Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘Gay Marriage’

Bishop DiMarzio Responds to New York’s Politicians on Gay Marriage: Has the Slumbering Giant of the Episcopacy Been Awakened?

Posted in Bishops, tagged , , , , , , , on June 28, 2011 | 8 Comments »

The following is a statement by Bishop Nicholas DiMarzio, Bishop of the Brooklyn Diocese, regarding the passage of the gay marriage bill in New York. The Diocese of Brooklyn is one of the largest in the United States in terms of population, and Bishop DiMarzio’s is therefore a very influential voice. First Bishop DiMarzio’s statement, and then a few comments.

Today, Governor Andrew Cuomo and the state legislature have deconstructed the single most important institution in human history. Republicans and Democrats alike succumbed to powerful political elites and have passed legislation that will undermine our families and as a consequence, our society.

With this vote, Governor Cuomo has opened a new front in the culture wars that are tearing at the fabric of our nation. At a time when so many New Yorkers are struggling to stay in their homes and find jobs, we should be working together to solve these problems. However, the politicians have curried favor with wealthy donors who are proponents of a divisive agenda in order to advance their own careers and futures.

What is needed in our state is leadership and not political gamesmanship.

In light of these disturbing developments and in protest for this decision, I have asked all Catholic schools to refuse any distinction or honors bestowed upon them this year by the governor or any member of the legislature who voted to support this legislation. Furthermore, I have asked all pastors and principals to not invite any state legislator to speak or be present at any parish or school celebration.

The above request is intended as a protest of the corrupt political process in New York State. More than half of all New Yorkers oppose this legislation. Yet, the governor and the state legislature have demonized people of faith, whether they be Muslims, Jews, or Christians, and identified them as bigots and prejudiced, and voted in favor of same-sex “marriage.” It is mystifying that this bill would be passed on the last day of an extended session under the cover of darkness.

This issue has been framed as upholding marriage equality. This is not the case since one of the principal purposes of marriage is to bring new life into the world. This cannot happen in same-sex marriage. It is not a civil rights issue, but rather a human rights issue upholding the age-old understanding of marriage. Our political leaders do not believe their own rhetoric. If they did, how in good conscience could they carve out any exemption for institutions that would be proponents of bigotry and prejudice?

Republicans and Democrats equally share responsibility for this ruinous legislation and we as Catholics should hold all accountable for their actions.

Bishop DiMarzio’s statement is to be lauded as a good first step, but only as a first step. It isn’t enough to refuse honors from, or give honors to legislators. There are members of the Catholic Church who have been waging war against all that we stand for and then walk up on Sunday and receive Holy Communion.

Enough!

The sins of the Ted Kennedys, Andrew Cuomos and Nancy Pelosis are so vast, so deeply rooted, and entirely the fabric of the Democrat Party, that any confession by these people needs to have a public recanting of their deeds and concrete evidence of an action plan to undo them as the penance. If the politician is unwilling to work within the political system to undo their grave injustices and work toward a restoration of justice under law, then they are not contrite.

We have run out the rope on the excuse by so many bishops that we don’t know the private state of their souls. That simply strains credulity. If the politicians remain the same week after week, month after month, year after year, then as we say in Brooklyn, that’s a clue.

It’s a clue to their impenitence, and it is a sin against charity to confirm them in their impenitence by allowing them to eat and drink condemnation upon themselves, as Saint Paul put it.

As I’ve said before on this blog, if the fight was “too political” for the bishops in the past, the threat is now existential going into the future. The faithful are enraged over this law, and the bishops have a once-in-a-generation opportunity here to publicly call upon Catholic pro-abortion, pro-gay marriage politicians to publicly repent or face severe sanctions, beginning with being barred from the Eucharist, and leading to excommunication. There is a small window of opportunity here to reclaim the leadership most have eschewed for far too long.

For great good, or great evil, this is an historical moment for the United States Bishops in general, and New York’s bishops in particular. This is the great moment where the bishops can define what it means to be a Catholic in terms of sacramentality, and how to be a Catholic in the public square. This is the time for a muscular response. The faithful will back them to the hilt.

Carpe Diem!

Read Full Post »

A Canon Lawyer Goes After Governor Cuomo

Posted in Marriage, tagged , on June 26, 2011 | 1 Comment »

Canon Lawyer Eward Peters on Governor Cuomo in the wake of the Gay Marriage Bill signing:

“Among the many persons laboring in New York to accord same-sex unions the civil legal status of marriage, no one played a more important, and indeed a constitutionally essential, role than did the governor of the Empire State, Andrew Cuomo, a Roman Catholic. Cuomo’s gubernatorial campaign touted his strong support for “gay marriage”, he used his enormous influence to push key legislators into voting for New York’s “gay marriage” bill, and he signed that bill into law hardly an hour after it was passed…

“First, Cuomo’s long pattern of conduct in regard to “gay marriage” warrants, in my opinion, a canonical investigation under Canon 1717 into whether he has “in a public show or speech, published writings, or in other uses of the instruments of social communications … gravely injure[d] good morals…” and on that account is to be punished (puniatur) with a just penalty per Canon 1369…

“Cuomo’s concubinage gives prominent bad example against marriage, but his official actions in regard to “gay marriage” have changed the very definition of marriage in the populous state under his care; Cuomo’s living arrangements are of immediate canonical concern to only two of New York’s eight arch/bishops, but his political actions in regard to “gay marriage” negatively impact the pastoral mission of every Catholic bishop, parish priest, deacon, and lay minister throughout the Province of New York; finally, while most of the bishops of New York said little or nothing about Cuomo’s living with a woman not his wife, his long-standing actions in regard to “gay marriage” were challenged repeatedly, directly, and forcefully by the Archbishop of New York and by all his seven suffragans.

“In light of the foregoing, I see no way, absent a public reversal of his public conduct, that Andrew Cuomo may present himself for holy Communion (per Canon 916), and, if he does present himself, I see no way that a minister of holy Communion may administer the sacrament to him (per Canon 915). Indeed, the only question in my mind is whether the ordinaries of New York should lift from the shoulders of individual ministers the burden of reaching this decision, by making a determination to this effect themselves and, assuming they do reach this conclusion, whether they should announce it publicly or in a personal letter to Cuomo. (Personally, I think a public announcement more befits the markedly public character of Cuomo’s conduct and responds better to the danger of scandal presented to the faithful by his actions).

Read the rest here.

H/T Deacon Greg Kandra

Read Full Post »

New York and Gay Marriage, Nothing New

Posted in Uncategorized, tagged , on June 25, 2011 | 11 Comments »

For all of the political drama in New York these past weeks, last night’s historic vote in favor of gay marriage by the NYS Senate was actually rather anti-climactic. It was a fight over political and philosophical nomenclature, not over new realities. As the losing side licks its wounds this morning, we should realize that we didn’t lose as much as we think we did last night. We’ve been losing it for decades.

What we call the lived reality that is marriage is important. The name indicates the reality. Nomen est omen, as it is said in latin. “The name is the sign.” What really happened here in New York last night was a recognition that for thirty years we have given the lived reality of marriage to gays and lesbians, by systematically giving them all of the goods and privileges reserved to married people.

There was little, if any, protest as sodomy laws were struck down, when gay/lesbian adoptions were legalized, when partners were entitled to shared employment benefits hitherto reserved for spouses, etc. Society used to reserve these goods for those men and women willing to make a lifetime commitment to one another. What were once rights became entitlements in a nation increasingly debilitated by narcissism and a faux egalitarianism.

We have allowed what was once a brush fire to build to a forest fire that is now raging across the American landscape. Fueling that fire has been the same surrender of marital goods and privileges to cohabiting heterosexuals as well. Add to that no-fault divorce and the all-out war on the greatest of all the goods of marriage:

The abortion of over 53 million babies, because people have been enjoying the sex, but were not prepared mentally, emotionally, or economically to embrace the obvious outcome. Children are the greatest of all the blessings of marriage, yet have been treated as mere accessories by people aping marriage.

This isn’t the fault of gays and lesbians so much as it is our fault for allowing it to happen. Consider the following.

Kansas is poised to become the first state in the nation that is abortion-free. They are down to their last one or two clinics. Juxtapose that with New York, the abortion capital of the nation.

In New York City, 41% of all pregnancies end in abortion (60% among African-Americans).

In New York City, we just passed a law (Bill 371) that targets crisis pregnancy centers, with NARAL NY’s stated goal of shutting them down.

In New York State from 2000-2010, we aborted three times as many babies as the state grew by, losing two seats in Congress as a result of the demographic decline.

New York State pays for over 45,000 abortions per year through Medicaid.

The Catholic Church has been largely missing in action since the death of Cardinal O’Connor. In the fight over Bill 371, there was one priest who showed to give testimony to the New York City Council, Father Peter Pilsner. No religious brothers or sisters. At a rally in Harlem over the bill, there were a few priests who turned out, and that was it. There was no mention of the bill by any bishops in Brooklyn, New York, or Rockville Centre, in the five months of fighting, until a joint statement by Bishop DiMarzio of Brooklyn, and Archbishop Dolan the night before the City Council vote.

To their credit, those missing in action over Bill 371 turned out to fight the gay marriage proposal. However, it was to little, too late. Catholic clergy have been loathe to engage these issues from the pulpit. “Too political,” is the mantra. It wasn’t too political for the Holy Spirit and His partner, Blessed John Paul II, who gave us all the tools we need to reclaim an authentic Christian civilization. Yet, I have never heard a priest discuss any of JP II’s teaching in any substantive manner from the pulpit, or in any adult education program. The disconnect has been breathtaking.

So, while last night’s vote was nothing new in the Rotten Apple, it does portend very bad things to come for the Church. As elsewhere, we will be targets of discrimination suits and run out of the adoption business if we refuse to place children with gay and lesbian couples. We will eventually be accused of bigotry for failing to do gay/lesbian weddings, and our clergy will lose their civil faculties to witness at weddings on behalf of the state. This will force Catholics into requiring two wedding ceremonies: one church, one civil.

If our clergy thought that fighting these forces was “too political,” in the past, the fight will now become one that is existential in the future. Our clergy now face a line drawn in the sand. Retreat from that line, and see the church continue to be coopted, as a majority of New York Catholics favors gay rights, or cross that line and fight for all we are worth.

We haven’t fought for all we are worth, because we have lost sight of our worth. Perhaps if there is a silver lining at all in last nights events, it’s that we have now opened the door to that discussion within the Church. It will be interesting to see how many bishops and their priests are willing to pursue that discussion.

Read Full Post »

Marriage: What’s In a Name?

Posted in Marriage, tagged , on August 5, 2010 | 92 Comments »

Today one man, one homosexual judge, has decided for a nation that the people of a state do not have the right to conserve ancient societal institutions such as marriage. U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker struck down California’s Proposition 8 ballot initiative, passed by the voters in 2008, which defines marriage as the union of one man and one woman. Doubtless a river of ink will be spilled over this ruling and its appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.

The questions, the searing questions for Christians are these: What was actually at stake? What, if anything, was lost today?

Was it the name of marriage, its definition, or its fundamental lived reality?

Certainly the definition of what constitutes marriage was dealt a deadly blow in one judicial ruling. But then, the very identity of marriage has been suffering death by a thousand cuts for decades. Marriage was always understood to reserve certain goods for heterosexual couples who promised their lives to one another in sacred oath.

Sexual activity, the procreating of children, adoption, rights of inheritance, rights of visitation, joint ownerships and contracts, joint rental leases, tax benefits, spousal coverage on insurance, have all been goods of marriage. One by one, each has been given away over the past few decades to cohabiting couples, both heterosexual and homosexual/lesbian.

Gays and lesbians may adopt children, whom society has decided do not need both a mother and a father for optimal healthy development.

Sodomy laws have been struck down.

Cohabitation outside of marriage is the norm.

Same-sex partners may share health benefits and have full hospital visitation rights.

Same-sex partners may cosign leases and mortgages.

Same-sex couples have domestic partnerships, quasi-marriage.

The list goes on and on. One by one the goods reserved to marriage have been given away without a firestorm of protest. The result is that gays and lesbians now have marriage in everything but name only. If we have not formally redefined marriage up to this point, we have done so operationally. Anger over Vaughn’s decision, while understandable, is a little like closing the barn door after the horses have gone.

Assuming the U.S. Supreme Court overturns Vaughn and restores the right of the people to define marriage, this will be a very small victory for marriage. No-fault divorce has done more to destroy marriage than all of the gay weddings times a thousand. We heterosexuals have been poor custodians of God’s great institution. Assuming a Supreme Court victory for traditionalists, what then?

Do we then turn our sights on cheap and easy divorces? Do we dare attempt to reclaim the goods of marriage and reserve them to heterosexual married couples only? Are we ready for that series of battles?

Or do we simply claim victory in a semantic skirmish and concede the war?

We have become too comfortable for far too long. Perhaps we dared not oppose the systematic surrender of marriage’s goods because of guilt over our rampant use of porn, rampant rates of adultery and divorce. Perhaps we were too busy with other pursuits, material acquisition and easy living, to man the barricades.

In his first homily as Pope, Benedict XVI reminded the Church that we were not made for comfort, but for greatness. Our collective shrug at the systematic looting of marriage’s goods points to our need to heed the Holy Father’s call to reorient ourselves toward greatness, and not a moment too soon.

Read Full Post »

False Gods, False Virtues (Part I)

Posted in Biomedical Ethics, Family, tagged , , on August 2, 2010 | 4 Comments »

“All evil begins with a lie. If we can identify the lie, we succeed in unmasking the evil” Great homiletic wisdom from the late Msgr. William Smith, moral theologian and priest of the Archdiocese of New York. Following on those words were these: “All social engineering is preceded by verbal engineering.” In two sentences, Msgr. Smith has provided for us the key to identifying the false gods and decoding the lexicon of the Culture of Death. This lexicon is most easily decoded by considering the polar opposite definition of that which is held up to us by the opposition as virtue.

Most of societal reengineering has occurred in the area of sexual morality and family life. In the past few years the very definition of the family has come under withering assault by the homosexual and lesbian communities with a pitched battle that has ensued. We are assured that gay and lesbian partnerships and families are not motivated by anything other than love and that children raised in such homes are not subject to any distortions in their psychological or faith formation. We are told that gay marriages are no different than heterosexual marriages, and can be just as healthy, and that heterosexuals need to practice the virtues of tolerance, openness, and inclusivity.

Children who are either adopted into, or born into such arrangements are taught implicitly that either a mother or a father is not essential to the wellbeing of children, that they are optional, that a second mother or father is a suitable replacement. Implicit in such a statement resides the evidence of the war against the opposite sex from those with same-sex attraction. It also denies the mountain of social scientific literature that consistently indicates the absolute necessity of a mother and a father in a stable marriage for children’s optimal development.

Gay and lesbian partnerships/marriages also open the floodgates to the perversion of sexual morality and the utilization of the immoral and unethical practices of surrogate motherhood, artificial insemination, and in vitro fertilization. Such grotesque manipulations of human sexuality mock the very nature of conjugal union in marriage as designed by the Creator, along with the denigration of motherhood or fatherhood, depending on which parental role is being deemed not essential.

Here the false virtues come into sharp relief. Openness in this context is the false virtue, being the diametric opposite of fidelity. If we are open to the concept that each person is free to define morality for him or herself, then we absolve ourselves of our divine mandate through Baptism, Confirmation, Marriage, and Holy Orders to be faithful witnesses to the gospels and to be a sign of contradiction in the world. We also simultaneously obliterate the need for bioethics, thereby descending into the morass of moral anarchy where each person is his or her own source of moral norms.

The tolerance demanded by the gay and lesbian communities is the deadliest of the false virtues. The very word conjures minimalistic visages. Who aspires to being tolerated? Love, respect and discernment are the virtues that oppose tolerance.

Because we are called to embrace God’s wise design for His creation, we are necessarily called to discern that which opposes what God has revealed in His plan. We are called to witness that plan in both word and deed. We are called to love and respect all persons as children of God, but also to engage in fraternal correction using the revealed Word (2 Timothy 3:16). True love demands that we not tolerate sin in our midst, much less condone it.

Fidelity and love call us to acknowledge the limits laid down by God for all of humanity, the goods contained within those limits and the perils that await those who seek to live beyond those limits. This necessarily implies that we cannot be tolerant of every lifestyle, be open to every redefinition of morality, or include within our moral boundaries those behaviors that God forbids.

The opposition is very skilled in the rhetoric of presenting false virtue as authentic civic virtue, with far too many Christians having been cowed into silence. The result has been the lightning disintegration of society, beginning with conjugal fidelity and leading to divorce, abortion, rampant sexually transmitted diseases, the scourge of AIDS, and a majority of Americans now eschewing marriage altogether.

In Part II, science as the new Ba’al.

Read Full Post »

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 600 other followers

%d bloggers like this: