In the latest news from the Boston Archdiocese, 
Cardinal Sean O’Malley , his senior cabinet officials, and big fundraisers all say it’s perfectly fine for the child of a homosexual couple to attend Catholic Schools. This decision came the same day as Pope Benedict XVI blasted gay marriage as “insidious and dangerous.“
This comes just two weeks after Cabinet Secretary for Social Services, Fr. Bryan Hehir, keynoted a conference with a priest who advocates for gay priests and the gay lifestyle. Just a few days ago, we learned that two “Catholic” legislators who are Knights of Columbus recently voted approval to allow what could be millions in taxpayer dollars spent for gay programs in schools–and the Archdiocese said nothing in response.
Short version of the current story. On Wednesday, it was reported in the mainstream media that a faithful Catholic priest at St. Paul School in Hingham decided to not admit the son of a lesbian couple to Catholic elementary school. The reason quite simply is that the parents’ relationship “was in discord with the teachings of the Catholic Church.” Kudos to that priest. But there was backlash, especially from donors to the Catholic schools. Now key players from the Cardinal on down have distanced themselves from that faithful priest, disavowed his decision and declared any Catholic school that gets funding from the Archdiocese must admit children of gay couples.
Our researchers cant find any official Church teaching on the specific issue of a Catholic school admitting children of gay couples. (After all, how long has it been that we have gay couples with children, let alone those who want their kids to attend Catholic schools?). So, we’ll focus this post on three things. First, what the Church does say, secondly, how another diocese with an archbishop who is a strong leader responded to a similar situation, and third, our perspective on whats happening in Boston and whos pulling the strings here in Boston on this issue that is not the archbishop.
The Vatican has criticized adoptions by gay couples
Here’s what the Vaticans 2003 “Considerations Regarding Proposals to Give Legal Recognition to Unions Between Homosexual Persons” said:
As experience has shown, the absence of sexual complementarity in these unions creates obstacles in the normal development of children who would be placed in the care of such persons. They would be deprived of the experience of either fatherhood or motherhood. Allowing children to be adopted by persons living in such unions would actually mean doing violence to these children, in the sense that their condition of dependency would be used to place them in an environment that is not conducive to their full human development.
The Archdiocese of Denver backed a similar decision to exclude kids of gay couples.
Archbishop Chaput of Denver gave a brilliant defense of his position last year that children of gay couples should not attend Catholic schools.
Chaput said the parents of Catholic school students are expected to agree with church beliefs, including those forbidding sex between anyone other than married, heterosexual couples. “The church cannot change these teachings because, in the faith of Catholics, they are the teachings of Jesus Christ,” he said. Chaput said Catholic schools work as religious partners with parents, but that doesn’t work if the parents don’t respect church beliefs or openly reject them. He said that also puts unfair stress on the children and their teachers. Chaput acknowledged that many Catholic schools accept students from other faiths and from single-parent families, but he said their parents are expected to support the Catholic mission of the school.
Whats Happening in Boston
In the opinion of the team here at Bryan Hehir Exposed, the situation for Boston can best be summed up in three words: failed episcopal leadership. Did Boston get a response like that of Archbishop Chaput. No. We got the exact opposite. Mark Silk over at SpiritualPolitics covers this in “O’Malley v Chaput.” He opens with “What a difference a diocese makes” and closes by saying “…we may ponder his [O'Malley's] emergence as the closest thing to a paladin progressive Catholicism has in the American hierarchy today.” (Could it be that Cardinal Sean is rapidly emerging as the left-leaning successor to Cardinal Roger Mahony and this is just another manifestation of that?)
Some of you might recall what happened early in Cardinal O’Malleys tenure here in Boston. When he washed just the feet of men for Holy Thursday in 2004 liberal women complained, and he responded by asking the Vatican what to do. The Congregation for Divine Worship “affirmed the liturgical requirement that only the feet of men be washed at the Holy Thursday ritual.” But the Cardinal caved in to the pressure and after 2005 decided to wash the feet of women anyway. This sounds like de ja vu.
The person heading up fundraising for Catholic Schools is wealthy power-broker Jack Connors. In 2007, the Boston Globe described him as “a man with his hand still firmly on the levers of power… Who is going to say no when Jack comes calling?” From this article, it sounds like he does a lot of good work for a lot of good causes. With respect to this latest schools fracas, Mr. Connors’ picture is at the top of the article in today’s Boston Globe, where he is quoted as saying. ‘I am disappointed that . . . this faith that I love seems to find new ways to shoot itself in the foot.”
Readers should know that besides raising money for Catholic Schools and doing lots of good work for a lot of good causes, Mr. Connors was also co-chair and a key fundraiser of the 2004 Democratic National Convention in Boston that nominated the pro-abortion, pro-gay marriage Sen. John Kerry. When it was found that local business would take a $24 million hit due to the convention, Connors, said naysayers should “lighten up and enjoy it.” According to Federal Election Committee campaign finance records, in the past 4 years, John M Connors, Jr. and his wife, Eileen, have donated close to $250,000 to the Democratic Party and to Democratic political candidates, almost all of whom support abortion and gay marriage, including Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Barney Frank, Christopher Dodd, and Martha Coakley (who said during her failed Senate campaign, devout Catholics “probably shouldn’t work in an emergency room.”). We don’t know Mr. Connors, so no judgments on him–were just giving readers the factual information thats out in the public domain available to anyone.
The first message that was sent to schools about this situation came not from someone responsible for the education and moral formation of children, but from the fundraising folks. Here’s the email threatening to cut off funding for any school that refused admission to children of gay couples.
Dear School Administrators:
You may be aware from recent publicity about an exclusionary admissions practice at St. Paul School in Hingham, which does not receive support from the Catholic Schools Foundation. In light of those media reports, we thought it important to clarify the position of the Catholic Schools Foundation – - namely, that no school that promotes an exclusionary admissions policy or practice will be considered for support.
We believe a policy or practice that denies admission to students in such a manner as occurred at St. Paul’s is at odds with our values as a Foundation, the intentions of our donors, and ultimately with Gospel teaching. Our concern is the education of young people. We will not fund any school that treats students and families in such a manner. This policy has been unchanged since our founding in 1983.
We are proud that Catholic schools are known for being welcoming communities for all students. So although this incident is disturbing, we know that it is isolated, not a policy of the Archdiocese, or indicative generally of the Catholic schools of the Archdiocese. Know that we appreciate all you do to make your schools places where all feel welcome.
Please contact me at 617-778-5981 if you have any questions or if I can be of any assistance to you.
With hope for the students we serve and the future of Catholic education, I am
Sincerely yours,
Michael B, Reardon, Executive Director
Mary Grassa O’Neill, Secretary for Education and Superintendent of Schools, who makes $325,000 a year and whose biography says that she never taught or administered in a Catholic school before landing the job, said in her statement that the church does not prohibit children of same-sex parents from attending Catholic schools and that the archdiocese will “work in the coming weeks to develop a policy to eliminate any misunderstandings in the future.”
Frankly, its unclear to a lot of us why a lesbian couple would want to send their child to a Catholic school in the first place, and it seems like it may also be unclear now to that couple. The Globe reports “But the woman said she was uncertain she would enroll her son in another Catholic school because she needed to learn more about their educational programs. She added: ‘I will be a little bit more guarded in my questioning so I’ll be able to have a real clear picture where they stand.”
Orthodox Catholics like C.J. Doyle, executive director of Catholic Action League of Massachusetts concur. He called upon the archdiocese to “vigorously defend’’ the school’s decision to revoke admission to the youngster. “The real question here is why two people who radically repudiate the moral teachings of Catholicism would want their child educated in a Catholic school,’’ Doyle said in a statement.
We close with this excerpt from a timely post by Judie Brown of the American Life League entitled “Bishops Who Wear Badges…Of Courage“:
It has been said that strong, faithful shepherds can lead the “spiritual paralytic” to an understanding of Christ, His truth and His love for each of us. On the other hand, as St. Augustine wrote in reference to false shepherds,
You have failed to strengthen the weak, says the Lord. He is speaking to wicked shepherds, false shepherds, shepherds who seek their own concerns and not those of Christ. They enjoy the bounty of milk and wool, but they take no care at all of the sheep, and they make no effort to heal those who are ill. I think there is a difference between one who is weak (that is, not strong) and one who is ill, although we often say that the weak are also suffering from illness.
So, as we celebrate the good shepherds who have chosen to follow what is true and good, we salute them as we pray for those shepherds who, for whatever reason, need the audacity of faith to stand in the gap, defending Christ and bearing all manner of insults in His name.
The reaction of the Cardinal and his money-making pseudo- Catholic team is appalling. St. Paul’s pastor and principal were doing their job, trying to protect the interests of the poor child with two “mothers” and run a true private Catholic school. They’ve been betrayed, as have all who subscribe to the true teachings of the Catholic Church. I commented on this in today’s one-sided Globe article, and fully expected the usual Catholic-bashing reactions, but enough is enough.
Why did these women want their child in a Catholic school? Surely not to learn Catholic teaching on human sexuality. Then they cry foul to the media? They hide behind anonymity while the faithful priest is treated by his shepherd as a leper.
The core issue is religious freedom – to teach within a religious school about marriage and family life. Glossing over differences on essential matters, and pretending that crucial issues are irrelevant, is not tolerance. It is relativism, a secular invention that bullies – and judges – those with moral conviction different from the prevailing politically correct one. It is the most hypocritical kind of intolerance.
This priest and principal did the right thing. Shame on the Cardinal for not supporting them and the parents who really want their children to learn the faith in a Catholic school.
To say that the Archbishop is “weak” is not really our teeth into reality.
Look what the Cardinal did in response to faithful Catholics exposing the 35 year record of Bryan Hehir. He called upon the good old boys at the Vatican to honor Hehir at a Pontifical Council to which they responded affirmatively. He put up a post on the blog, astoundnigly saying that Bryan Hehir is one of the worlds leading ethical experts, etc.
He has been a Cardinal who has proven, over and over again that he retaliates against faithful priests and lay people while advancing and promoting proabortion apostates and heretics.
He is a false shepherd. A wolfe in sheep’s clothing.
It is so difficult to understand why a Catholic Cardinal cannot see the hero that this faithful priest is. Let us continue to keep St. Paul Church, school, and all those Catholics who strive ever faithfully to live an authentic Catholic life, in our prayers. Surely this priest knew he would suffer for his stand, it is unthinkable that he should suffer at the hands of his Cardinal.
What is the relationship of Cardinal O’Malley to the Pope? Don’t they speak the same language when it comes to the teachings of the Catholic Church?
They are making the Church sound like the Tower of Babel.
I am stressfully disappointed in the Cardinal’s decision. For all we know the lesbian couple may have set us up. If they did, we fell right into it.
Until something is done to change the fact that John McDargh is allowed to teach in the Theology department of Boston College, there is no chance of support for the teachings of the Catholic Church as presented in the Catechism of the Catholic Church in general and regarding same-sex sex acts and same-sex marriage in particular in the Catholic elementary schools. Even the Pilot advertises courses taught by John McDargh. Yet the editors know that BC Theologian John McDargh boasts publicly and to his students that he is “married” to Tim Dunn and to make their “marriage” appear to be equivalent to a marriage between a man and a woman, they adopted a young boy from Russia.(“Featured Links in The lesbian and Gay Facultu,Staff and Administrators Association at Boston College”(LGFSAA),2009)
Look at the courses McDargh teaches, such as “Sexuality and Spirituality”.”Integrating Spirituality into Clinical Practice”,among others. McDargh is quoted as saying:”We cannot understand fully what compels human beings to seek after that which they name ‘God’ until and unless we understand something about our relationship to our teddy bears.”(Boston College Capstone Program). McDargh’s experience includes the practice and promotion of same-sex sex acts. In an article by Laura Kiritsy in Bay Windows issue of June 3,2004:”BC faculty band together to promote change”, McDargh is praised for his work in establishing the Lesbian and Gay Faculty,Staff and Administration Association at Boston College(LGFSAA). He was also instrumental in convincing Fr. Leahy S.J. to give formal recognition to a campus gay/straight alliance group called “Allies of Boston College”(Determined BC students get gay group recognized” by Laura Kiritsy,Bay Windows,Apr. 24,2003). And of course he promotes the play,”Vagina Monologues” in the BC Heights newspaper in”Monologues an educational experience”(2/28/05). Much more about McDargh’s activities to promote same-sex sex can be found on the website http://www.bc.edu/offices/lgfsaa/links.htm
Cardinal O’Malley and the editors of the Pilot are fully aware of all of this information about Boston College Theology professor John McDargh. When a change is made in this horrendous situation, then there will be hope for change in the elementary education policies regarding the right to Catholic education in Catholic schools.
KHR, you’re right–it is not weak leadership–it is more accurately described as totally failed episcopal leadership
I humbly wish to call attention to an earlier post on this blog where I called His Eminence liberal. Are we not allowed just a bit of gloating when we are right? The glee of course is replaced by a sudden horror when you realize what the implications of such a situation are…
The condemnations and derogatory comments posted here make me think of the Pharisees bringing the adulteress to Jesus, screaming insults and ready to stone her for her moral failings. Jesus did not hop on their bandwagon of hate, but instead was silent and drew in the dirt, much to the Pharisees’ annoyance. While they were focused on condemning the woman, Jesus was focused on her salvation. After exposing the Pharisees’ hypocrisy, Jesus specifically chose not to condemn the woman, instead telling her to sin no more.
I trust you are also familiar with the Samaritan woman from whom Jesus asked for a cup of water at the well; the tax collector with whom Jesus broke bread; the sinful woman who Jesus allowed to wash his feet… Again and again, Jesus had to disabuse both the Pharisees and his disciples of their holier-than-thou inclinations and grumblings while he preached to sinners. The Good News is that Jesus chooses to meet us sinners where we are, with respect for us as human beings, despite our sinfulness. It is thus peculiarly wrong-headed to smear Fr. Hehir as above because he has the gall to follow in Jesus’ footsteps and associate with the “sinners” you apparently revile.
It is also instructive that the only times Jesus is recorded in the Gospels as hurling insults are when he threw out the money changers from the temple and all the choice words he had for the aforementioned Pharisees. On issues of sexuality, he explicitly chose a more pastoral approach to the individual – an approach we and the Church would do well to emulate.
Finally, it was Jesus himself who admonished his own followers from keeping the children away from him. How can you then spew your venom against allowing a child to attend a Catholic school based on his parents’ sexuality? Should Catholic schools be turning away all children whose parents live in “sin”? are felons? Was it not Jesus again who had to remind everyone that the blind man he cured was not blind because of his parents’ sinfulness? While taking a moral stand is laudable, condemnation and hate speech are NOT what Jesus was preaching or living. He did not die on a cross so you could condemn a child because his parents are gay.
Thank you, Eric Thompson, for expressing your views so well.
It’s unfortunate that this blog continues to treat a complex issue in a simplistic manner.
Again, this post has nothing to do with Fr. Bryan Hehir, who is nonetheless attacked in the comments. And the Cardinal is called a “wolf in sheep’s clothing.” This from people who claim to be faithful to the Church!
And, the blog continues to be shamefully anonymous. Who are the authors? What are your names?
Eric,
You seem to have a straw man on your back.
Jesus’s conversation with the adulteress and the woman at the well doesn’t apply in this situation.
When you filter through the hundreds of thousands of pictures the Cardinal takes of himself and posts on his blog, you won’t find one where he is sitting among the gays teaching what the Church teaches about human sexuality. Unless we missed it, we don’t see him eating lunch with the prostitutes on Mass Avenue teaching human sexuality.
This would be inappropriate. yet he willingly is turning every Catholic classroom into an inappropriate situation to discuss the teachings of homosexuality.
It is my understanding the two lesbians set Fr. Rafferty up for all this. When they “applied” they only wrote their first initials and last names. They did not state their gender. They’ve blown it up so that Jack Connors and Jim McDonough and other dissident Catholics now operating the Archdiocese can turn our classrooms into an impossible situation to teach the next generation of children our faith.
Let’s have the decency not to sully Scripture with this.
“Keeping the children away from Jesus and his teachings” is precisely what the Archdiocese is doing.
Jesus is not the Archbishop of the Church. Jesus the teachings of the Church.
Since teachings of the Church will not be able to be taught, it is the Cardinal Archbishop who is keeping the entire next generation of little children away from Jesus.
The other scenario is, the teachings of the Church will be taught and the child will be traumatized by learning about the state of their parents souls. Once the other children learn the lesbians are not in good standing with God, they’ll be as interested in playing with him as they would beezabul.
Redmond,
Why doesn’t the conversation with the adultress apply to the purveyors of this blog? Why are they entitled to anonymously castigate the Cardinal, Fr. Hehir, and any other Catholic people they see fit? Why doesn’t the “let him who is without sin cast the first stone” teaching apply to THEM?
Eric,
Thanks for you thoughts.
The story at the well – Christ Charity and fulfillment of the law trumped the God given Justice the people sought and were authorized to carry out under Jewish law.
There was a new Sheriff in town. The Courage of this good teacher was novel and extraordinary (lesson for you Eric)
He did not die on a cross so you could condemn a child because his parents are gay. Amen to that!
He also did not die on a cross so you could feel good about yourself.
Fr. Rafferty made a prudent and courageous decision based I’m sure on more than the fit of a woman’s Wrangler Jeans.
He is clearly in line with Rome on it and the most orthodox Cardinals in America.
At this point if Fr. Bad Hair ‘takes issue with it’ it probably is the right thing to do.
PS
Keep those babies coming, all you orthodox and heroic Catholic women! The mockery that lesbian couples offer is a great offense to our Blessed Mother and true Motherhood in general. -
Jesus’ conversations with the adulteress and with the woman of Sychar are QUITE germane to the issue of what constitutes an appropriate pastoral approach to outcasts and perceived “sinners.” As far as I can tell no one who is now passing judgment on Fr. Hehir here or the parents of the rejected child has learned a THING from Christ’s example of respect, mercy, and non-violent language. Moreover, Jesus highly relevant admonition that we should NOT throw stones at those we perceive as sinners seems to be conveniently ignored here. In fact, no one seems to want to recall His EXPLICIT command “Do not judge.”
There is no human being who can purport to know the state of another’s soul; for all we know the child’s parents may be like the son in Jesus’ parable about the vineyard, who may not have outwardly paid lip service to the Father’s command but then was the one who actually did the Father’s will and was therefore the true righteous one. Only God can judge whether our hearts are full of prideful, nasty, arrogant judgments or whether they are full of love, compassion, and mercy. I have rarely seen the latter on this supposedly “Christian” blog.
Isabel,
I’m sorry do not judge is not a commandment.
It impossible to practice the virtue of Justice without using judgment. Impossible.
Only Christ condemns. Humans do not send other people to Hell, they send themselves. Only when their obstinacy in the face of Christs Mercy is rejected. But this does happen, Jesus spoke of it.
Men frequent this Blog. Some men speak with strong language when appropriate. Perhaps if you judge it to be in poor taste or hurtful, you should use your good judgment and not read this blog.
TheLastCatholicinBoston,
You and the still-anonymous purveyors of this blog chose to have your conversation in the public square… perhaps you should use your good judgment and keep your “strong language” to yourselves.
By the way, cloaking your identity in secret and using language like “Dykes” and “Sodomites” does not make you a “man.”
Anything given to us as a directive by Christ is something he commands us, his followers, to do. It may not be one of “The Commandments,” but make no mistake – he COMMANDS US to forgive, to show mercy, to be compassionate as His Heavenly Father is compassionate, and not to judge.
The only appropriate behavior for a true and mature “man,” especially a Christian one, is that which respects each individual and refrains from violent words and acts. Excuses to behave otherwise are just that: lame excuses to be more bestial rather than more fully human, as the Church teaches we are called to be to be truly moral people.
The “Last Catholic in Boston”:
Please stop calling Fr. Hehir names. None of us has shown that disrespect to Fr. Rafferty even if we have disagreed with his position or action.
Disrespect is the refuge of those who are either too immature or too intellectually incapable or too morally weak to express their thoughts with the recognition for intrinsic human dignity the Catholic Church exhorts us all to see in EACH person, whether “sinner” or “saint.”
Hostility and disrespectful tones and attitudes can only serve to undermine what earnest and fervent believers sincerely hope to accomplish. Contempt is the opposite of charity and humility; Jesus said in John 13, “This is how all will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another,” yet anyone reading many of the comments here will see only the most prideful and un-Christian sort of lack of mercy that gives so much of Christianity a bad name and lack of credibility.
“None of us?” What lobby, group or ‘US’ do you actually represent?
- too immature or too intellectually incapable-
Gee if I had any feeling, you might have hurt them.
Fr. Rafferty is right. Pope Benedict spoke on sodomite marriage this week and he concurs. John Paul II called homosexual adoption Child- abuse. Is there really anything more to discuss than some peoples discomfort with a truth that they do not recognize?
I’m sorry if you find this hurtful. This isn’t 8th grade CCD class we are talking about.
I am not personally hurt by your inability to show dignity and recognize dignity; it merely saddens me that you actually think it represents your faith truly or well.
Redmond,
I’m not sure I’m following your argument here.
But if I read you correctly, the child should be excluded from a Catholic education because his parents are gay for his own good. So are we also going to “save” all the children of unmarried heterosexual parents from the trauma of a Catholic education because they will be taught that their parents are fornicators? How about the children of convicted felons or those who have a parent that has had an affair? Not many kids will be getting a Catholic education if we exclude for their own good those whose parents have violated the Ten Commandments.
The point of a Catholic education is a grounding in the teachings of Christ as passed down by the Church. If we feel so threatened by homosexuality that we refuse to educate the children of gay couples, have we not failed in preaching the Good News?
I will not dishonor the sacrament of marriage I have before God by calling an institutionalized bad habit – Gay marriage.
I am not morally or ethically bound to use the term. I find the word sodomite to be far more accurate than Gay. The fact that it raises such strong responses suggests to me it pours hot coals upon the head of Satan and those deceived by his lies.
Thanks Mike,
God Made me a man already.
I use language to convey thoughts, ideas and beliefs.
I would love to know whether either the people who run this blog or the many hateful posters here have ever met Father Hehir. They surely cannot have, or they would castigate this web site, as I am about to do.
I was honored and privileged to know Father Hehir when he was the Pastor of St. Paul’s Church and the undergraduate chaplin there. As a member of the Catholic Student Association in the mid-1990′s, I listened to his formal homilies but also knew him informally, as he would often visit the undergraduates who, at that time, used to study and socialize at odd hours in the Catholic Student Center. My friends and I would joke and laugh with him, and yet we bore him a deep, deep respect.
The true character of a priest, in the end, comes down to how he cares for his flock. Father Hehir was already a prominent man when we knew him–well-known to the media as well as in church leadership–with many, many demands on his time. He certainly could have treated his role as undergraduate chaplain as a trivial one, a post he held in name only. But he did not. He led, calmly and carefully, through example. He made the Catholic Student Center available to us at all times of day and night, insisting only that we leave when the priests themselves went to bed. (More recent pastors have curtailed that policy). In doing so, he provided a refuge for my group of friends, people who wanted to be serious Catholics, who sometimes wanted to get away from Harvard’s more secular atmosphere, and gave us a place in which to socialize and become more deeply involved in our faith. At least six marriages, that I know of, came out of our years “hanging out” in the student center, and many more friendships. My faith grew in those years, because Father Hehir provided a space for it to grow. He led our undergraduate retreats himself, speaking to us honestly and wisely, pushing us to think and reason for ourselves, at the same time that we strove to understand church teachings. When, during one retreat, I learned that my grandmother was in the hospital, he drove me back a day early from Cape Cod to Boston so that I could be with her.
I could have written an entirely different post here, objecting to the very premise of thinking that being a “gay-friendly” priest is a bad thing, but I knew that would fall on blind ears. I strongly support gay rights, and I do not find that belief incompatible with my own ability to continue as a practicing Catholic. I know that many people will think that stance automatically disqualifies me and all of my words, which is why I put my own politics at the end.
But let me close by reminding people that Jesus himself told us to judge not, lest we be judged, and to love our enemies, as well as our neighbors, and to protect little children (something that the Church hierarcy has done a wretched job of, to all our shame). True Catholics (and Christians) are not the haters, but are those who strive to live by those principles.
Where oh where to begin?
TheLastCatholciinBoston: on advising Isabel to “use your good judgment and not read this blog.” That reminds me of an experience from my own background. As a college student, I was asked how I found Harvard. When I replied that it was “hard,” I was told that “that’s what you get for going to a MAN’s school.” Yup, that’s what I got. A Harvard education, an education that taught me to read, analyze, think, and yes — under the tutelage of Fr. J Bryan Hehir — to pray. Then, having done those things, to speak out when needed. I feel that this is a good moment to speak.
Isabel does not seem out of her depth in commenting here. Rather, she merely reminds all those taking part in this discussion that civility leads to more progress than name calling.
Speaking of name calling: I find the repeated use of “bad hair” to refer to Fr. Hehir to be both silly and offensive. I could write a great deal, as others have, on what a holy man he is. Instead, I merely ask two questions, TheLastCatholciinBoston. Didn’t your Christian mother tell you teach you not to call people names? We’re grown-ups, now, don’t you feel it detracts from your point to be so childish?
My thanks to Michael Cedrone (aka Concerned Catholic) for repeatedly pointing out that nothing in the last two blog posts has anything to do with Fr. Hehir himself.
One final note on the bigoted, misogynistic, unChristian tone of this blog and of many of the anonymous comments that follow. To just what Catholic church are you faithful? The one created by Christ himself, based in love? The early Church, where Christians gave their lives for Jesus’ sake and where Priests — both men AND WOMEN — celebrated in house-Churches and lived Jesus’ word every moment? The Church of the middle ages, corrupt and money-hungry, concerned more with keeping some down and elevating others? Or the current Church, indeed a Tower of Babel, which seems to be a combination of all of those?
For those who would dismiss me or others as tie-dye wearing liberals on our way to hell for praying on Church teaching and coming to a different conclusion than your own, I suggest you Google the Catholic teaching on Primacy of Conscience. Or perhaps I sound too much like Fr. Hehir? If I do, I take that as a mark of a good education and as a compliment.
I’m sure I can’t impact the thinking of many of the posters here, but I must try.
Sexuality is a part, and only ONE PART, of our existence. Do you actually KNOW any gay people? I know many–not because I am a radical who has deliberately sought them out, but because they live in our world! The gay people I know are teachers, scientists, lawyers, and small business people. They are committed to their partners (often far more monogamous than many heterosexuals I know), to their jobs, their communities, and yes, in some cases, their churches and their children, too. They are fair and honest and intelligent and good.
The Church has its right to teach what it does. It has history and tradition behind it. And I am not advocating some kind of sexual free-for-all across the world. But the harshness of the Church’s teachings must create a crisis for people of sympathy across the world. If you believe that God will damn all people who commit any sexual offenses–that is, anything other than “conventional” sexual intercourse without birth control between married couples–then the number of people going to heaven will be tiny. And maybe you’re OK with that belief, but I’m not.
I believe in a God of mercy, not one who will necessarily ignore our sexual choices, but one who will judge us based on what use we made of our God-given talents and how we lived our ENTIRE lives. At the time of death, will not these things matter? Were we good friends? Good children to our parents and grandparents? Kind to our neighbors? Truthful and honest and dedicated to our colleagues? Loyal to our country and to the cause of justice? Generous to the poor? Forgiving of our enemies? A light in the darkness to others? Do you seriously believe that God takes NONE of that into consideration, and judges us on our sexual lives alone? I guess you’re entitled to your view, but I believe in a God who is more merciful than that.
No, your language does not pour hot coals on anyone. Instead, it encourages violence against gay people in our already-too-violent society—and it does so in direct contradiction of the Church’s teaching. The Cafeteria’s open and doing business.
Hey Mike,
What are you the thought police?
175,000 taxpaying Massachusetts voters wanted to put ____ marriage on the ballot. A special interest lobby played politics and brought ____ marriage to the USA.
My church calls it Gravely disordered.
Assault and battery are a crimes in America OK?
Who is advocating violence? We strongly disagree on an issue and the terms we use to define things – suddenly its VIOLENT? – Red Herring-
To all the Crimson Ladies.
Fr. Nice Hair is your friend, I get it. It does border on comical that his former underlings come to his defense. He hung with you for his ego – Trust me, I know he did, he is a man.
Fr. Feeney is more my style, OK?
To Jane and others who are complaining about this blog:
First of all, we invite you to go to the Chronology, read it from top to bottom, and let us know what information on that you believe is factually incorrect. It’s all out there in the public domain and well-documented, and the writers of this blog felt it appropriate to pull together and share this information because of the influence this person has on the Archdiocese of Boston and on the Catholic Church beyond Boston. What’s to not like about facts? Every time we ask what’s inaccurate, nobody can respond. So, is your complaint that we’ve brought accurate information all together in one place and it doesn’t look pretty now that people can look at the big picture? Or is the complaint about the comments from people reading the blog, over which the bloggers have no control, unless we turn off comments? (which were tempted to do again)
Secondly, were glad to hear that you had a positive pastoral experience with Fr. Hehir at Harvard. Some of us heard him preach and give talks at St. Pauls and frankly found most of his talks impossible to follow and understand but maybe youre much smarter than we are. That’s off-topic anyway. We digress.
Thirdly, how many of those complaining support the Church’s teaching (and millenia of precedent across all societies and religions) that marriage is the union of a man and woman? Could you, somewhere in your post, let us know if you agree with the Church’s teachings on same-sex marriage and adoption of children by gay couples?
Fourthly, if you reread the actual blog post, could you re-state exactly what aspect of this blog post you are troubled by? With all of the various comment threads, it is difficult to determine what you disagree with from the original blog post.
Fifthly, (is there such a word?), yes, we have met Fr. Hehir and interacted with him. We, and others who have shared experiences with us, have caught him in lies and found him rejecting initiatives that proactively push church teachings on defense of life and marriage in the public square. Weve observed him undermine orthodox Catholics who are instructing on the teachings of the Church by him standing up after talks saying, “Well, actually, that’s not entirely what you need to know…the teachings are ‘complex’ and ‘multi-dimensional’”–as though only someone with his intellect could possibly understand Church teachings.
Sixth, we normally leave it to those commenting to debate eachother, but this Samaritan woman at the well thing seems to be getting out of hand. Jesus told the woman to “drink of the living water.” He told the adulterous woman to “sin no more.” To those Catholics who are strongly supportive of gay rights, are you telling your friends to “sin no more”? Do you have a problem with the Catholic Church telling people living that lifestyle to “sin no more,” or is that objectionable to you also?
Seventh, we detailed in a previous post 12 days ago why we are maintaining anonymity.
Lastly, as the bloggers, we unabashedly reserve the right to post on whatever topic we feel we would like to post on! That being said, every post on this blog has had something to do with Fr. Bryan Hehir, but perhaps new readers have not seen the common theme. The post before this was about how the Mass Catholic Conference has been silent on the gay schools language inserted to the Massachusetts state budget legislation. The Catholic Conference reports to Fr. Bryan Hehir and the head of the Catholic Conference was hired by him. See the relevance now? Fr. Hehir is also one of the most senior and influential advisors to the Cardinal–on everything. Fr. Hehir and Jack Connors (education fund-raiser) have been working together for years, and thats well documented. If you think Bryan Hehir had no involvement in the discussions over this school situation Thursday-Friday, we have a nice older-construction but well-maintained bridge in Brooklyn to sell you.
We hope this helps answer some of the questions raised.
redmond,
i could not help but comment on what you said about the child being traumatized if he/she learns about the catholic teachings that his/her parents are not in good standing with God…
speaking for the child, growing up adopted, being given the chance to belong.. being loved.. is a good start in life.
being in a catholic school, i have learned that God is compassionate, and His love is unconditional.
I just took a few minutes to read through the chronology of Fr. Hehir’s life, and all I can say is –
WOW!!! What an amazing and remarkable man!!!! Hands down, I have not heard of any other priest with such depth of engagement in issues of social justice and commitment to maintaining a high level of intellectual discourse in the public square.
Thank you for compiling this chronology and sharing it. I don’t like the ignorant tone on the rest of the website (or, for that matter, the cynical way in which the chronology tries to use circumstantial connections to paint Fr. Hehir in a negative light), but I do appreciate seeing all the wonderful contributions and achievements of this fabulous priest listed for all the world to see.
Congratulations.
It looks like the the Cardinal’s PR team has made its way to your blog to defend Father Hehir’s long history of misleading souls into perdition (so well documented in your chronology!)
That the folks flocking to defend Father Hehir would find your chronology the works of a “wonderful” priest says everything there is to say about their lack of fidelity to the doctrines of the Church.
This was my favorite disabuse of Scripture and the teachings of the Church:
“I believe in a God of mercy, not one who will necessarily ignore our sexual choices, but one who will judge us based on what use we made of our God-given talents and how we lived our ENTIRE lives. At the time of death, will not these things matter? Were we good friends? Good children to our parents and grandparents? Kind to our neighbors? ”
What is necessary to gain entry into Heaven is a soul being in a state of Grace. Priests have to teach the teachings of the Church accurately in order for people to know what choices to make to keep their soul in a state of Grace.
They have not done that for the last 40 years and so the world is reaping the effects in the moral chaos and sin. God is not going to admit an unrepentant sinner into Heaven. Believe what you want to believe but this is the antithesis of salvation for those who believe Scripture.
The fruit of Father Hehir is the unrepentant sinner losing their ability to know right from wrong, sin from virtue and truth from lies.
As other posters have mentioned, the young boy’s mother is offended by the moral teachings of the Catholic Church on her lesbian relationship and wants assurances her son will not be taught them.
In order to make those arrangements, Mr. Reardon and Ms. O’Neil will have to forbid the teachers in the school from teaching what the Church teaches. The other children will not hear them.
This is completely in character of Cardinals and Bishops. They have long been forbidding priests to teach about contraception and abortion so as not to offend the people in the pews. Now, they will start on homosexuality to the next generation in Catholic Schools.
Let all the little children come unto them so their parents can put money into their coffers is the meme in all but a few parishes.
They have finished indoctrinating women into promiscuity, birth control and abortion. They’re getting ready for the next chapter, the homosexualization of Catholic children under Cardinal O’Malley.
Priests can undermine and obscure the teachings of sexuality to a generation of Catholics because God will not judge sins but rather our God given talents, right?
This is the tool the hierarchy of the Catholic Church has been using for years to shuffle pedophiles to abuse children from parish to parish.
They are still at it.
By the way, I too know Father Hehir. Quite well from my days at Harvard University. For those of you who are reading from outside of Massachusetts. Harvard University is where all the poor folks send their children to be educated. Father Hehir loves working with indigent people, so Harvard University was a natural fit. (She says dripping with sarcasm)
Though I lost touch with him after he bankrupted St. Paul’s and was plucked out and sent to Catholic Charities, I know of several friends who visited him in his abode in D.C. I’m sure he was looking for indigent people to live among and serve when he choose a home in one of the wealthiest sections of Washington?
After he came back from his stint in Catholic Charities I caught up to him a few times at his abode in the wealthiest suburbs or Massachusetts (Wellesley).
His love for the poor and sinners must be rubbing off on Cardinal O’Malley as in a recent flight back from Rome, I was surprised to see him on my flight making his way right into first class. He must have been going to sit with all the poor people and sinners.
His young and very handsome secretary sat in coach.
Catholic, perhaps you read a different chronology besides ours? If reading our chronology describing Fr. Hehir’s 35-year history of dissent against Church teachings make you feel his contributions and achievements are “wonderful” then that says something right there. You’re welcome to keep reading here, but seriously, perhaps you’ll find other blogs more in-line with your values and beliefs.
By the way, has an email gone out to the Bryan Hehir Fan Club list or Boston Archdiocesan PR team’s Crisis Recovery and Dissent Against the Church group in the last day or so telling everyone to come on over to visit us? We here on the blogging team are of course pleased to have new readers. But the ideological bent of most of the new readers/commenters makes us ask if someone sent the cabal after us to try and confuse everyone.
Most of the people who are quoting scripture as their basis for criticizing the positions of this blog and the orthodox Catholics who post here seem to be conveniently missing an important detail.
John 7:54-8:11 (woman caught in adultery being condemned by the Pharisees). Jesus said, “If any one of you is without sin, let him be the first to throw a stone at her” “Then neither do I condemn you,” Jesus declared. “Go now and leave your life of sin.”
When Fr. Bryan Hehir spoke on a panel in the midst of the sexual abuse crisis with a noted lesbian feminist, did he say to her, “You need to leave your life of sin”? No. He said the Church’s teachings on sexuality were “a chronically afflicted area,” and he ceded to the lesbian feminist discussion of any perception of the influence and role of women. His Social Justice conference in Boston in 2006 featured a speaker on the topic of how to run parish social justice ministry who organized a Catholic Church’s participation in Boston’s Gay Pride parade.
Jesus met sinners where they were at . We agree there. But he met them to try and save their souls by getting them to turn from their sins, repent and to seek salvation. Nowhere in scripture can you find an example of him putting sinners up on a pedestal and saying, “Hey everyone, listen to what this sinner has to say, as they’re the kind of role model you want to follow.”
Our Church is about the salvation of souls. The Catechism of the Catholic Church says the following:
849: The missionary mandate. “Having been divinely sent to the nations that she might be ‘the universal sacrament of salvation,’ the Church, in obedience to the command of her founder and because it is demanded by her own essential universality, strives to preach the Gospel to all men”:339 “Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you; and Lo, I am with you always, until the close of the age.
That’s the focus folks.
The public discourse on this particular post has run sufficiently. It is also a beautiful day in Boston and the Lord’s day of rest. We are closing comments on this post at this time. More on Monday in a new post.
Have a blessed Sunday!