but what the heck is IT?)
We need to take full advantage of the fact, that kids are most influenced by their parents, and that they actually want to spend more time with their parents than with their friends.
Anyone with a GID-kid should embrace them, smother them with love, never hold them at arm’s length.
(Ninety percent of sexually confused mid-teens spontaneously resolve to confident, mature heterosexuality by their mid-20s — if they can just evade recruitment by the “anti-bullying” mafia.)
Families facing such challenges deserve dedicated, professionally based outreach. We can’t afford to be amateurs, with the world under the onslaught of the professional propaganda of our ruthless opposition.
Could you provide the sources for your “Ninety percent of sexually confused mid-teens spontaneously resolve to confident, mature heterosexuality by their mid-20s — if they can just evade recruitment by the “anti-bullying” mafia” comment?
Also, what is the “anti-bullying” mafia? Are you proposing that we should allow bullying? More specifically, is it ok to target gay teens verbally, physically and emotionally? Shouldn’t Catholics stand against this – “Love thy neighbor as you love yourself” – and instead offer emotional support.
“The Archdiocese offers Mass and other spiritual help to those who live their homosexuality anonymously (Courage groups) and also to those who want to be publicly part of the gay community…”
What happened to making the flesh dead against sin? How can you be Catholic and be “publicly part of the gay community”?
And they that are Christ’s, have crucified their flesh with the vices and concupiscences. Galatians 5:24
I am glad that their Archdiocese offers Mass for gay people. When I called the Courage phone number, the man who called me back refused to give me his name when I asked, wouldn’t tell me when Mass was, said that they had a group but wouldn’t tell me where it met. I suppose he was having a bad day but he shouldn’t have called me back and then get nasty when I asked who was calling. I am just glad that I wasn’t a young person who needed help. The man snarled at me, “This isn’t a pro-homosexual group” and then I got the message that he really didn’t want to talk to me.
PA perhaps the guy did not want to “affirm” homosexuality, you just want to promote homosexuality so it will be officially accepted by the Church…. you are not going to win…
God reward you Cardinal George for professing the Faith of Christ. This is the Witness of Love that we need in the world now. If we love the Lord, we must keep His commandments. In a world which is blind to sin and walking in darkness we must bring light and clarity. It is not “loving” to others nor is it an expression of true Agape Love to allow into law standards which go against the fabric of Christianity. This will be a tough battle due to a lack of real knowledge of Catholic teaching sadly within the ranks of the Catholic Church. First we must re-evangelize lapsed Catholics and then bring the truth to others. Even though it is difficult at this point in salvation history, the Truth of Christ must be shared.
Yes God bless you Cardinal George! I applaud your efforts. You are a humble soul. I really appreciate your efforts here. They are a shining light, one that definitely leads souls to salvation!
I am ever so grateful and appreciate these actions! Let us understand how tough it is today to be holy especially when one is on the spot light, it can be humbling at times. We must pray for all our leadership in our church! They need our prayers especially when they are confronted with the evil forces that are being condoned today in this society!
God bless Cardinal George and may God have mercy on the legislators of Illinois, if they vote for Gay Marriage. What has happened to the people of these United States of America? I think our country really started to go down hill with the advent of “The Pill” in the sixties. Divorce became common place and families were destroyed. If a country doesn’t have strong families, the country will be destroyed. Cardinal George understands this and I’m sure he is just as sad as I am. We need to get on our knees and pray without ceasing. We must put everyone and our country in God’s hands… Today it has been 40 years since Roe v. Wade became the law of the land… and it breaks my heart.
The Church needs to do a better job of explaining that if we love our Neighbor as instructed by Jesus that we will want him/her to get to Heaven.
Gen 19:1-29; Rom 1:24-27; 1 Cor 6:10; 1 Tim 1:10.
CCC: 2357, 2358, 2359; 2394.
The Church does not discriminate against homosexual persons. All sexual acts outside of marriage (between one man and one woman are mortal sins).
CCC: ” 2396 Among the sins gravely contrary to chastity are masturbation, fornication, pornography, and homosexual practices.”
On the Vatican web site see: “Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church on the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons”.
“Laws teach”, says Cdl George. OK, when are the bishops going to teach Canon 915?
Cardinal George is a courageous bishop, doing what good princes of the Church must do for the sake of his flock. He touches on the main problem with challenging this cultural catastrophy: sentiment. Western civilization is now ruled by it. But all sentiment is not created equal. Only politically correct sentiment can be the foundation of legistlation. Another point seldom made is that the physical incompatibility of same sex conjugal relations results in the desecration of many temples of the Holy Spirit. Sodomy brought God’s wrath down to earth. There were good reasons for it that are still relevant today. God may not be setting fire to cities but those that choose this behavior will eventually be called to account for their actions — whether in this world or the next. I wish Cardinal George had made this point, as salvation is all that really matters.
It’s a bit long, but so relevant! From Fr.George Rutler’s ‘The Cure’ D’Ars’: “The clarion message of Ars to all was this: there is a more perilous impediment to holiness than misdeeds, and it is tepidity… goodness is a fruit of the the Christian life, it is not the tree itself. Thus the symbol of salvation is the Cross and not the holy Commandments, for holiness as a state more profound than conformity to moral precept requires identity with the salvific sacrifice of Christ: “Father, I desire that they also, whom thous hast given me, may be with me where I am”. The Calvinist moral tradition had been uprooted from the unitive vision of the natural law: consequently, the common environment of much Western culture has a decontological morality, aware of legal precepts but unaware of holiness as their end… by a dreadful amnesia of all that makes the soul breathe, the blood of Calvary and the white of Easter have been blended throught thge alchemy of reductionism into a sentimental pink.” As you say, Paul, it is all about salvation. Are we spreading the good news?
I believe you’ve pegged it, Dana. Good Fr Rutler, he puts up the dots so we can see them and then he connects them in one flash so as to burn them into our minds.
That is so true, skai! Sometimes, reading his incredibly insightful books I can hardly keep still. Things that are true, things that are beautiful, things that are so difficult for most of us to express, when brought together by such a gifted and faithful intellect like Fr. Rutler can cause an overwhelming sensation of peace and explosive passion at the same time.
Shouldn’t the quotation marks in your header enclose the word “marriage” and not “same-sex”?
Five years ago, Your Eminence, this would have been welcome, timely, and helpful.
It is still welcome.
For better or worse, we live in a democratic republic that cherishes rights above all else. The struggle for gay righrts is just the latest in a long series of presentations of various groups seeking personal liberty and access to all this country offers by way of legal protection. You can still be morally opposed to homosexuality but recogtnize that the rights they seek do not abrogate moral opprobrium. It is very ikely that gay marriage and family is here to stay.
Good cause, quite frankly I think eventually it will die out when even homosexuals and lesbians realize it really serves no redeeming social purpose. Some have already as even most of them have benefited from two parent heterosexual families in their past. Eventually the children from these “families” will speak out too, and some already are, and I think that will be the death knell for such situations. The only answer to building up our society and our nation’s economy is to strengthen two parent heterosexual families, especially by encouraging good marriages.
I think society should strengthen two parent heterosexual families. But they are not strengthened by denigrating other families. Some families are single parent families through no fault of their own. But the existence of the single parent family does not weaken two parent heterosexual families. The existence of foster families does not weaken two parent heterosexual families. And the existence of same sex families does not weaken two parent heterosexual families. When is the last time you heard a two parent heterosexual family ask themselves why they should stay together, if their is a widow living with her son?
You’re so right about supporting families. The familly unit, the very basis of society and our economic system (economy simply means, “one who manages a household” from the Greek word oikonomos) has been under attack for many years. With the passing of ‘no fault divorce’, changes in the tax structure, increasing usurping of parental authority by schools, employers and government policies, have made tremendous inroads into the destruction of the ONLY thing that matters in society.
Without the stability of families the whole fabric of society is literally torn apart. With no basis for rules and laws (which are ALL based on the ten commandments and a belief in God) how do we expect our government to keep order? If we kill our own children, how can we defend the rights of children against predators and people who would use them for their own ends, even if ‘well-meaning’ ends, at that? Many French and English homosexuals (like Elton John) have come out in support of families and that the gov’t hasn’t the right to undermine what is not their right to do. I would love to see people treat people of same-sex attraction with respect and friendship, but it will be a disaster of untold consequences if they change our marriage laws. The biggest losers (as is ALWAYS the case) will be innocent children. Their fragile safety and futures becomes everyday more insecure.
The foster family issue is really a hot potato, and I can understand why you might feel hurt and persecuted. All I can say from my tiny perspective, Fellow Catholic, is that we can’t question God’s laws, and we must seek TRUTH always, through Bible study and prayer and Church teaching. Rather than seeking what we want we surely must seek what God wants for us, don’t you think? Let love and awe of God guide you… not your own inner prejudices and fears. I want love for you, and hope, and that is nothing compared to what He wants for you! But it may not be what you THINK you want!
Dana writes, “All I can say from my tiny perspective, Fellow Catholic, is that we can’t question God’s laws, and we must seek TRUTH always, through Bible study and prayer and Church teaching. Rather than seeking what we want we surely must seek what God wants for us, don’t you think? Let love and awe of God guide you… not your own inner prejudices and fears. I want love for you, and hope, and that is nothing compared to what He wants for you! But it may not be what you THINK you want!”
You seem to assume that I disagree with you, that I do not believe that we must seek what God want’s for us, that I am not guided by love and awe of God. If so, you would be incorrect, Dear Dana.
To PA and YFC, the day is coming when the Church will be attacked by those who “support homosexuals” the first thing they will demand is the loss of its exempt status, then they will demand that its teachings be changed because they are “homophobic” (a term invented by the gay mafia”) and “oppress gays” and I do see mobs of gays and their supporters burning Catholic parishes in the name of tolerance and equality, so which side will you two be on….
Canisius: You are claiming victimhood for the Catholic Church when LGBT folk are literally crucified, as Matthew Shepard was on that fence 15 years ago?
You are claiming victimhood when there were 1293 violent hate crimes reported against LGBT individuals in 2011 (last year reported) vs 67 anti-Catholic violent hate crimes, even though the Catholic population is at least 4-6 times the size of the LGBT community?
When you come out against violence against LGBT individuals, and work to erase the causes of that violence, then, trust me, the LGBT community will listen to whatever “persecution” claims you might have.
Dana, There are veritable reams of law that have NOTHING to do with morality or are in no way based on a belief in God. For example, in the United States we drive on the left side of the road. In England, people drive on the right. Where, exactly, in the ten commandments or the bible or belief in God, is the side of the road upon which traffic flows determined? Which side of the road does God wish us to drive upon? Obviously, either the United States or England is defying the will of God. Which is it?
There are massive numbers of legitimate laws which are essentially administrative in nature and in no way have anything to do with moral precepts or natural law. For example, in the area of health care IT, the federal government has established certain technical methods of interoperability between digitized information systems. Numerous different protocols could be established and could potentially work, yet the federal government has picked one so that universal communication within the US health care system becomes possible. Are you contending that any particular coding method is chosen as a result of morality and the ten commandments?
In fact, trying to claim that “all law derives from the 10 commandments and belief in God” turns Jesus’s instruction that the Isrealites should “Give unto Ceasar, what is Ceaser’s,” into heretical nonsense. Because if all law were based on morality, the Jews could in no way conform to any portion of Roman law without denying Yaweh.
I am not claiming victimhood, YFC. I am predicting a red martyrdom of the Faithful at the hands of homosexuals and their supporters… so again I ask when it starts whose side will you be on? The thought police of CC did not print my original post, but I can tell you I have seen the martyrdom of Christians and destruction of churches first hand…
JonJ, what are you drinking? “in the United States we drive on the left side of the road”: I suspect your mind has been left by the side of the road, all right. Why don’t you go to youtube and watch actual police chases of drunk drivers … they do often drive on the left side of the road. Watch and see what happens.
LOL, Skai, you are correct. I reversed my directions while typing, something that is easy for me to do since I am ambidextrous and don’t have a truly dominant hand. Of course, visual memory is a bit different and I don’t have a problem driving on the correct side of the road, though I can have issues with turns when getting verbal directions if I’m tired and not specifically thinking about it.
Of course, equating a verbal slip with alcoholism is a cheap debating tactic, implying that my argument is invalid due to something that is relatively trivial error (even though the structure of the argument is still clear) and also suggesting I’m a substance abuser. Ad hominem attacks are supposedly not allowed in this site (and yes, I’ve indulged in them and had them (appropriately) edited).
I do, however, find it interesting that your ad hominem, was not edited.
JonJ, your points are valid in so far as they deal with specifics, but let’s say that the issue of driving on a certain side of the road, for example, is based on ‘thou shalt not kill’, for if there were no rules, (which side of the road matters not in the least, but whichever side is chosen must be the prerequisite for all future enforcement) there would be many deaths involved and it would be remiss in the extreme for a society not to provide general safety RULES that didn’t prevent everyone from driving all higgely piggely wherever they pleased. Basically what we call traffic laws, are rules that we must abide by or face fines and imprisonment, but the reason for issuing ALL rules can eventually be traced back to the decologue. Also, you’re quibbling with semantics, which I find wily and lawyerish and rather specious in that you knew I was writing about moral issues that really matter and not nattering about traffic rules and mundane minutiae of daily living. There used to be dress codes that if not obeyed could have landed the offender in jail with a hefty fine. That may sound to you like trivial rules of social behavior, when in fact it show exactly where a society is in its relationship to God and the moral law. Certain behavior was not acceptable because there was a general sane and wholesome order. The fact that San Francisco allowed until recently, people to run around completely naked, with their bare bottoms sitting on park benches shared by mothers and children shows their total complicity with evil and you can say what you want but to me you’re a quibbler.
Dana, the point is not trivial and highlighting the distinction is not quibbling because it goes to the core of what is the role of law in our society (and, indeed, in any ordered society).
The position you express is one often adopted by people who wish to assert the superiority of faith over law. Usually, such expressions are a preface to calls to make law conform to some or another religious viewpoint; since, after all, law is “properly” based on “God” or “the 10 commandments”.
Not only does this view run afoul of “Give unto Caesar” it also conflicts with the CCC. By uttering “Give unto Caesar” Jesus established that law and religion are two distinct things. Up until this time, law and religion were pretty much mixed in a blender and indistinguishable in western culture. It was one reason why we see such Old Testament commands as in Deuteronomy that the Jews should butcher anyone in one of their cities that do not worship Yaweh. Such individuals were also defying the King, and were thus viewed as ungovernable.
However, when Rome conquered Israel, it threw Hebrew culture into a terrible quandry because how could one accept Roman Law without denying Yaweh? Jesus’ solution of “give unto Caesar” and the totality of his preaching was, to a large degree, in answer to this cultural crisis. Jesus was showing how the Israelites could preserve their relationship with God, while separating it from all of the “day-to-day” legal mechanisms necessary for an ordered society.
When you say “all law is based on the 10 commandments and belief in God” you’re denying this distinction and saying either 1) you want to put law and religion back in the blender and mix them up again or 2) such a distinction never existed and Jesus was spouting nonsense or 3) any law that doesn’t conform to christian concepts of God is either trivial or immoral. All three of these points are at least implicitly refuted by Jesus’ teaching about Caesar and the law.
The CCC also implicitly rejects your position. The CCC teaches us it is immoral to use secular law to compel people to attend mass or worship God. Where, in the 10 commandments, can we extract this principle? How does “belief in God” result in the notion that it is immoral to compel people to offer public homage to God? Or that it is immoral to stop people from worshiping false Gods? Certainly, this notion does not conform to natural law (in which we are required to honor the true one God). The CCC’s position only makes sense if you recognize that law and religion are, and should be, distinct entities.
You also cannot accurately say that any law that is not rooted in the belief in God or the 10 commandments is trivial. For example, I know of a court which used to require that plaintiff’s submit briefs with red binders and defendant’s submit briefs in blue binders. If you did not submit your brief with the right color binder, that could mean you miss a procedural deadline, which could result in your case getting thrown out. While this rule of court was completely unrelated to any moral principle, such an error could have devastating consequences and certainly was not trivial.
In fact, your entire point is refuted by the very existence of legal systems in Communist countries. Or are you arguing that the USSR’s legal code was based upon their belief in God and the 10 commandments?
Law, in fact, is nothing more than a system of rewards and punishments designed to compel citizens to behave in a manner that benefits the state. At its core, law is amoral and serves the self-interests of the state. Any morality imputed into law only exists to promote order by increasing the willingness of citizens to submit to state authority.
Study legal systems over large amounts of time, you will see moral principles come and go with many turned on their head. You will see many extremely cynical and self-serving decisions. However, the one consistency you do see is that law serves the interests of the state, and the political class that operates the state.
To wring morality from the law, you need to convince the state, and the law’s political gatekeepers, that moral principle serves their purpose. When Jesus told us to “Give unto Caesar”, he was showing us how to live with this amoral entity. Basically, we should conform unless the law compels us to violate, or interferes with, our relationship with God.
The CCC’s instruction also tells us that a catholic should not use state force (through the mechanism of law) to compel conformity to certain moral principles. To what extent it is moral to use state force to compel obedience to moral principles is an undeveloped area of theology. Often, in public debates about law, the Church simply presumes it is ethical to use state force to compel obedience to the moral principle in question, and never addresses this issue.
You are correct, Your Fellow Catholic.
Correction, PA, YFC is half correct; it’s the other half that is the problem. YFC never makes a profession of faith, as do most Catholics when pressed to do so. He constantly runs the game of assumption, but perhaps he does not understand the real Assumption. If he did, if you did, then why would you be disputing doctrine or making yourself out to be more authoritive than the Queen of Heaven?
Btw, PA, you never use Scripture or the CCC or any other Church Doctrine as a basis for your allegedly Catholic ramblings or for your profession of faith.
There are no more homosexuals and lesbians murdered than heterosexuals, probably less, and many are killed by other homosexuals. The men who killed Shepherd should be charged with murder and so many counts of tortue, just as would have happened with any other murder of a heterosexual. End of discussion.
Also, homosexual men should not be harassing men who do not want their attention either. Sometimes that happens, and others can act in self defense. They should be charged with harassment, just as men who bother women are charged with harrassment.
No he is not PA
YFC, your command of social science needs some work; as you put it forth, I see little but shambles. My recommendation is to forget the social science gambit, because it won’t get you anywhere. And what is critical is you should read the New Testament over and over and over until you know what it says. Following this, or concurrent with it, explore each point that is not clear to you. Also, if a point is clear to you, then you need to explore it also to discover if your sense of clarity is true.
Skai, you attack my “command of social science”, yet you offer no support for your assertion. You don’t even counter what I say except to attack my supposed need for more work. If you disagree with me, either in fact or logic, state where you disagree and what authority you use.
YFC, society won’t strengthen anything until the bishops begin it. And they do nothing but confound every attempt, by saying one thing and then doing or failing to do what that one thing they say demands. The USCCB is nothing more than confusion, a “hydra” of modern times.
Your Fellow Catholic, no one is denigrating one parent families that are so through no fault of their own. We are, though, castigating those who DELIBERATELY have children when they are single and/or DELIBERATELY deprive a child of a mother and a father, including heterosexuals and the LGBT communities. That is a very selfish decision to make and should in no way be encouraged.
The majority of men in our prisons are men without fathers That should tell you something. Yes, I know some homosexual men might not be able to relate to their own fathers since the fathers were drunks, and they were abused by them, but that is no reason not to try to give decent fathers to as many boys and girls as possible, and help the husbands and wives learn to treat each other with respect, along with their children.
Taking benefits away from those families and giving more to those who should not have had children in the first place is not the answer.
Anne T: You say “We are, castigating those who deliberately have children when they are single.” This week is the 40th anniversary of Roe vs. Wade. I think single women who have children when they are encouraged and sometimes even bullied into having abortions should be supported and encouraged to have their child. They should not be castigated. Many of these women make a deliberate choice to have their babies as they refuse to get rid of their babies through abortion.
Anne if you want to make a relevant contribution here, you might share with us the percentage of prisoners who were raised by same sex married couples. Until you can do that, we are talking apples and oranges.
One of my tenants is a man who spent 27 years in prisons, and never had a real father figure in his life. The angst is ultra extreme, and it greatly angers me that men would violate this sacred trust of raising their offspring.
Mark from Pa, I have a reply below, but I put it in the wrong place. You know darn well I was talking about those who actions were deliberately. Read my post below.
Anne T says: “Yes, I know some homosexual men might not be able to relate to their own fathers since the fathers were drunks, and they were abused by them, but that is no reason not to try to give decent fathers to as many boys and girls as possible, and help the husbands and wives learn to treat each other with respect, along with their children.”
This is a despicable castigation against faithful fathers evewhere. Anne provides no evidence whatsoever, because none can be had, that gay children were raised by alcoholic or were raised by abusive fathers.
My own father was a totally decent man, rarely drank, and never so much as raised a hand against me. He passed decades ago, and yet you, Anne, insult his memory. Shame on you!
Jesus was not only moral, good cause, but much more than that. The solution, as the Pope has pointed out, is for the bishops to become holy. They’re not, and so all they do is bide their time. Nobody is going to follow non holy or unholy bishops towards Heaven because that is not where they are headed. Moses said words, and so did the Prophets, but people do not care about mere words. The bishops have to do more than say words. On another thread, jon, asked what more do they need to say, and then jon equated what they say as an act, since he cannot see the difference between words and actions. Becoming holy is more than words. We already have the words, but we do not have the holiness. The shepherds simply do not have what it takes; which is why the Pope told them to obtain what it takes, namely they must become holy.
Skai – What does that mean, exactly. How does one measure “holiness”?
Peter humbly inquired? (not quite there yet but hopefully working on it) “How does one measure holiness?”
Peter doubtfully and skeptically inquires: (more in keeping with a falsely formed pattern of rebellion) “How does one measure holiness?”
While living on this earth, rebellious inquirers will continue on an endless journey of justifying their own blindness. Rebellious inquirers will find themselves on a perpetually unsatisfying search of manmade loopholes that help them in their rationalization of remaining blind.
Confessions of St. Augustine
“”I often sought victories, I myself being conquered by the vain desire of pre-eminence. And what could I so little endure, or, if I detected it, censured I so violently, as the very things I did to others, and, when myself detected I was censured, preferred rather to quarrel than to yield ? Is this the innocence of childhood ? Nay, Lord, nay, Lord; I entreat Thy mercy, O my God. For these same sins, as we grow older, are transferred from governors and masters, from nuts, and balls, and sparrows, to magistrates and kings, to gold, and lands, and slaves, just as the rod is succeeded by more severe chastisements. It was, then, the stature of childhood that Thou, O our King, didst approve of as an emblem of humility when Thou saidst: “Of such is the kingdom of heaven.”
Peter, Faithful inquirers who are sincerely striving to attain a recognizable measure of Christian “Holiness” will not reject this response from:
THE CATECHISM OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH
2015 “The way of perfection passes by way of the Cross. There is no holiness without renunciation and spiritual battle. Spiritual progress entails the ascesis and mortification that gradually lead to living in the peace and joy of the Beatitudes:
He who climbs never stops going from beginning to beginning, through beginnings that have no end. He never stops desiring what he already knows.”
So, sincerely, what is holiness? Living in the peace and joy of the Beatitudes? So peace and joy are the marks of holiness?
Excellent Catherine! Pilate’s “What is truth?” came to mind, as well. “Fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom,” and it would seem true holiness can only come to those who are completely humble and fear God, as St.Augustine shows. In his youth he was arrogant and rebellious.. in old age, so humble. I read something really profound yesterday that is related (indirectly) as to why women used to wear veils to church. Think of everything that is considered truly holy in the Church… the Challice and the Tabernacle are veiled, for example. It follows that by veiling ourselves, women, like our beloved Mother, who was so humble and holy, would wear a veil. We would do well to imitate her in all things. (But then I’d have to stop writing acerbic posts… that would be a stretch to give up. haha)
Women wear veils in Church to lessen the distraction of their beauty.
St Teresa of Avila one day was seated in her coach, when it hit a bump and tossed her out. She fell into a mud puddle. While extracting herself from the puddle, she cried out to God, “If this is the way you treat your friends, then no wonder you have so few of them”. Her order prospered under the loving care of Jesus Christ.
Holiness, peter, cannot be measured, for it is infinite. To gain an insight into holiness, two ways come to mind. One, read the writings of the saints and doctors of the Church, or, two, pray God make you holy (you’ll have to keep at this prayer until He does).
I just read recently on Fr Z’s post that women wear veils as a cover as over a vessel of holiness. You’re thinking of Muslims who must cover their women from head to toe to cover their loveliness so they won’t be a distraction and temptation. Which reminds me of a photo I recently saw of women in their burkas at Disneyland posing for a camera. So sad.
Mark from PA, you know darn well that I am talking about those who deliberately have children out of wedlock, such as some egotistical and self centered actors and actresses and homosexuals and lesbians, who go out of their way to produce children without a mother and a father, not those whose actions were not deliberate. Both are wrong, but one is more so, and can be remedied. We are willing to help women who do not get pregnant deliberately, and choosing to adopt out is often a better option than keeping the child if the woman is very young and without support. Women who adopt their children to two parent heterosexual families are very unselfish.
Correction: The ones that are not deliberate mentioned in my sixth line can be remedied. I did not make that very clear.
Anne T, I think that women who are single and refuse to have abortions are unselfish. Don’t you think that it is better for a single person to deliberately have a child than to have an abortion? Those children are wanted children so they are actually in a better position then those conceived by accident. I know of two men that adopted a bi-racial boy whose mom had her parental rights terminated. So was this boy better off with 2 dads than none? These men were also guardians for a teenage boy. He had a single mom, who he visited, but he had learning disabilities and living with 2 men, (1 a teacher and the other a social worker) gave him more structure.
Mark, I am talking about those egotistical and selfish people who deliberately get pregnant, knowing the child will be without a father in lawful marriage and those selfish men who deliberately impregnate them, whether through natural ways or through artificial ways. If the child is murdered then there are two serious sins committed.
goodcause, homosexual persons already have the legal right to live together, purchase property together, name each other as beneficiaries, give each other power of attorney for finances and health, etc. They have the freedom to live as they please, and go to Hell if they so choose.
However, – – – they do NOT have the right to take other people’s children through adoption and raise them in a homosexual atmosphere, to encourage their lifestyle.
They do NOT have the right to call all practicing Christians, Muslims, and Jews who religiously or morally do not believe in ‘sodomy’ – guilty of hate crimes or try to outlaw their Faiths.
These are their real goals.
“Sins against nature, therefore, like the sin of Sodom, are abominable and deserve punishment whenever and wherever they are committed. If all nations committed them, all alike would be held guilty of the same charge in God’s law, for our Maker did not prescribe that we should use each other in this way. In fact, the relationship that we ought to have with God is itself violated when our nature, of which He is Author, is desecrated by perverted lust… Your punishments are for sins which men commit against themselves, because, although they sin against You, they do wrong in their own souls and their malice is self-betrayed. They corrupt and pervert their own nature, which You made and for which You shaped the rules, either by making wrong use of the things which You allow, or by becoming inflamed with passion to make unnatural use of things which You do not allow” (Rom. 1:26).
–Saint Augustine of Hippo
Abeca this quote, like other saintly quotes, is not binding on the faithful. To borrow from the juridical arts, is dicta.
Well YFC when we one dies, that is when the great holy consequence come, this world may not punish sodomy or the scandalizing of little children by exposing them to those sort of lifestyles, but if one dies committing such heinous crimes against the natural law, our Lord has already spoken on what happens to the souls of those choosing against God’s holy commandments. God does not change, people may and laws may but God’s laws never do!
I praise God for His forgiving heart, so that sinners can repent and unite themselves once again in God’s love and mercy.
“In failing to confess, Lord, I would only hide You from myself, not myself from You.”
OK Abeca, we don’t know what happens “when we one dies”. But the question about granting marriage licenses to same sex couples is likely to have little impact on we one’s ability to go to heaven. For example, if homosexual sex is an impediment to heaven, then adding a marriage license to the equation doesn’t send you to a deeper level of hell. Or is that now your view, that a state issued license is ITSELF a sin? Hmmm, I wonder what the moral implications of a drivers license might be. I’ll have to consult my Bishop.
YFC, it is not the Law of God that will get you to Heaven, but the grace of Jesus Christ. You have the awesome power and authority to deny that grace. It is not a legal issue at all; the law exists so that you will have a warning that grace can be denied.
YFC, are you sure you are Catholic? You know what happens when one dies. Particular judgement, remember? As a Catholic, if the state does institute gay “marriage” you would be morally bound not to enter it. Heterosexual Catholics are not to enter into civil marriage, remember?
January 24, 2013 at 7:23 pm
YFC, are you sure you are Catholic? You know what happens when one dies. Particular judgement, remember? As a Catholic, if the state does institute gay “marriage” you would be morally bound not to enter it. Heterosexual Catholics are not to enter into civil marriage, remember?
Heterosexual catholics enter into civil marriage ALL THE TIME. In fact, Catholic priests solemnize them. What are you talking about?
There is no such thing as “civil marriage”. A. It is a fantasy that engaged people have; B. civil law has no power or authority to create marriage, but can only regulate the financial aspects of a natural marriage.
**granting marriage licenses to same sex couples is likely to have little impact on we one’s ability to go to heaven**: Someone please name this heresy? Jesus is fully God and fully man: Thus the Catholic is required to bring not only himself or herself to God but to bring society to God (Great Commission). When you believe that man should ignore what society does, then you in effect are dissociating Jesus from both His Cross and His Resurrection.
YFC, It is illicit for baptised Catholics to be married in a civil marriage. The Church does not consider this to be a vaild marriage. This action puts the couple in a state of mortal sin. They may not receive the Sacraments. This situation occurs not infrequently and in order for these marriages to be convalidated in the Church, the couple must make a Sacramental Confession first.
“You must ask God to give you power to fight against the sin of pride which is your greatest enemy – the root of all that is evil, and the failure of all that is good. For God resists the proud.”
— St. Vincent de Paul
YFC you are only complicating things with excuses to justify gay marriage. The road to salvation isn’t that complicated but give it up to mankind, they are the ones who complicate things more with their embrace and justification to sin. The root of all evil is pride. That is what many hopefully know today but still to this day, it is not understood well by many. This society does not fear the Lord, they don’t even understand what that means either… we need to return to humility so that our hearts can be closer to Christ.
Not according to the blogs of Bob One, where one sees that we live in a cryptic communist state.
What do you think the priest is doing when he signs the civil marriage certificate? Is he participating in an illicit act? Is he complicit in mortal sin?
Civil marriage is entered into by virtually every catholic couple who is married in the Church as part and parcel of the ceremony. Civil marriage is also entered into by virtually every non-catholic who weds. The Church may view those latter marriages as illicit, but the Church doesn’t deny their validity, pretend that those marriages harm the eternal souls of those who enter into them, or seek to dissolve them if one of them converts to catholicism.
So I go back to my original claim: civil marriage licenses for same sex couples cannot of themselves add anything to any sins those who obtain them already commit, any more than renewing a drivers license makes a drunk driver any more sinful.
YFC, yes, when one marries in the Catholic Church one also is civilly married. You know that I was speaking of being married outside of the Church when I said it was illicit. Non-Catholics who wed obviously get married outside of the Church. The Church considers all such marriages to be valid but they are not sacramentally valid. As for civil marriage licenses for same sex couples, it adds the elements of permanancy and publicity to the sin so, yes, it does add to the sin. It is also scandal and disobedience to the Church. To say, “I’m going to hell anyway, so it makes no difference” would also be the sin of despair.
Really, so the elements of “a lifetime of love”, of “commitment”, and if there is a possibility of raising kids together, “childrearing”, play no role in your moral equation?
So in your opinion, would a same sex couple who obtains a marriage license from the state incur additional sin from that act? Would not their love for one another also be a part of their public act? Would not their lifetime partnership not also weigh into the question of any moral judgement, especially if they did it to PROTECT their CHILDREN?
I’m not so sure that non catholics who wed are not sacramentally valid. My understanding of the sacrament is that it is the individuals sacramentally marry each other. The Priest is there as a witness, not as a minister of the sacrament. Therefore, if couples enter into a sacramental marriage without the valid minister to witness, it may be an illicit sacrament, but not an invalid sacrament.
“The Church considers all such marriages to be valid but they are not sacramentally valid”. Not so, Anon. For a marriage to be naturally valid, certain conditions need to be met.
Well, yes, man and woman. Legal age. Free consent. What else?
YFC, it is not a moral equation and it is not mine. It is a tenet of the Catholic Faith. Two people, of opposite genders, who love one another, have a lifetime commitment, raise children and are not married are living in sin if they have a sexual relationship. Two people of the same gender cannot marry because marriage is between a man and a woman. Should they be legally married in one of the states where that is legal, they are not married in the eyes of the Church. Do they incur additional sin? Yes, because they have disobeyed the Church. They have given public witness that they disobey the Church and that they have committed to continue to do so until death they do part. Even if the couple were chaste, committing no sexual sins, they could still have the sin of scandal (leading others to sin) and disobedience. You speak of moral judgement, this is not a judgement of any person. I do not judge; the Church does not judge persons. As to the moral equation you speak of: It would be wrong (and possibly the sin of presumption) to say “I am committing a mortal sin, but my good deeds balance it.” In the CCC, it states that sin is a failure in genuine love of God and neighbor. It is true that Peter said that “Love covers a multitude of sins.” but it would be a misapplication to use it to avoid having to renounce a grave sin. As to the other question of sacramental validity, CCC 1630 explains the necessity of having the priest (or deacon) assist at the sacrament. Marriages between Catholics and non-Christians can be valid but not sacramental. Between two baptised Catholics (and I think Christians, but cannot verify) they must either have the proper ecclesial authority assist or have the bishop’s dispensation not to. There is an FAQ page on the USCCB’s marriage website which can explain better than I. God bless you. I hope that you have a good priest who can explain things in a less legalistic way and who can answer your questions. I try. For myself, I want to know the truth even if I am disappointed in the truth or do not understand it.
Some denominations marry same sex couples. So if a same sex couple in Massachusetts gets married in the United Church of Christ their marriage is valid. They may not be following the rules of the Catholic Church but if these people belong to the United Church of Christ, they are not bound by the rules of the Catholic Church.
In the Catholic Faith, when a sin is committed without full knowledge and/or consent, it is a material sin.
To protect a child, one must not scandalize them with same sex partners and other sinful lifestyles, subjecting them to those lifestyles is extremely sinful. The Lord warned against scandalizing children! To rob a child intentionally of a normal home life, that is one mum and one pop, is child abuse in my book and against the natural law.
To live out the lie that same sex partnership is marriage is against the natural law and it is one of the biggest sinful crimes against the natural law which God placed upon mankind! To deceive children into normalizing those sinful lifestyles is truly scandalous against their innocence and well being not only spiritually but emotionally! Not to mention the sexual sins that occur with those lifestyles, they are a sin, with monstrous spiritual consequences.
Because mankind is accepting these sinful lifestyles, they committed greater spiritual consequences that bring forth curses and incomprehensible spiritual warship. There is no excuse for ignorance because the truth is known but many choose to not hear, to not listen, to not obey. The modern comforts of this world have made us lazy, selfish, narcissistic, prideful and scandalized mostly leading many to fall astray.
Praise God for those who persevere with fortitude in the truth.
Thank you for your explanation and for your prayers. Truly, they are needed, wanted, and appreciated!
However, I still think the question of whether same sex couples, especially those who find themselves raising children, incur additional sin if they marry for the purpose of benefitting the kids.
Think about it. First of all, on the issue of civil marriage licenses, the church teaches very little about it in general. In the specific instance of same sex civil marriages, the issue is frankly so new that there is no official doctrine out there. Sure, bishops have weighed in. The Pope has weighed in. But none of it rises to the level of official church doctrine. And it will never do so, because it would need to address the prickly issue of civil marriages among non-believers and non-catholics, which is and has always been an issue that the church finds itself in a no-win situation.
If one delves into what those bishops have said about same sex civil marriages, they dance around the theological issues. They say their opposition does not stem from theology, but from “natural law” which, they claim, binds all of society, even unbelievers.
Well, nobody but catholics believe in natural law as the catholic church states it. And the secular sciences are providing overwhelming evidence that the “natural law” conclusions are faulty.
So what we are left with is a marriage license and no clear doctrine to guide those who obtain one. Most of the couples who obtain one do so to protect the children they raise. Is that so bad?
YFC and Mark from PA, in a multi-cultural society like the US, there are going to be people who do things that we do not do. We are Catholic. The Catholic Church is the Mystical Body of Christ. Catholics have been given the fullness of revealed Truth. We know that God’s will is for marriage to be sacramental. We know that God’s will is for marriage to be one-man and one-woman. It is our work to bring the kingdom of God to the culture. We know that God is all-wise, all-knowing. There is no need to point to others who know less than we do and use them as an example for us to follow. We are supposed to be showing them the way of the Lord. The bishops do dance around the theological issues because they are discussing it in the secular arena, where theological arguments are dismissed. The moral law is written in the human heart. Natural law means that the sexual gift is for procreation and even though it can be abused and used for pleasure or power or even cruelty, it should not be. We want the civil law to reflect the law of God. We owe Him that loyalty. As Catholics, we know that He has given us life, and redemption, and forgiveness for our sins, not because we earned it but from His love. All men are meant to share in His Love. When we work to bring His Kingdom to the world, all men do. When we leave His path, settle for less than we know to be good, we deprive all men of that. We are supposed to be a light to the world. If we hide the light, we make it more difficult for people.
Children need a Mother and a Father. The true purpose of marriage is to go forth and multiply.
You all hit the nail on the head – is that radical sodomists want other people’s children to teach them their lifestyle.And this is the only reason they need to marry.
Children learn by example. Sodomists should never be given other people’s children.
CCC: “1792 Ignorance of Christ and his Gospel, bad example given by others, enslavement to one’s passions, assertion of a mistaken notion of autonomy of conscience, rejection of the Church’s authority and her teaching, lack of conversion and of charity: these can be at the source of errors of judgment in moral conduct.”
CCC: “1791 This ignorance can often be imputed to personal responsibility. This is the case when a man “takes little trouble to find out what is true and good, or when conscience is by degrees almost blinded through the habit of committing sin. In such cases, the person is culpable for the evil he commits.”
Confusion and Ignorance and Relativism can mostly be attributed to the mortal sin of SCANDAL.
This is why all ‘Catholic’ politicians and others who publicly support the non-negotiable evils of: abortion, same-sex marriage, euthanasia, or embyonic stem cell research should be publicly (ab homine) excommunicated.
US Bishops please do your job.
“Canon 1399 In addition to the cases established here or in other laws, the external violation of a divine or canonical law can be punished by a just penalty only when the special gravity of the violation demands punishment and there is an urgent need to prevent or repair scandals.”
There is no love between same sex partners; it is an abomination, a total shewing of what God has created. What the gays call “love” is anything but that. Their minds, hearts, souls are darkened substantially, and gravely, which should be obvious since so many of them never turn away from it.
Moreover, there is a critical difference between sinner and repentant sinner: the repentant sinner admits his or her sin, whereas the other type of sinner tries to justify his or her sin. Admitting sin is a step in faith in God; justifying sin is contracting with the demons.
Skai you are correct. God bless you!
Skai, you say there is no love between same sex partners but that is your opinion, not Church teachings. The Catholic Church has nothing against love between people of the same sex but teaches that homosexuals persons, all persons, in fact, should strive for chastity. The Catholic Church considers some sexual practices to be sinful but does not consider love between people to be sinful. I think that Catholic Church fully recognizes that many people love people of the same sex.
Love only exists because of God. For God is love! If man creates it’s own definition of what they consider to be love and act it out away from God, then it is not real love and God does not dwell in that. True love includes God, anything that does not include God can become some kind of sin… like lust, dependency, perversion, selfishness, abuse, obsession, self gratification, even a disorder etc etc.
1 IF I speak with the tongues of men, and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal. 2 And if I should have prophecy and should know all mysteries, and all knowledge, and if I should have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing. 3 And if I should distribute all my goods to feed the poor, and if I should deliver my body to be burned, and have not charity, it profiteth me nothing.
4 Charity is patient, is kind: charity envieth not, dealeth not perversely; is not puffed up; 5 Is not ambitious, seeketh not her own, is not provoked to anger, thinketh no evil; 6 Rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth with the truth; 7 Beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things.
8 Charity never falleth away: whether prophecies shall be made void, or tongues shall cease, or knowledge shall be destroyed. 9 For we know in part, and we prophesy in part. 10 But when that which is perfect is come, that which is in part shall be done away. 11 When I was a child, I spoke as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child. But, when I became a man, I put away the things of a child. 12 We see now through a glass in a dark manner; but then face to face. Now I know I part; but then I shall know even as I am known. 13 And now there remain faith, hope, and charity, these three: but the greatest of these is charity.
When God created man and woman, God gave them a pro-creative nature in a unity of persons, in the likeness of the trinity. God said, “be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth.” This command He gave Adam and Eve, our first parents. This was the model of nature which was to be carried foreword through the love of persons, and through conjugal love. Same sex couples no matter how hard they try, will never have a pro-creative nature through conjugal love. It’s not a love of persons, it is a lust of persons, through mutual masturbation. Masturbation, as everyone knows, from your DRM, “guide for a good confession,” under the sixth and ninth commandments, “masturbation is a moral sin”. Why would a practicing Catholic, want to endanger their salvation, by having a same sex marriage, and jeopardize their soul? The truth is, they are spiritually dead, because they have reverted back to the sin of Adam, wanting to elevate self, and to reduce the need to embrace God. To fulfill the first principle of the moral code you must, “do good avoid evil”. The second moral code is the reverse of the first, “you cannot bring about good, by doing evil”.
The Cardinal needs to be asked: When are the US Cardinals and Bishops going to publically excommunicate (ab homine) those Catholic politicians who are obstinately guilty of supporting same-sex marriage, abortion, euthanasia, and embryonic stem cell research.
We are grateful for the Cardinal’s words, but would appreciate action as well.
Public SCANDAL loses Souls, and must be corrected.
…and ex-communicate all priests and bishops who are either gay or have women partners. In my own Diocese I can name many openly gay priests and the same for priests living with women. The Church demands that Catholics who want divorce receive an annulment first, for which they must pay. They (Church) obviously set this policy aside for their priests, who also take vows…
If I knew any priest living with a man or a woman, I’d be knocking at his door so fast his head would swim. That is utterly sickening… first that this is going on so blatantly, and second, that no one is doing anything about it. Why aren’t you knocking at their doors and raising a dust?
This has been going on for centuries. The pastor in my former parish had an ongoing intimate relationship with one of the parishioners. It was common knowledge in the parish.
That is not an excommunicable offense. Catholics who divorce and remarry are not excommunicated although they are not permitted to receive the Eucharist just as anyone who is aware of committing a grave sin should not receive.
So, Anon, if Catholics switch spouses without annullments, and continue to receive Holy Communion, are they then excommunicated?
Skai, no, they are guilty of sacrilege.
Ok, then, if a Catholic acts publically to cause many abortions, is that grounds to excommunicate them?
Skai, a person is excommunicated for procuring a successful abortion or for direct involvement in it.
Anonymous, so you think bishops and priests who are gay should be excommunicated? Most of them are not open about this, how do you suggest outing them all? Being a homosexual is a state of being. Nobody has really ever been excommunicated for their sexual orientation. You can name many openly gay priests, do you think it is preferable that priests tell the truth about this? Should they be honest or should they be like the minority who pretty much follow “don’t ask, don’t tell”? As for priests having female partners, this is even more common than priests who are gay. It would be difficult to get rid of them as they are a considerable percentage of priests. I do think that priests that father children should be responsible for them and I think that any priest that is involved in getting an abortion for a child he fathered should be removed.
Partially correct, PA, when you say, ” Being a homosexual is a state of being “, but you left the truth hanging. Should say, “Being homosexual is a state of being an obstinate mortal sinner.” Evidently you repudiate Church doctrine, voiced so well by Blessed John Paul II in his philosphical works on the nature of human individuals, ie the individual soul.
No, that does not reflect the Church’s doctine accurately.
Skai, one again you are incorrect. The Church teaches that being gay is neither a choice nor a sin. Why is this a teaching that you feel you can ignore? I thought promotion of ideas against the teaching of the Church was a scandal. Please learn what the Church actually teaches before you lecture others on it.
Skai says: “Being homosexual is a state of being an obstinate mortal sinner.” Evidently you repudiate Church doctrine,
Where, oh WHERE Dear Skai, does Church doctrine say this? Where?
Anonymous, if you know of any Priests in your Diocese who are openly gay (sodomists) or openly sexually active with women, it is your duty to contact your Diocese Bishop and provide him with documentation on the matter.
If after a reasonable period of time to allow for his investigation, the Bishop does nothing – contact the US Papal Nuncio in DC, and the Vatican. You should then also ask that the Bishop be removed from his Office.
I am aware of numerous priests who are openly sexually active with women. In fact, there are over 20 congregations in congress with Rome who allow their priests to marry.
There are also a number of Latin rite priests who are married; they were originally Anglican priests who converted to Catholicism and whose marriages were accepted by Rome because these priests did not swear celibacy when taking Holy Orders in the Anglican Church.
Those ususual circumstances approved by the Vatican are not wrong, and have nothing to do with this converstion, JonJ. Read the CCC for those who came into the Church already married. The Church does not break up marriages.
Newly ordainded Priests of the Episcopalian – now Catholic-Church may not marry. We are talking about Diocese Priests who have taken the vow of celebacy.
CCC 1599: “In the Latin Church the sacrament of Holy Orders for the presbyterate is normally conferred only on candidates who are ready to embrace celibacy freely and who publicly manifest their intention of staying celibate for the love of God’s kingdom and the service of men.”
Dear Anonymous: The Church teaches explicitly in several places that being gay (homosexual) is neither a choice nor a sin. Why should the Church excommunicate someone who lives in a state over which they have no control and which is not a sin?
Skai, please note Your Fellow Catholic’s post of 1/24, 6:18 PM. Most Catholics know this.
False. The Church teaches that same sex attraction is not a sin. “Gay” is not the same thing as same sex attraction. “Gay” is a socio-political movement that pushes the agenda of sodomy and sexual and marriage perversion. PA, most Catholics don’t know much at all, especially about what the Church teaches … this should be obvious to you after all these years reading posts on this site. Same sex attraction is different from homosexual, which is why the Church phrases it “same sex attraction”.
Skai, until I came here I never heard the expression “same sex attraction.” To the best of my knowledge the church does not use this expression in its documents. It refers to homosexual persons. I have never heard the expression “same sex attraction” used where I live. From what I have read, the term was invented by the NARTH organization. I don’t know what year they started using this term. People in the Courage organization, which is tied to NARTH, also use this expression. It is somewhat confusing to me that people that dislike homosexual persons also seem to dislike the term gay. I don’t totally understand this. Gay and homosexual are actually words for the same things.
What about, Anon, the man carries on a sex relationship with a woman who is married to his natural father? Is that excommunicable?
Skai, no. Are you confusing excommunication with the need to refrain from receiving communion? Adultery is a grave sin and would need to be confessed before receiving Holy Communion. Also, there is at least more than one poster who is using the anonymous default on this post. I assume you were continuing the conversation from above.
Hello the room. I don’t know if anyone’s noticed, but we’ve covered at least ten different topics under one post. I was trying to respond to JonJ’s Jan.28 contribution about rendering under Caesar et al, and I kept scrolling, scrolling, scrolling (Rawhide!) and all I wanted to say JonJ is that whatever I could devise to refute or concur with your post would not be in keeping with whatever it was you wrote as I admit freely and earnestly that I couldn’t take in a word of it as I’m totally right brained and it was like trying to pick up all the feathers you just let out of your pillow…they just kept blowing in the wind. Sorry!
In legislative batles over sodomy and sodomy marriage it’s numbers that count. Logic and reason are not convincing to those already committed.
What the cardinal has to do is get his troops in order, ie the laity, the Knights of Columbus and their families, etc. Then make sure they show up at the state house and are ready for the political battle.
Also, make sure the K of C members are with you. In Mass. the K of C were AWOL. We’ll see how it goes in RI.
I agree with you, but … No matter how many troops the Cardinal raises for the fight, they will not overcome the majority thinking of the people of this country. No moral or social issue has changed as quickly as the nation’s belief that gay people should be treated equally, both legally and socially. The forces against same sex marriage have lost this fight, in my opinion. We, the church, are to the point of being considered a hate group by many people. Most of the other denominations have taken up the equality fight (not that we should follow them), and most Catholics now believe that gays should be able to marry. And then, there is Los Angeles! Do you really think that any Cardinal or Bishop has any moral authority after today’s announcements? Many, if not most Catholics I know, don’t pay much attention to the Bishops any more. They live out their faith at the parish level. The notion of publically excommunicating our politicians would be a public relations disaster. The Church would lose any thread of authority it still possesses. Look at how the two candidates for Congress were pillared when they raised crazy notions about rape. The same would happen to the Bishops. The country is moving faster than the Church on most issues and the church is looking bad (but maybe not totally wrong) on most issues. I get asked fairly frequently how I can remain a Catholic under these conditions. I just know that this too shall pass, but it will take generations.
The homosexuals have a good propaganda machine and resources.
They also control the public school system and have been indoctrinating the youth.
The Catholic church propaganda system leaves much to be desired.
The ephebophilia problem was lost because the bishops are weak in defending the church (that problem is just as bad if not worse in the public schools.)
And, the shamestream media is part of the homosexual propaganda machine.
I hope you called your congressman to vote no on the important same sex sham marriage bill up for a vote in Rhode Island today!
So Bob One when those mobs who consider the Church a “hate group” start burning parishes in the name of equality and social justice which side will you be on? And why would public excommunication be a public relations disaster? You just stated “Many, if not most Catholics I know, don’t pay much attention to the Bishops any more,” so what difference would it make? Also,, and I quote, “I get asked fairly frequently how I can remain a Catholic under these conditions.” Do you honestly believe it’s so difficult to be Catholic say compared to 1st century Christians on route to the Lion’s den?
Question to Bob One,
What “right” does marriage give to homosexual couples that they do not already legally have?
The GSA has estimated that there are a little over a thousand rights, benefits, and obligations of marriage unavailable to couples without relationship recognition structures like marriage.
What do you want more, Fellow Catholic? God’s will in your life or your own? Who do you love more? God or someone or something else? Where do you plan to spend eternity? Can we as Catholics love the world and God equally? When you can truthfully answer these questions to your own satisfaction, then you really need to consider what you’re going to do about it? Just remember, you can’t serve two masters.
And you feel entitled to these?
Replying to Dana’s post at January 23, 2013 at 3:01 pm
I can truthfully answer the questions you raise to my satisfaction.
Any other questions?
Ah, perhaps to YOUR satisfaction, but to God’s? Well, I’ve said what I had to say, and now I’m shaking the dust on my sandals and moving on, so to speak. I didn’t feel very welcome in your house, metaphorically speaking.
YFC, there are a lot of moral alchemists out there trying to turn lead into gold. Our trustworthy sources of divine revelation are the Bible, both the Old and the New Testaments, Sacred Tradition which can be found in Catechism and the Magisterium — the Pope and the Bishops. Please stick with the trustworthy. There are a lot of people who are confused right now. We are called to walk humbly with God and to love and serve one another and it is in that spirit that I tell you this. God bless you and lead you to himself. (Hope I get there — pray for me, please.)
The GSA is a gay deception organization. Why would anyone in their right mind listen to them?
“MY SATISFACTION” = still conquered by the vain desire of *pre-eminence*
“I can truthfully answer the questions you raise to “my satisfaction.”
“Any other questions?”
No! ….No more questions. St. Augustine already addressed that same battle you are experiencing with pre-eminence. People often ignore this battle when they are not truly concerned or satisfied with “what pleases God first.” “Dear Dana” is actually “very dear” for telling you that you are fooling yourself to think that you can serve two masters.
After his conversion St. Augustine was only concerned with being raised to desire God’s satisfaction with Augustine.
Before his profound conversion, God was discounted to accommodate Augustine’s satisfaction of still rationalizing sin.
Confessions of St. Augustine
“”I often sought victories, I myself being conquered by the vain desire of pre-eminence. And what could I so little endure, or, if I detected it, censured I so violently, as the very things I did to others, and, when myself detected I was censured, preferred rather to quarrel than to yield ? Is this the innocence of childhood ?
It was Dana who chose the subject of my response, if you read her post carefully. It has nothing at all to do with “my” vanity or “pre-eminence”, whatever that was supposed to mean.
I don’t disagree that we ought to seek first what God desires. For some reason you all imply that I do. I think that’s just a little bit unfair and presumptuous.
YFC, sorry if I read your posts wrong. There were some that seemed as if you were supporting gay marriage. That made it seem as if you may have been misled or disagreed with the Church. I see that the posts could have been taken just as a question. The posts I am referring to were Jan 22 at 9:40 and Jan 23 at 1:20. I apologize if I read something into them that you did not intend.
The Church should always do what is good and true. It should never capitulate to sin, to appease public opinion or the popular fad of the day.
We must never tolerate sin, especially the sin of Sacrilege against the Body and Blood of our Lord.
Excommunication of heretical and/or schismatic “Catholic” politicians is most appropriate regarding the non-negotiables of: abortion, euthanasia, same-sex marriage, and embryonic stem cell research.
If anyone has trouble answering others regarding Church teaching — read your Catholic Bible, and then the CCC. You will find all the answers there.
In the words of St. Paul, “Drive out the wicked person from among you”. 1 Cor 5:11-13.
Scandal and relativism must not be allowed within our Church.
“Can. 1399 In addition to the cases established here or in other laws, the external violation of a divine or canonical law can be punished by a just penalty only when the special gravity of the violation demands punishment and there is an urgent need to prevent or repair scandals.”
Bob One — example of utter lack of faith in Christ: “No matter how many troops the Cardinal raises for the fight, they will not overcome the majority thinking of the people of this country.”
“It is better to say one Our Father fervently and devoutly than a thousand with no devotion and full of distraction.”
— St. Edmund
“God may not be setting fire to cities” — NOT YET!
God bless, yours in Their Hearts,
Kenneth M. Fisher
Not yet? Los Angeles, New York, Washington DC, Atlanta, over the years and decades, not to mention many great cities in Europe and elsewhere on the globe. The Great City is indeed burning, slowly but it’s on fire.
Yes, with our potentate in chief declaring the other day that he intends to ‘redefine’ marriage, as though he’s a real trailblazer, rather than a civilization burner.
No, Kenneth, but he did send hundreds of strikes of lightning over California about two years ago before we passed Prop 8 defending traditional marriages. Also, he has sent flies to torment Pharoah, and it will only get worse if he “does not le our people go” to worship the Lord without having to pay for abortions or do such faux marriages.
Virtues are formed by prayer. Prayer preserves temperance. Prayer suppresses anger. Prayer prevents emotions of pride and envy. Prayer draws into the soul the Holy Spirit, and raises man to Heaven.
–Saint Ephraem of Syria
Larry from RI,
In many cases, far too many, Knights are on the devil’s side in these battles. Just look at the Massachusetts and New York state legislatures for glaring examples of that!
I know ex Governor Mario Cuomo is or was a Knight — his son may be one as well. Maybe someone from New York can enlighten us on that.
God bless, yours in Their Hearts,
Kenneth M. Fisher
Not just big shot KOC members who favor and or push abortion. Few years ago, I was invited to a KOC breakfast by a long time friend (an ardent and self sacrificing prolife activist). There were about a dozen men and wives. A query was taken and almost half of them favored or were ok with abortion. That was the last time I had anything to do with such people, my friend excepted, since he’d sit down with the devil and drive him over the edge if it were possible.
The Knights now have Abp Lori as an advisor.
It used to be Cardinal Donald Weurl, who did not advise them properly – regarding pro-abortion members, etc.
If anyone knows of any abuses against Church teaching within the Knights, contact Archbishop Lori.
It is time to publically excommunicate all ‘Catholic’ politicians and others – who support homosexual marriage, abortion, euthanasia, and stem cell research.
Where are the US Bishops and Cardinals?
We need the public excommunications to stop the relativism and scandal within the Church.
For the words of St. Paul regarding excommunication read:
1 Cor 5:11-13.
Cardinal George stated, “Children, even if they are loved and raised by those who are not their biological parents, want to know who their parents are, who are their natural family.” It find it troubling that the Cardinal does not feel that adopted families are natural families. Are adoptive parents “unnatural parents”? Are adopted children “unnatural children”? It sounds as if Cardinal George is not really in favor of adoptions. I have read one Church document that speaks of how “genuine families” need to be protected. Genuine families being a man, a woman and their biological children. Sadly, other families don’t count as much in the eyes of some in the Church.
Mark from PA, adopted children are curious about their biological parents – their mother and their father.
This has nothing to do with adoption by a married woman and man, who are obligated to set good examples for children who need them.
Sodomy is a mortal sin, a terrible example.
Btw read: Gen: 19:1-29; Rom 1:24-27; 1 Cor 6:9 -10; 1 Tim 1:10.
Mark from Pa:: I find your way of thinking very troubling for someone that was raised as a Catholic. Why are you misreading what the Cardinal thinks or says? Get your own house (mind) in order and then, just maybe you can understand what others are really saying. +JMJ+
The good news is that we are a people of faith, people who have Christ.
‘Indeed it is written, Everyone who sins is a slave of sin; but the slave does not abide in the house for ever. The son abides for ever. Since then we too have been granted to have been called sons according to grace, we remain in the house for ever, if we hold firm the beginning of our undertaking to the end.’
–St. Theodore the Studite
“The Lord opened the understanding of my unbelieving heart, so that I should recall my sins.”
A good book is: “Where have all the Catholics Gone” by Fr. Michael Dolan.
After reading, you may want to send this as a gift to your Diocese Bishop.
Everyone needs to stand at the foot of the Cross with the Blessed Mother. We need to gaze up at the lifeless body of Her Son, with His Side opened. Stand in the pool of Blood and Water; look around. Amidst her agony, She has the consolation of St. Dismas, who has been guaranteed Paradise this very day because of the Agony and Death of Her Son. She sees St. Longinus, who converted as the Blood and Water poured out on Him. She sees the centurian who converted when Her Son died. Stand there in you sins, whether they be of lust or anger or pride or gluttony or stinginess or lack of charity. We are offered forgiveness if we repent. There are no excuses that work at the foot of the Cross. Our Blessed Mother stands there, Queen of Martyrs, because of all our sins. Console her. Surrender every inch of your heart to Christ.
Thank you, Cardinal George, for speaking the truth and leaving no stone unturned. God bless you.
He might have left one stone unturned, though — forbidding those politicians who push and vote for abortion and “marriages” between people of the same sex from receiving Communion is his diocese. I do not know Cardinal George’s policy on that.
Personal policy is secondary. Obedience to God, His law, and His Church take precedence.
All US Cardinals and Bishops must address SCANDAL and the loss of Souls that associate with it, as well as the relativism it creates.
Every single bishop who talks on this topic presents the vision that there is nothing anyone can do about the grievous sins of society today. They have about all thrown in the towel.
Your Fellow Catholic, those boys raised by two homosexual men are not going do any better and probably worse. In fact from what many of them have already said, it makes them feel totally strange and disoriented as would be natural for someone who knows two men cannot have children together.
Now, do not address any more posts to me as I do not want to discuss this disgusting subject any more.
It would be a nice thing if you didn’t view your fellow catholics with disgust. But you make it pretty clear that you do. But that’s your personal journey, and I wish you healing and wellbeing along the way.
However, if you care about the children being raised by gay partners, sometimes from previous straight marriages, sometimes through technology, sometimes by adoption, you might actually ask yourself how not extending marriage to same sex parents HARMS these CHILDREN.
YFC, We are Catholics. We cannot compromise. We care about God, first. We care about the gay partners and their children. People multiply their sorrows when they leave the path of the Lord. They harm themselves and they harm other people. Extending marriage to same sex partners is not going to help. It will make it worse. The worst punishment God can give to people is to leave them in their sins. I am sorry to frustrate you, but there are real issues here that you are glossing over. It is not merciful to legitimize something that deals death to the soul of human beings.
All people are called to holiness. The opposite of homosexuality is not heterosexuality. It is chastity. The Church is not asking homosexual persons to become heterosexual. She is asking them to be holy. If you have children, no matter your orientation, give them the powerful witness of holiness. Teach by example the way of life that chooses the right, even when it is inconvenient or bitter. Temptations come to everyone. Many people live doing whatever seems best at the time, following their impulses and they get themselves in all kinds of dire situations. Be the kind of parent that teaches and models self-mastery and confidence in God.
I phrased that badly. Homosexuality (the orientation) is not unchaste. The point is that the Church asks the same thing of everyone — we are all called to holiness.
One of my nephews was molested when he was under aged by another male relative and his live-in male lover when he was sent there for a visit. The mother trusted that relative. The first thing I asked her when she told me about it was, “Why did you ever send him there? I would never have sent any son of mine there.”
She found out about her son’s molestation when she was going to send him to that relative’s apartment for a visit again. He cried and beg her not to do so, and then told her what happened. Later he was beaten on a street in the city where he lived. A few years later he disappeared completely.
Anne T I’m so sorry to hear about this tragedy. I’ll keep your family in my prayers. God bless you and give you courage.
Thank you, Abeca, most of my family are dead now. Another family member confirmed pretty much what happened. I did not just take the mother’s word for it. I believe the mother of the one who did the molesting talked the family out of pressing charges. That is my take on it anyway.
Abeca, I should have written that another family member said that there was “strong evidence” that it happened, not that he “confirmed” it. He had talked with the victim.
Well it is a very sad story. My heart goes out to you and your family. So you have lost many family members too. I know how you feel, my aunt died of liver cancer a few years back, my papa had a bad heart, he died a few years ago too, after my aunt passed. From my mums side, all her siblings but one had passed, they were way older than her.
I hope you still have some good family that is there by your side. God bless you, you are in my prayers!
That is such an incredibly moving story! That poor young man. I’ll be praying for him too, Anne. There’s so much pain in this world.
I talked to the proper authorities about the situation after I heard about it, but there was nothing I could do as the young man was already of age, and neither he nor his mother chose to report it as far as I know. It is possible that he was later put under police protection or even murdered. His mother never found out.
What is your point, Anne? If this story is true, it is tragic. But it is just one person’s story. It has nothing whatsoever to do with the subject of this thread. None whatsoever. And besides that you string together 3 unrelated parts of his life as though that is all there was to his life. It is very very strange that a mother would send her adult child away for a “visit”. Who does that? What does his street beating have to do with anything else in the story? And he disappeared. What does that have anything to do with anything else? Maybe he was abused by his mother? Maybe he was on drugs? There are so many missing pieces to the story that it makes no sense to repeat it here.
When we speak about wisdom, we are speaking of Christ. When we speak about virtue, we are speaking of Christ. When we speak about justice, we are speaking of Christ. When we speak about peace, we are speaking of Christ. When we speak about truth and life and redemption, we are speaking of Christ.
St. Ambrose of Milan
A beautiful post, Abeca. One to remember. Did you see the Ignatius press movie about St.Augustine? The actor that played Ambrose was excellent!
It’s interesting you ask dear friend, my husband, just last week was asking me if I wanted to watch that movie. We plan to watch it soon. : ) I bet it’s a good movie, I look forward to it. : ) Thanks for the encouragement.
Well, Fellow Catholic, I made damn sure that neither of those men ever got close to my grandsons, even though I was related to one of them. My point Fellow Catholic is that those who have fallen over the edge into practicing perversion should not be entrusted with any one’s child alone because many of them have lost their moral compass and cannot be trusted.
Furthermore, he was not an adult when she sent him there, and they molested him. I made that quite clear in my posts. I said quite clearly that he was underage at that time. Don’t twist my words. I found out about it when he was older when his mother told me about it.
No his mother was not a good mother by my standards. She did not beat him, but she was involved with too many men during her lifetime.That is why I kept my children away from those members of my family when they were younger, but that does not excuse what the two men did to him.
When I said I did not find out about the molestation of my nephew until he was older, I meant he was already an adult by the time I found out, and it was then up to him to press charges.
If it was long ago, then your nephew can get some therapy to help him cope, also if he is Catholic, he can reflect in Holy scripture and Christ to help him heal. God bless him. Again I am so sorry. It is sad how there are many children robbed of their innocence because of wickedness. It is heartbreaking to me.
Abeca, this has reminded me to pray for him if he is still alive as I doubt he was ever even baptized. His mother was baptized by a Baptist church but ended up more New Age, so as far as I know he and his siblings never went to Sunday School or church, and the only Biblical foundation he ever got was perhaps the Biblical story books I gave him as a child. One of his half brother was even into Motley Crue, and I think you know how bad that kind of music is — basically Satanic. I need to keep all of them in my prayers.
I’m so sorry for misunderstanding, I thought that what you mentioned was in the present. I didn’t know that they had passed away.
Jesus loves Motley Crue. They wouldn’t be alive if He didn’t.
Yes, he does, Anonymous, but he does not always like what they do. Pray for their conversion.
Anonymous, I realize I have serious sins at times, too, getting self righteous or judgmental can be one of them. Perhaps I should not even have mentioned what happened in my family, but I did it to explain the anger that I sometimes feel on here when some suggest children be exposed to the wrong things or wrong people. I get somewhat like a mother bear or a lioness, which can be good or bad, depending on the reason for the anger and how it is carried out. It should always be done with love for all concerned and sometimes, I know, I have neglected that. For any sins of wrong judgement or self righteousness I am sorry and will try, by the grace of God, to avoid and improve.
God bless you, Anne T.
Anne T you are just fine… you did nothing wrong and you are reasonable to say what you said. Ignore Anonymous. Plus many are alive yet they still choose hell, you know better because you know that God still allows man to live and still have free will… so ignore Anon!
Anonymous and Abeca, some do not believe that Satan or Pure Evil really exists. Sometime before the mother of the molested young man passed away, she asked me if I had seen anything unusual in one of the houses where they were allowed to stay. I told her that I did not “see” anything unusual, but that I did feel uncomfortable there She then told me that she had seen an evil entity in one of the bedrooms. That was when I told her that I had found out previously that the relative who owned the house had been into white witchcraft, and I had been uncomfortable there and sensed it until she had stopped. I was aware that one of the mother’s sons had played Motely Crue in one of those bedrooms on previously occasions, but I did not remind her at that time. So from my own experience and that of others, I know real evil, the demonic, does exist.
I also thank you two for your blessings, and I did have Masses said for those relatives who were involved in the occult.
By the way, Your Fellow Catholic, I did what I could for my nephew and any children involved in that situation with money or buying clothing, educational materials, etc. when i was able. They were in another area, so even though I did not let my children stay there or be too involved with them, I helped when I could. I was not callous to their situation,
No doubt, Anne. I’m sure your heart ached then as it still does for the family.
By the way, Your Fellow Catholic, I helped my nephew when I could do, and I thought it would be really helpful to him.
Correction: “could do so”.
I am sorry for posting too many posts, but even though those posts were for today and not yesterday, the website kept kicking back a message that I had posted the same thing before, and they did not come up on my computer as having gone through, even though they had. So my apologies for the repeat posts, even though it was do to a glitch on the other end or in my computer.
Don’t apologize Anne… it was good of you to share and it will bring extra prayers for your nephew! With God, all things are possible, as you know, and I’ve heard of men being restored and returning to their families not infrequently, and there is always the witness of the prodigal son.