The following comes from an October 8 story on the website of the leftish National Catholic Reporter.
In late September, Archbishop John Myers of Newark, N.J., upped the ante in the hierarchy’s culture war against LGBT civil rights by declaring that those who support marriage equality should refrain from receiving the Eucharist. With somewhere between 52 percent and 72 percent of Catholics in this country supporting same-sex marriage, a lot of people are going to be turned away hungry from the altar.
Myers articulated his position in a 16-page letter on marriage. Not surprisingly, most of the document reads as an argument against same-sex relationships rather than a pastoral letter that offers counsel on the many challenges that plague heterosexual marriages.
Myers’ also calls on “Catholic politicians who serve the common good” to “defend the truth about marriage against those who would try to deconstruct or radically alter its meaning.” This, too, may prove an uphill battle for the bishops since, as I have written previously in NCR, the marriage equality movement has been advanced to a good extent by Catholic politicians. Many of the governors — including Andrew Cuomo in New York, Martin O’Malley in Maryland and Christine Gregoire in Washington state — who have signed marriage equality bills into law are Catholic.
Since multiple studies and surveys have confirmed that more Catholics agree with marriage equality than the overall population and history has already demonstrated that Catholics have played a key role in passing same-sex marriage legislation, I’ve often wondered whether there is a connection behind the Catholic theological tradition and this particular issue.
I don’t think this phenomenon is evidence of increased secularization among Catholics. Cuomo, O’Malley and Gregoire, for example, all claim their faith is an important part of their identities. Nor do I think it is simply the result of Catholics having been raised in a justice-oriented tradition. The answer to why so many Catholics support marriage equality lies, I believe, in understanding the Catholic imagination.
In his book The Catholic Imagination, Father Andrew Greeley writes, “Catholics see the Holy lurking in creation. As Catholics, we find our houses and our world haunted by a sense that the objects, events and persons of daily life are revelations of grace.”
The Catholic imagination, or “Catholic sacramental view of the world,” as my mentor Margaret Farley calls it, has its roots in the Catholic understanding of the relationship between grace and nature.
In Catholic theology, grace perfects nature. Yes, human beings are a mess, and we’re born into a very messy world. But because we are created by God and because everything God creates is good, there is intrinsic goodness in us. God offers us countless opportunities of grace to help us transform ourselves and to redeem us.
Catholics believe the finite is capable of the infinite. This is why Greely says objects, events and persons all have the capability to reveal God’s grace to us. That grace can come in our experiences of love, forgiveness, compassion, justice, sacrifice, but also in the midst of suffering, brokenness and desolation.
It is the Catholic imagination that gave Dorothy Day the vision to see a prostitute with advanced syphilis as Jesus Christ on her doorstep.
It’s Catholic sacramental view of the world that allowed Pierre Teilhard de Chardin to see that “Christ has a cosmic body that extends throughout the universe.”
It is the Catholic theological tradition that made Thomas Merton see, in the middle of a Louisville, Ky., shopping center, that he was so in love with all of the people buzzing around him that he longed to tell them that “they are all walking around shining like the sun.”
Of course, the Roman Catholic Church bases its teaching on homosexuality on its interpretation of natural law, arguing that all sex acts must take place within the state of marriage and must have the potential to procreate.
But the Catholic imagination sees God everywhere, believes that God reveals Godself in all things and understands God can work through any human being or human relationship. By insisting that genital complementarity is an absolute requirement for marriage, the hierarchy places limits on God’s power to work within all of the relationships of all God’s beloved children.
To read the entire story, click here.
At a certain point one must ask why the shepherds sponsor the wolves.
Smokescreen for even worse, is my guess.
It’s too long to print here, so on the net please go to: ” What Catholics REALLY Believe SOURCE “.
Using the CCC it answers the questions:
” 9. Is the Catholic Church unfair to homosexuals?
What does the Church teach?
Why does it oppose gay-marriage?
Can homosexuals get to heaven? ”
It also has helpful links for those with same sex attraction,
and to the Vatican web site so people will know if they are attending a ‘true’ Church help group or a sinful group.
All Catholics including Cardinals, Bishops, Priests, Nuns, and Laity must adhere to the CCC.
Maybe Catholics have given up their Christianity and became something closer to secular idealism!
“Adhere”? What do you mean with this word?
Maybe one must first fear the Lord before anyone can adhere to anything. We must use reason, God’s holy wisdom and knowledge before anything makes good sense.
I prefer the term “follow Jesus” over “adhere to the CCC”.
The site in my above post also includes quotes from the CCC regarding Heresy, Schism, Scandal and Ignorance.
Pope Benedict has instructed each of us to read the “Catechism of the Catholic Church” in his Year of Faith – ‘Porta Fidei’.
It is so important to read the CCC (not local catechisms) that he has included the CCC itself in the Plenary Indulgence for the Year of Faith. –
Links to these are also included on the web site: ” What Catholics REALLY Believe SOURCE ” under “Year of Faith”.
Non-negotiables are: Abortion, Euthanasia, Gay-marriage, and Freedom of Religion.
No. Such reasoning leads to complete relativism and, ultimately, the absence of a sense of sin, and, more importantly, the cost of the commission of sin. We may not fully know why people are homosexual. But we do know that the limits placed on the exercise of sexuality by God and by the Church. At some point, faith must assume an objective reality — you cannot have homosexual sex, even though your creation as a person with those drives might be understood as “good”. Nor can you have sex before marriage, even though your heterosexual impulse to do so is “good”. This is not difficult to understand. Bishop Myers is correct in his direction that those who even support homosexual marriage should not receive communion. And who knows what Fr. Greeley ever means (although he did make a pile of money writing novels).
St, Christopher excellent comments! MIKE he actually uses the ability to reason….which no book can give you but only through God’s graces, love and faith this is all possible
You are mistaken Abeca. PLEASE before writing anything else and contradicting our Pope, go to the web site and read.
You will also see Dr. Scott Hahn in a short video.
and there is a link to ‘Porta Fidei’ which includes but is not limited to :
” 11. In order to arrive at a systematic knowledge of the content of the faith, all can find in the Catechism of the Catholic Church a precious and indispensable tool. It is one of the most important fruits of the Second Vatican Council.
In the Apostolic Constitution Fidei Depositum, signed, not by accident, on the thirtieth anniversary of the opening of the Second Vatican Council, Blessed John Paul II wrote: “this catechism will make a very important contribution to that work of renewing the whole life of the Church … I declare it to be a valid and legitimate instrument for ecclesial communion and a sure norm for teaching the faith.” etc. etc., – POPE BENEDICT, “Porta Fidei”.
Try it, you may see the wisdom of Pope John Paul II and Pope Bernedict.
Web site: ” What Catholics REALLY Believe SOURCE “.
I don’t understand why some Americans try to second guess Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict in matters of Faith and Morals. Pretending to know more than they do.
Our Popes try to teach while some Americans tell others the CCC is not that important because it is a book.
The Bible is made up of books too. Are you going to tell us that that book it is not important as well ?
CCC: ” 2089 SCHISM is the refusal of submission to the Roman Pontiff or of communion with the members of the Church subject to him. ”
If you read “Porta Fidei” directly you will see (starting with paragraphs 11 – 3 paragraphs) you will see that the POPE is INSTRUCTING each of us to STUDY the – – – – Catechism of the Catholic Church.
Easy one, Rick. The church is wrong.
Correction: “Easy one, Rick, peter is wrong”….the faith is correct. Natural law applies to all human beings whether they be Catholic or not!
peter, your scar tissue that once was brain tissue is no longer capable of distinguishing right from wrong. Pray for a miracle of healing.
peter prayer is good
I don’t see anything wrong with this as long as the auhitnetc voice of the Church is heard in the dialogue. But as far as I can tell there is nobody on the roster who will be presenting her truth. How is any learning going to occur there? That is unfortunate.LGBTs everywhere we love you and pray for you! Don’t give up on Christ and his Church!
I remember back in the late 70s talking with a friend who stated this view without equivocation. Human nature, he said without qualification, is essentially good. I didn’t know at the time he was gay, nor that he would march for gay rights. Now I realize he was saying essentially, my gayness and gay sex is good and pleasing to God. I will forever regret not asking him why Christ had to suffer for sins, and why he warned us of hell.
Here we go again. This is the result of insufficient and limited catechism many received in the ’70s and ’80s. These folks are now surveyed for polls. Couple it with the aggression of secular forces, its a wonder the percentage isn’t higher.
I frequently ask Catholic friends to define the Mass and they marvel at the fact that it is a Holy and Perpetual Sacrifice. We have a long way to go still.
I wish more would of read their Bible too!
This article does not support its own premise. Do we even know it to be based on current facts? It is little more than a quirky collection of random thoughts thrown out by other thinkers, most of whom are long departed, and some of whom are to be forgiven their oddball pronouncements as we await their more worthy utterances.
Maryanne what do you mean? I think you have something for us all to think about. I always hear people say that it was Catholics who this and that? I don’t recall them asking me what I thought. But maybe the reality is that this article sheds some light to things….I think that it was a Catholic who used the rainbow to stand for the gay agenda, I don’t recall the source but I remember reading about it. All so sad.
Mr. Greely should go back to writing his books. He has always been on the fringe of faith with spreading more confusion no matter what the subject.
I don’t get it. Is “genital complementarity” some kind of a joke?
Just thought I’d note someone named Jamie Manson wrote this piece.
Just goes to show you what a Master of Divinity degree from Yale Divinity School in Catholic theology and sexual ethics can get you; a ticket to the NCR heretics parade!
Where do they come up with this garbage?
I especially marvel at her opening charge: “the hierarchy’s culture war against LGBT civil rights.”
How about the spiritual war that is being waged by satan over the souls who buy this line?
Homosexuality is sinful, the homosexual is a child of God and should be treated with dignity. They have all the same rights that heterosexual enjoy; they can marry as long as it is someone of the opposite sex. If you do not choose that then don’t call it marriage and don’t call foul.
NCReporter is a blight on the souls of it’s readers.
And the 50 -70% of “catholics” who claim to support same-sex marriage are making a false claim…they are not Catholic. They left and joined the ranks of the fallen away who believe the “theologians” who write garbage for NCR(reporter).
This is what happens when Colleges and Universities do not use the “CATECHISM of the CATHOLIC CHURCH” as a required student text.
We end up with a mess, filled with errors of professors who are supposed to know what they are teaching.
The answer is so simple. And its in the “Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition “. – – – – no ifs, no ands, no buts – – just the facts.
Their incessant rants can be boiled down to categories. They are paid to disguise these categories with a lot of wordiness. Nothing they come up with has not been said or written countless times for eons. They are drummers of stupidity. And many there are who buy from them.
Greely has always been on the edge. I wondered when he would just jump off, and now I have the answer – he’s in free fall. When polls are used as the determinant of right and wrong sides of an issue by anyone, it’s a very good sign their opinions should not be trusted on any issue at any time. If I ever see that Andrew Greely is right on anything, I’ll assume it’s accidental. He’s loony, and has been since I first heard of him in the 1970’s.
When Jesus defined the Eucharist as the Real Presence and the people walked away, did Christ say: “Well, this poll is not in my favor–I better retract my statement.” OF COURSE NOT!
To clarify, are we talking about gay marriage or gay civil unions? They are two completely different things.
Alex:
Same sex “civil unions” are indeed distinct from same sex “marriage”, exactly as the Trojan Horse is distinct from the fall of Troy.
The “civil union” concept is a brilliant stratagem, concocted by excellent legal minds, who knew that, while there exists no 14th amendment issue regarding same sex “marriage” (this is acknowledged, binding Supreme Court precedent)- if one first grants same-sex civil unions, then…..
Presto change-o!
Now there *is* a 14th amendment issue.
Given the essentially pragmatist bent of the US electorate, they have, in many cases, willingly acceded to the “compromise” which, of course, turns out to be the perfect legal trap by which same sex “marriage” obtains a legal basis for a constitutional challenge to marriage.
I only wish that the Lord had seen fit to make people stupid, once they embrace evil.
But the astonishing sophistication of the radical homosexualist assault on humanity’s most ancient and irreplaceable institution empirically demonstrates the He didn’t.
One can fight against same sex marriage because marriage is a religious ceremony but when one fights against sam sex civil unions, one begins to merge church and state and forces non-Christian citizens to abide by Christian law. I know that I would not liked to be forced to abide by the laws of religions I do not support such as Islam, Hinduism, Sikhism, etc therefore I believe that it is wrong to force non-Catholics to abide by ours. Let them come willingly, not because we forced them.
You are wrong, Alex, because legalizing same-sex civil unions forces Catholic and judges of other religions, including Jewish, Islamic, Hindu and Sikh who disapprove to support these, Also, there is no need for such unions as healthcare provisions and property rights can be handled by legal means now for single people through making out wills and giving the power of attorney for ones healthcare to whomever one chooses. Many married heterosexual couples have used those means also. If they can and have to do it so, should single people. I do not know if you know this, but the Sikh religion teaches that marriage is between one and one woman, too. Also, India, where the majority of people are Hindu, outlawed so-called same-sex marriages, so most Hindus do not approve of it.. Islam and Orthodox and most conversative Judiasm, forbids such things also. In this country the only way it is even getting passed is by renegade judges and legislators against the will of the people.
Correction: “the Sikh religions teaches that marriage is between one MAN and one woman”.
You completely missed the point. I was not saying that Jews, Sikhs, etc support homosexuality. I was making the point that you do not start forcing people who do not follow a certain religion to abide by the laws of that religion. Non-religious Americans should not be forced into Christianity. It not only hurts those people but also hurts the religion. You are also wrong in thinking that same sex civil union would force Judges of certain religions into supporting it. The fact is, judges have an obligation to the law and to the constitution when doing their job. Their personal life, including religion, is separate. They either need to learn to separate their religion from the law or choose a different job, just as many of you would not willingly choose to be an Imam, or an OBGYN, or choose to work in a prison that delivers capital punishment.
So, what we really need is to pass an amendment to the Constitution mandating that judges not interpret any part of it except as written. That way they cannot make laws up by bending the meaning of our founding documents. Sounds radical, but the federal government would have to get out of a lot of areas it doesn’t belong in. Most of the decisions involving the word games would be null and void, as they ought to be. The Judicial branch is far too powerful, and have accelerated societal decay to a rapid rate.
I do not think you understand that mandating a literal interpretation of the Constitution would hurt the religious in this country.
Alex, it is you who completely missed the point.
Religion has not….one….single….itty….bitty….thing to do with civil marriage.
Nothing.
Nada.
Zilch.
Zero.
If one can notice that:
1. Our species is *biologically* constituted in two complementary genders,
2. Civilization depends on marriage- the stable union of man and woman- for its own future: children raised by their own parents,
then one can notice that same-sex civil unions are a counterfeit of marriage, one which extends its benefits to couples that cannot provide society with its benefits.
But that is not the worst thing- not by a long shot.
The worst thing is the same sex civil unions are a legal ploy by which marriage can be legally challenged as discriminatory (!)
As I said above. The homosexualist war on marriage is truly evil.
But it is also truly brilliant.
May God deliver us from the terrible mistake we have made by “compromising” on same sex civil unions.
It was never anything other than a trap, the legal equivalent of a Trojan Horse.
It’s now inside the gates.
If religion has nothing to do with civil union, why are you arguing against it? You continue to use purely religious arguments against it and then say they are not related. It is useless for me to try to explain this to you because your logic is sending you in circles.
Alex: “If religion has nothing to do with civil union, why are you arguing against it?”
>> Because civil unions are disastrous on non-religious grounds, as I have demonstrated above.
A: “You continue to use purely religious arguments against it and then say they are not related.”
>> Because I have never advanced a single religious argument, we see that you are either dishonest or illogical.
A: “It is useless for me to try to explain this to you because your logic is sending you in circles.”
>> It is useless for you to try and explain this because you have been exposed as incapable of even simple logic.
Both terms are false. Civil unions are not civil if they are same sex. Nor are they unions if same sex. Using that term is capitulating to the aims of sodomites. Many clergy use such terms because it is not clear to them.
The Catholic Church teaches that God is in all things except sin. The Catholic Church teaches that God can bring good from evil but that it is never permissible to do evil hoping that God will bring good from it. The Roman Catholic Church bases its teaching on marriage on the revealed Word Of God, Scripture and natural law.
k, according to what you claim, is God in a statue?
K, God is omnipresent (everywhere), but he is not in everything. It is pantheism, not Christianity that teaches that God is in everything.
Anne T., no. Pantheism believes that all things together are God. God is not a separate being. Christianity believes that all created things are in God. God is an entirely other being, infinitely above all things. Like you said, God is everywhere. ccc 300
K, the dictionary definitions of omnipresent is “present in all PLACES at the same time”. The dictionary definition of pantheism is #1.”the doctrine that all forces, manifestations, etc.of the universe ARE God or #2. The worship of all gods”. There is a difference between omnipresent and pantheism, but it is too much to go through on here. I do think you understand it though. What JLS was asking you is what you meant by “God is in all things”. I think you meant that people are created in the image of God, not that a statue IS God as some pagans or pantheists believe, but that sin mars that image of God in us. In that sense we should see Christ in all people, though marred. The “marred” part is what needs to be corrected, but the above article and writer does not give the impression that the sinful part of a person needs to be changed, On the other hand, the Church teaches that they need to repent before they can restore the Holy spirit in their soul. God leaves the soul of an unrepentant sinner and does not return until that person repents and makes his/her peace with God by a RIGHTLY FORMED CONSCIENCE. What some people call their “conscience” is not a rightly formed conscience and some are culpable because they have not sought the truth so their conscience IS a rightly formed conscience according to Church teaching.
Anne T. God is everywhere. Matter does not displace Him. Man is the only creature created in the image and likeness of God. No, the statue is not God; neither is the sun. We do not worship creatures.
k, air is everywhere but not all things can breathe it.
JLS, air is not everywhere.
Yes and it is in Him.
Wow! did this get confusing. I think I should have stayed out of the mail between JLS and K. (Lots of laughs.) Now I cannot tell what she means. Oh, well I am gone for good on this one.
Anne T., God is everywhere.
Anne T,
Out of the mouths of trusting lambs and babes comes this honest comment…. “Wow! did this get “CONFUSING.”
“My sheep hear my voice, and I know them and they follow me”…John10:27 Douay-Rheims Catholic Bible
Anne T, There are deliberate purveyors of confusion and deception on this website. Never let a deliberate purveyor of confusion intimidate you into confusion or silence, for that is just one of the intended duplicitous goals.
St. Augustine said, “Before the devil can destroy you, he must first deceive you.”
Jesus Christ is Lord!
The lack of imagination is what helps distort marriage in this case. We think legalistically, rights, equality, etc without pondering what it is homosexuals do to each other. The act is what is objectionable, its lack of creativity, its brutality, its inversion of nature, its wanton selfishness.
Its a very simple answer, Teach the Catechism and not the Bologna LWCR and everyone try’s to pass as Catechism
Can you disagree with the Church and still be Catholic on matters of Doctrine?
Only in so far as Jesus can.
I remember telling a pastor from one parish that I didn’t agree with alter girls serving……he agreed with me and told me that it was OK to disagree about that one….
Hah, this article supports my supposition that Dorothy Day is a liberal’s idea of a saint, and Thomas Merton was practically a zen buddhist. The problem with most of us is we have TOO MUCH imagination, and it is self-discipline and living in accordance with Church doctrine, the Bible and the myriad resources such as the lives and writings of the saints that we can begin to even fathom the beauty and incredible creativeness of God. Imagination rules the world, according to Napoleon and if anyone had imagination, it was he. Hitler had a vivid imagination as well. We only been able to grow in our Catholic understanding by reining in our overworked imaginations. I think people are misusing the word…I think what they should really mean is creativity, which is a gift from God. It seems like satan finds a real playground in our imaginations. A good example of imagination is to me is John Lennon’s song “Imagination’. Sounds good on the surface but it’s always a dream without God. I don’t think The Catholic Reporter should not be allowed to use Catholic in its title. It’s deeply in error and steeped in stuff and nonsense.
No one has too much imagination. People use it wrongly, which is the problem. Imagination is the use by the mind of images. Reason is the use by the mind of logic.
That was a good article by Jamie Manson. It gave me a lot of food for thought. Dana, I think The National Catholic Reporter has many good articles. I agree with you to an extent about John Lennon’s song “Imagine”. In it he says, “Imagine there’s no heaven.” That is not so good. Good music but not the best of messages in that song. I bought that album when I was a teen and like a lot of the songs but Imagine’s message struck me cold.
Good point, PA: John Lennon’s “Imagine there’s no heaven” is a deception. It is not possible to truly imagine heaven, which is why Jesus told us not to attempt it. Therefore, it is also impossible to imagine no heaven.
PA I am totally not surprised that you think the National Catholic Distorter eh Reporter has many good articles. They are newspaper of malcontents and dissenters, the define the church of nice. I never liked John Lennon he was just another drugged addled over sexed hippie who abandoned his wife and young son for another woman, it is no wonder your generation has given him a secular canonization.
Mark PA, the “National Catholic REPORTER” has many heretical and schismatic writers/reporters. They support Obama, Pelosi, Biden and others who are also heretics. They support married priests, women priests, gay-marriage, etc.
The Reporter has been nick-named “fishwrap” since it is only good to wrap stinky fish in.
They do not believe in what the Catholic church teaches – in the “CATECHISM of the CATHOLIC CHURCH, Second Edition”. Nor will they print comments that refer to the CCC. (I have been blocked from quoting the CCC more than once.)
I urge all true Catholics to boycott the “National Catholic REPORTER”.
This is not the ‘National Catholic Register’ which is faithful to the Magisterium.
I forgot to mention that about 20 years ago the Bishop in the home Diocese of the REPORTER told them not to use the name ‘Catholic’.
Naturally they continue to disobey – like all heretics and schismatics.
Also, correct me if I’m wrong, but it seems that greely, like lady gaga, madonna, and a host of other parasites that milk their association with the Church for all it is worth, should confine himself to writing inane novels and wearing checked sports coats ..He presents himself as a Church spokesman, for pete’s sake! He gave obama several thousand dollars in 2008’s election. . Who is his bishop? Who oversees what he writes when he ‘speaks’ for the Church, like in the NYT. Should he be allowed to do that?
Just wondering. I have no idea. I read one his books once, and I thought at the time, ‘How does he get away with this?” It seems like if you’re saying things that arent’ true, and you’re supposedly a priest, and people believe what you say, this isn’t right, is it? I guess his truly generous gifts to Catholic schools gives him credibility? Am I being rude?
No, Dana, you are not being rude, just telling the truth, and it needs to be heard, but I think you truly have a misconception about Dorothy Day. From the books I have read about her and one autobiography (I think) I read years ago, she was sorry for all the wrong things she had done and sought to make amends. She ended up against abortion even though she had had one. From what I see the radical left likes to use her and twist her words to suit their own ideology as they try to make St. Joan of Arc out to be a cross dresser and a radical feminist when she was no such person. St. Joan wore men’s clothing out of dire necessity, and at all other times she wore the typical clothing of the women of her class. She wore soldiers’s clothing to protect herself in battle and from rape. I might be wrong, but it seems to me that the radical left does the same thing with Dorothy Day because she once was a Communist. They often quote her words before her conversion and ignore what she said after her conversion which most often were quite different.
I just want to puke! So all those prostitutes who turned from their evil ways in the past, did severe penance when they realized all the evil they had done and later became great saints were wrong according to these people. Yes, we certainly should help one with syphilis get out of the mire they are in, but not by encouraging them to continue the behavior that got them into the mire in the first place, and I doubt Dorothy Day did that either. I think they have just twisted her words as many do the Bible, St. Joan of Arc and many other of the Saints. I have always avoided Fr. Greeley’s books at bookstores because he seems to have a one track mind — down in the gutter most of the time if you ask me. I will take Pope John Paul II’s “Theology of the Body” any day over this trash, and I do mean trash.
I cannot find any incriminating evidence to diss Dorothy Day. She seems like a true convert and not some subtle wolf in sheep’s clothing. But that does not mean I believe Thomas Merton is anyone to follow; I read his last letters and he was enthralled with the demonology he found in the far east.
And please, Lord Jesus, while you are at it bring back to us more Saints like Nicholas the Bishop who saved the three women from prostitution instead of saying, “Oh, it is fine that they take such a job — all the more money they will make. to buy pretty dresses.”
Also, thank you Archbishop John Myers for doing the right thing by protecting the Holy Eucharist against desecration by those who would take it unworthily.
For truly appalling look at the workings of at least one ordained priest’s mind works, I point to Father Andrew Greeley’s two “non-fiction” books on the selecting of the popes, both our current pope and his predecessor. I walked around in disbelief for 2 weeks after reading about the selection of Pope John Paul II and made the mistake of lending the book to a brilliant Catholic friend. Although I forewarned her, she seems now to associate me with this author, and I now lament time misinvested, dollars misspent, and a friendship risked on this man’s writing. Actually, the writing isn’t nearly as bad as the man’s distorted thinking. It proves yet again that all sorts of people have been ordained, which of course we knew but are pained to remember. Life is short indeed, my friends; read only good books, most especially including The Good Book!
Maryanne L. Now that you opened up the can of worms, you have raised our interest about the two previous papal elections. Something obviously disturbed you and we are eager to find out what it is. Perhaps you can share with us what your read. Who is to say whether or not the disturbing information written by the priest is true or not? One would hope that what a good priest writes is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. The correct way that an author builds credibility into his/her book is by providing plenty of truthful references. If the references are from reliable sources, the odds are pretty high that a book’s author may be completely correct and credible whether the reader likes the facts in the book or not. I would suggest as a matter of caution that you relook at the book and if it hasn’t any good credible references from which to draw the written facts from, than to not share with us the information we are interested in learning about those two papal elections, as we wouldn’t want you to be held liable for slander or anything; however, if the book’s information is filled with many credible references to stand behind the facts, then you have nothing to fear in sharing with us what information that disturbed you, or at least share with us the title of the book. We all want to know the truth of what is going on in our daily lives. This is just one more piece in the mysterious puzzle of the 20th and 21st centuries.
Harv, I was more appalled by the thinking of Father Andrew Greeley than by the facts he wrote down in his daily diary entries prior to and during the process of selecting Pope John Paul II. Having loaned or given away his books, I can’t refer to specific comments he made, but he didn’t seem to think much of any of the cardinals as far as I could determine and definitely has a negative, critical, gossipy view of people. His comments about the various individuals, jotted down on a daily basis, his repeated griping about little things like Vatican accommodations, and his petty ways of seeing these other respected human beings as almost caricatures reminded me of gossipy teenaged girls and their unending critical comments about other girls, their own parents, teachers and older people in general. I am surprised his work is published, as it is unworthy of a Catholic priest, and certainly makes all of us look foolish to admire members of the Catholic hierarchy. I question his smug self-satisfaction and wonder who is buying his books. I guess I would rather not give him more thought and would prefer to read other more truly Catholic writers.
Real catholics don’t support marriage equality as defined in this article (i.e. between gays and lesbians). Marriage according to the Roman Catholic Church and US Defense of Marriage Act is between one man and one woman!
I am not saying that there is not a place for Catholic sexology for married couples with problems. There is, but I think it should be reserved to married Catholic lay people, for the most part, who are loyal to Church teachings — preferably non involved doctors and healthcare professionals who know what is truly beneficial and what is harmful to the body. Married people should not confide in “friends” with whom they are close. I have seen more marriages destroyed by “friends”, even Catholic “friends”, whose true purposes were to destroy the marriage instead of helping the couple solve their differences. I also think that Fr. Greeley needs to stay away from writing racy novels. It does not become a celibate priest. I think Mother Angelica has the right idea when she tells women not to read racy romances because no husband can compete with the Mr. Perfect of the romance books.. The same goes for men. No woman, including the models themselves, can compete with the airbrushed perfect women in Playboy or porn.
Are lesbians sincere about marriage? I don’t believe it for a minute! They only covet the treasure trove of benefits like insurance, etc. My mother lived the lesbian life, may God rest her tortured soul. If she had married a woman I would have run away or worse (I am an only child).
What about children who do not want two mommies? Where is the help for them?!
An attorney I know had a case: a 9-yr.-old girl adopted by two lesbians kept telling them “But I want a mommy and a daddy!” It went to court because the lesbians sued the adoption agency.
Hey, do Catholics want children put into these situations? Do Catholics even consider the children??
Keep The Faith has a 1984 speech by Dr. Mary Royer available for download about the plans for gay infiltration into the Church — “Dignity Convention Address To Serra Club.”
We always hear about Catholic “conversion” stories. So, let’s work to convert those Catholics who favor gay “marriage” by explaining that it’s not “marriage” as God intended.
Those plans are already carried out.
I just re-read the top of the post. You’ve misled readers! Where’s the full header? “NATIONAL CATHOLIC REPORTER: Why Do So Many Catholics Support Marriage Equality? by …”
The reporter doesn’t cite the “studies and surveys:” He says: “Since multiple studies and surveys have confirmed that more Catholics agree with marriage equality than the overall population and history has already demonstrated that Catholics have played a key role in passing same-sex marriage legislation, . . . ”
Where’s the evidence? I’m a Catholic and worked very hard to defend traditional marriage in Oregon and gay marriage is illegal here.