 |
| Ignatius and Islam: Uncovering Faith Intersections- National CAtholic Reporter |
Newer have liked this rag, and here is one reason why:
NcR
Needs a Time Out!
Holy smokes! National
catholic Reporter (small “c” no accident) seem to be hell-bent on going down
with the ship! I think I’m going to change my pet name for them to “Not
Catholic Reporter.” It’s just gotten that ridiculous. Seriously, it decided
it’s going to be the number one mouthpiece for the anti-USCCB folks? I’m a
little shocked that they’ve done a piece tying the entire editorial staff to the
same millstone, but they have indeed (http://donotlink.com/ncronline.org/news/politics/editorial-go-beyond-foot-stomping-no#.VaZ-wdIIoxY.twitter):
In
another way, however, this broad new acceptance may be as transformative in its
own way of our understanding of something deeply personal and mysterious as
recent explorations have been transformative of our understanding, in equally
jarring ways, of an infinitely vast and endlessly mystifying universe.
OK, I’m just going to ask this? What…the…H E Double Hockey
Sticks does that mean??? Anyone? Really? What are they trying to say? I feel
like a new age psychologist on acid wrote this. Thanks for the comic
relief.
In each
case, old certainties that once comfortably contained our presumptions are
shattered. Even those who marvel at or celebrate such new realities might, at
the same time, find them unsettling.
Uh, yeah, thousands of years of God’s Law just went out the
window. You bet we find them unsettling. I’m going to bust this out again –
Thanks Captain Obvious!
The
Catholic church, which has used some of the most severe language of major
denominations in its condemnation of homosexuality, labeling those with a
homosexual orientation “intrinsically disordered,” is especially challenged by
the ruling.
Really? Homosexuals have been condemned? Mind showing us a
citation for that? Honestly, why do you even want to have “Catholic” in your
name again? You clearly are against most doctrine.
At
least its leaders are, for it has become clear in recent years that when it comes
to believers, Catholics are among the most accepting of homosexuality. In terms
of same-sex marriage, according to recent Pew Research polling, “Among
Catholics and white mainline Protestants, roughly six-in-ten now express
support for same-sex marriage.”
OK, we all know by now
the Pew Research poll was an outlier (http://nineteensixty-four.blogspot.com/2015/05/the-island-of-misfit-polls.html).
Still desperately clinging to that one, NcR? Just for the sake of making you
feel better about your downward spiral, sanity-wise, let’s say Pew was right
(which is a bigger stretch of logic than their poll). If 99% of people are
wrong, does that make them right? I seem to recall a story about Noah, and
another about Lot. Pesky, but if you call yourselves Catholics, you might want
to flip through the pages of the Bible once in a while.
Churches
certainly don’t run on polling data, but the bishops should at least be informed
of what the flock is thinking. And the majority of the flock is not in
agreement with assertions such as those voiced by Archbishop Joseph Kurtz of
Louisville, Ky., who called the decision “a tragic error.”
Great, Carnac! Tell me what am I thinking right now? That you
are all pompous idiots? Right on the money.
Kurtz, president of the
U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, compared Obergefell v. Hodges to Roe v. Wadeand said that just as Roe v. Wade did not settle the question of abortion, Obergefell v. Hodges does not
settle the question of marriage. “Neither decision is rooted in the truth and,
as a result, both will eventually fail. Today the Court is wrong again. It is
profoundly immoral and unjust for the government to declare that two people of
the same sex can constitute a marriage.
The
comparison with Roe is simply way off base.Obergefell is not a matter of life and death. The
case thus stated by Kurtz also places the conference in the posture of
combatant — with everyone: gays and lesbians, their families, government
structures, not to mention the church itself in the expression of the many
Catholics who disagree.
And here’s how we know you wouldn’t know Catholicism if it hit
you with a 2×4. Yes, it is a matter of life and death. You have NO concept of
eternal life or eternal damnation. The Catholic Church is not called to be in
union with everyone. Everyone is called to be in union with the Catholic
Church. Can you really be this out of touch with Catholic teaching?
Further,
if the church’s experience with Roe is any
indication, taking the combative approach will mean endless years of litigation
and lobbying, convincing few and alienating many while further depleting
whatever political capital the church might have left.
I’m sorry. Did anyone catch the news the last couple of days?
Let’s see – the Israelites wandered 40 years in the desert, and now it’s taken
about 40 years to see Planned Parenthoods closing left and right and the
National Organization going up in flames. Sorry, NcR. God’s people are very,
very patient.
The
Supreme Court ruling on same-sex marriage has, like the Affordable Care Act
before it, raised new questions about religious freedom — how it is interpreted
in the course of day-to-day life, and who can claim it as a means of exempting
themselves, individuals or businesses, from following the law. These complex
matters will demand more of the bishops than a foot-stomping “no.”
Nope, not really. It’s time to come out with all guns a blazing.
If this line in the sand is crossed, it might take a lot longer than 40 years
to reclaim this land. I think we’ve all learned that impossible is quite
possible. We’re not taking anything for granted anymore – especially our
Religious Freedom. It’s quite clear that if the “powers that be” in this country
are going to go after the Little Sisters of the Poor, they’re going to go after
us all.
As Jesuit Fr. Tom Reese points out in his analysis, a combative
stance is not the only option. First, the church’s treatment of divorced and
remarried people is an apt comparison to gay couples. Divorce and remarriage is
legal in all states, but the church is not required to perform such weddings.
Ministers remain free to denounce divorce. At the same time, it is rare that
Catholic institutions fire people who divorce and remarry; moreover, they and
their new spouses often receive benefits. Such consideration is not viewed as
an endorsement of a lifestyle.
Further,
Reese points out, “In Catholic morality, there is nothing to prohibit a
Catholic judge or clerk from performing a same-sex marriage. Nor is there any
moral obligation for a Catholic businessperson to refuse to provide flowers,
food, space and other services to a same-sex wedding.” Bishops, even those
intent on railing against the decision, need to make that point clear to their
people.
First of all, does it bother anyone that Fr. Reese uses Thomas
Reese in his articles? Dropping “Fr.” from his byline really should be a
tip-off. Next, he’s a Jesuit. God bless those priests who still follow St.
Ignatius, but odds are he’s into subverting faithful Catholicism. Next, let’s
just be clear: “Thomas Reese” doesn’t want the Church to fight for any core
Catholic principles like marriage, life, etc. He really does everything he can
to step over the Catholic “line” without actually saying what he’s thinking
lest he be silenced. He already had to leave America Magazine for not defending
the Faith (he simply reported both sides, don’tcha know?).
Fortunately for U.S. Catholics, examples exist of other
episcopal voices who took a more measured and prudent approach. Cardinal Donald
Wuerl of Washington, D.C., wrote that the meaning of marriage for the church
was the same post-Supreme Court ruling as it was before.
The
practical challenge for the church and its agencies, he said, is the need “to
balance two important values, the provision of appropriate health care benefits
for all church personnel including their spouses, and the avoidance of the
perception that by doing so we accept a definition of marriage and spouse
contrary to faith and revealed truth.
Hmmm…the editorial staff is cherry picking. Perhaps they didn’t
notice this part:
The ancient Maxim “love the sinner but hate the sin” is central
to our behavior because it refers to all human beings. The Lord asks us to “be
perfect, just as your heavenly Father is perfect,” but he does so in reference
to how we are to love one another (Matthew 5:48). In the Sacraments, he also
gives us the grace to do so. The Church has and always will meet people where
they are to bring them closer to Christ.
At the
same time, to condemn any sin is not discrimination against the person who
commits the sin. Disagreement is not discrimination. We do not force people to
agree with us, we ask to be granted the same freedom to hold our beliefs.
Catholic teaching on human sexuality is the same for all. We are called to love
God and love one another in truth (Matthew 22:36-40; Ephesians 4:15;
Philippians 1:27; cf. Gaudium et Spes, 24; Caritas in Veritate, 1-2; Familiaris
Consortio, 11 et seq.). (http://cardinalsblog.adw.org/2015/06/the-implications-of-the-supreme-courts-ruling-on-same-sex-marriage/)
Another NcR favorite:
“Bishop Gregory Hartmayer of Savannah, Ga., wrote, “This
decision of the Supreme Court is primarily a declaration of civil rights and
not a redefinition of marriage as the church teaches.”
He
warned that those on either side of the issue are not dispensed “from the
obligations of civility toward one another. Nor is it a license for more
venomous language or vile behavior against those whose opinions differ from our
own.”
Not a shock. Isn’t it interesting that they’re not quoting from
the over 50 bishops who put out other statements? Do you think that maybe the
NcR editorial staff are the ones living in the 1970s-fashioned ivory tower and
out of touch? I think yes. Can we finally put away the felt banner,
bell-bottomed, Birkenstock Catholicism and get back to the Faith of our fathers
please.
I guess not, because then they go on to write a long soliloquy
to Archbishop Cupich – the prince of ambiguous speak.
In a statement following the decision, Chicago Archbishop Blase
Cupich urged calm and “mature” reflection. “The Church must extend support to
all families, no matter their circumstances, recognizing that we are all
relatives, journeying through life under the careful watch of a loving God,” he
said.
We
suspect that for a time, at least, the air will be full of warnings about the
ongoing march of a “gay agenda” and threats to everything we have previously
understood about marriage. The ruling was certainly due, in part, to the
activity of the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community and its
striving for rights during the past 40 years.
No, Archbishop Cupich, the air hasn’t been full of warnings. It
been actually quite full of threats and attacks from those promoting the “gay
agenda.” Perhaps you missed these:
Oh, and then there’s this little thing:
Yep, the faithful have absolutely nothing to worry about in the
least. How is it that an Archbishop in the United States concludes this ruling
is a result of “striving for rights?” Can you really give the alphabet soup
community any more accolades for destroying Traditional Marriage? It’s really
quite an insult to Martin Luther King, Jr. and Rosa Parks.
But
bishops and others should not underestimate the power of human experience nor
the depth of insights gleaned in the short period during which parents stopped
being embarrassed by their children, and gay children stopped hiding themselves
and their sexual orientation.
Repeat after me: “The
bishops should uphold the teachings of the Catholic Church.” Was that so hard?
Maybe the editorial staff that uses “Catholic” in its name might want to
suggest that one? Yes, I know I’m being silly. Why would NcR want to start
doing that now? It would be nice, however, if they maybe read the Church’s
documents. Here’s one I might suggest. Do you disagree with this NcR?http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_19861001_homosexual-persons_en.html
Cupich’s
“take a deep breath” approach seems a far more productive way to sort out the
tangle of issues that certainly will unravel in the wake of this decision. The
bishops — many of whom like to compare themselves to fathers of a family —
might, before they commit to a protracted fight, sit down with gay and lesbian
Catholics and their families and respectfully listen to their stories.
Oh, for goodness sake! Yeah, I bet no other bishop besides
Cupich, McElroy, and Cardinal O’Malley has ever associated with “gay and
lesbian” Catholics. Could you be more condescending?!? Get over your arrogant
selves!
Meanwhile,
we need to call a halt to actions that will further divide and damage the body
of Christ. Almost immediately, different models have surfaced for handling gay
marriage in the context of Catholic institutions.
Code for: We just need to let everyone do what they want and forget
about that pesky sin stuff.
On one hand, officials at Jesuit-run Fordham University wished
J. Patrick Hornbeck and his male spouse “a rich life filled with many
blessings” following their marriage the day after the Supreme Court decision.
While
noting that church teaching does not support same-sex marriage, a school
spokesman said Hornbeck, chairman of the theology department, had a
constitutional right to marry, “and like all University employees, students and
alumni, is entitled to human dignity without regard to race, creed, gender, and
sexual orientation.”
And this is what they really want. The editorial staff just
wants all the bishops to put a nice piece of duct tape over their mouths, sit
on their hands and take it. “What can we possibly do? SCOTUS says it’s the “Law
of the Land.”
But in the Philadelphia archdiocese, where Archbishop Charles
Chaput predicted dire social consequences as a result of the decision, Waldron
Mercy Academy decided not to renew the contract of Margie Winters, director of
religious education and outreach, because she is married to another woman.
According to a July 8
report on Philly.com, Waldron Mercy Principal Nell Stetser explained
in a letter to parents that the school “recognizes the authority of the
archbishop of Philadelphia, especially in the teaching of religion, because we
call ourselves Catholic.
According to the report, many of the parents are supportive of
Winters, who has worked at the school for about eight years, and they are angry
at the archdiocese.
While
an archdiocesan spokesman denied that the archdiocese had anything to do with
Winters’ dismissal, Stetser said in the letter that “my duty is to protect our
school’s future,” and there apparently is no perceived threat from students’
parents.
What’s the point here?
The teacher was told to keep her “marital” status quiet. She agreed. After a
while, her marital status was made known to some and was thrown into the public
realm. Sorry, but according to Canon Law “teachers are to be outstanding in
correct doctrine and integrity of life” (http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__P2N.HTM).
Are you suggesting that Canon Law be ignored? I’m pretty sure it’s your hope,
but are you willing to say it or are you just going to pull a Cupich and
ambiguously suggest it?
Fordham’s
response stems from the correct understanding of the Supreme Court ruling: It
advances societal understanding of equality and non-discrimination. That is
something the church can and should embrace. Church leaders certainly shouldn’t
fight it.
The Fordham staff are a bunch of dissenters who are going to
have to answer for that. Are YOU, editorial staff, suggesting the Catholic
Church accepts whatever the Supreme Court says? Really? You might want to
re-examine why it’s taken so long to stop the killing of babies in this
country. That would be the likes of organizations, publications, etc. like you
who are a bunch of wishy-washy people.
Justice
Anthony Kennedy’s majority decision acknowledges a religious exemption in the
recognition of same-sex marriages, the meaning of which Catholics need to study
and discuss maturely and calmly. It won’t be an easy discussion, but it will be
good for the community.
There’s that condescending tone once again. Are you all this
smug in person? Do you all think the bishops and cardinals are recent graduates
from the local junior colleges? Stop acting like Catholics who disagree with
you are a bunch of eight-year-olds you can just pat on the head. Was Christ
immature when He overturned the money changers tables? It’s called just anger
and whole lot of holy cardinals and bishops are rather calmly expressing their
utter grief over the situation in comparison to Christ and the money changers.
You are the ones who really need to slap the duct tape on your mouths. A
time-out is definitely in order for you.
What we
must avoid at all costs is a spate of firings of Catholic high school track
coaches and math teachers. We can respect a narrow definition of the
ministerial exemption out of respect for religious belief, but the broadening
of the definition of “minister” to include schoolteachers, food pantry workers,
diocesan accountants and parish musicians is wrong and must be resisted.
Uh, says who? You? Before you spout off as smarter than the
bishops, you might want to actually re-read the Hosanna-Tabor decision again.
There is no “narrow definition of the ministerial exemption.” That’s something
you hope for to undermine Catholic Identity.
Justice Roberts:
The
Court, however, does not adopt a rigid formula for deciding when an employee
qualifies as a minister. (http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/11pdf/10-553.pdf)
Where’s that narrow definition again, editorial staff? At least
do a little honest journalism and note that justice after justice said they
aren’t deciding who is and who is not a minister. Also, is someone suggesting a
diocesan accountant be named a minister? Please. Can you say “overly dramatic?”
Back to the NcR:
Furthermore,
if state Catholic conferences work to enact laws against discrimination in
employment and accommodations based on sexual orientation, that would help heal
wounds in the religious community and society at large.
Wait, are you suggesting that the Church work for laws that
limit her Religious Freedom to maintain their Catholic Identity? Really, would
that shock anyone? I think the editorial staff is hoping the Catholic Church in
the United States is going to be the France of the Catholic World. Here’s
hoping our cardinals and bishops have learned a little more from history than
NcR.
