The scandal over the St. Cecilia Church’s Rainbow Ministry Gay Pride Mass canceled by the Archdiocese of Boston got deeper with word in Monday’s Boston Globe that the archdiocese has flipflopped and now has “no objection” to a “prayer service” by the same group at the same time for the same purpose as before. The pastor publicly accused concerned Catholics of “hate” during his Sunday homily, and a diocesan auxiliary bishop who was there on Sunday is apparently OK with both the prayer service plans and the accusations of hate against orthodox Catholics.
After the archdiocese’s initial response canceling the Mass that sounded strong and courageous, things are now spiraling out of control. At the end of this post, we’ll tell you how to Take Action about the growing scandal, which now involves the pastor, Fr. John Unni, Bishop Robert Hennessey, Cardinal Sean O’Malley and his spokesman, Terry Donilon. If this scandal continues beyond the next few days, someone will probably need to resign.
First there was the Mass planned to celebrate Boston Gay Pride described in this way: “The Rainbow Ministry of Saint Cecilia Parish invites all friends and supporters of the LGBT community to a Mass in celebration of Boston’s Pride Month.” Here’s the blog post, since removed, entitled, “Liturgy to Commemorate Boston Pride 2011.” Here’s the original bulletin listing:
Then concerned Catholics complained and the archdiocese insisted the Mass to celebrate Gay Pride be cancelled. The archdiocese said, the “wording and placement of a bulletin notice announcing that the St. Cecilia Rainbow Ministry will be joining the parish at a Mass on June 19 may have given the unintended impression that the Mass is in support of Gay Pride Week; it is not,’’ said Terrence C. Donilon, a spokesman for the archdiocese. “The pastor will clarify this issue at the Masses this coming weekend.’’ Donilon declined to answer questions about the apparent contradiction of the church’s bulletin and his statement.
Clarify the issue, the pastor did. Monday’s Globe reports Fr.John Unni said this in his homily:
Rev. John J. Unni preached a fiery message of unconditional love and what he called “acceptance of all.’’
“You are welcome here, gay or straight, rich or poor, young or old, black or white,’’ Unni said as he paced up and down the center aisle. “Here, you all can say, ‘I can worship the God who made me as I am.’ ’’Like the bishop said, good love always requires sacrifice,’’ Unni said. “We are being called to do not what is easy, but what is holy.’’
At one point, he called the conservative bloggers who criticized the Mass “unbelievably hurtful’’ and said he was trying to “not just succumb to being told what to do.’’
“We are not this renegade, crazy, liberal church,’’ Unni said, to smiles and nods from the pews. “We’re just Christians trying to live the gospel.’’
Now, instead of the Rainbow Ministry’s Mass next Sunday at 6pm promoted for the purpose of celebrating Gay Pride, which the archdiocese canceled because it gave the unintended impression it was in support of Gay Pride Week, “the Rainbow Ministry will hold a sidewalk prayer service next Sunday at 6 pm” apparently for the same purpose. What does the diocesan spokesperson say about this: “Donilon said the archdiocese has no objection to the service, especially if it isn’t held inside.” Let’s get this straight–an indoor Gay Pride Mass gives the “unintended impression” it’s in support of Gay Pride, but an outdoor prayer service at the same time as a substitute after it’s already been marketed as a celebration of Gay Pride is OK?
Part of the crux of the matter is that Fr.Unni seems to think he’s doing the right thing. In today’s Globe, he is quoted saying, “
Unni insists he’s not flouting church teachings. “Jesus met people where they were at,’’ he said. “He went to them and reminded them who they were in God’s eyes.’’
Does the poor man not realize that by not teaching Church teachings on sexual morality, he is in effect actually flouting church teachings? Does he not even understand how Jesus met sinners where they were and called them to conversion and turning from sin?
Donilon called me and the blog posts “neither Christian nor civil” in an email exchange copied to multiple people over the weekend. The blog that’s trying to hold firm to the Church’s beliefs and set the record straight that people with same-sex attractions should live a life of chastity consistent with the Gospel and Word of God was called “neither Christian nor civil” by the archdiocese and “unbelievably hurtful” by Fr. John Unni. Meanwhile back at the ranch, the archdiocese’s talking head described St. Cecilia parish as “a great example of people who are civil and exhibiting a real fellowship.’’
Over at The Deacon’s Bench, in comments on this same topic, Deacon John M. Bresnahan commented:
One line in Father Unni’s comments is particularly erroneous in Boston and Mass. He said “We are being called to do not what is easy, but what is holy.” Well, it IS holy to uphold Christian moral teachings. And it IS unholy to give people the impression that any kind of sinful acts are OK if you fabricate an excuse or are part of a political movement. As for what is easy—certainly not upholding traditional moral values in Massachusetts.
Another commenter, FrMichael commented:
To me, there is a simple solution.
Cardinal O’Malley shows up for Sunday Mass at the parish with a Catechism of the Catholic Church. He then reads the pertinent paragraphs of the CCC regarding homosexuality and then offers Fr. Unni the opportunity to publicly assent to each paragraph. Since the pastor publicly made a profession that he fully accepted the teachings of the Magisterium at his installation as pastor, this should go smoothly. If, on the contrary, the priest tries to weasel out, then fire him immediately.
This way outreach can continue to LGBT folks, but nobody is under the illusion that the Catholic Church is going to modify Her beliefs on the matter.
Reader, Alice, at this blog commented:
Will Fr. Unni and those who are currently engaging in homosexual acts who belong to St. Cecilia’s Rainbow Ministry publicly in a written statement accept the way of Courage? Courage is the only organization that has the endorsement of the Holy See. Cardinal Lopez Trujillo,speaking on behalf of the Holy See has stated: “This Pontifical Council for the Family supports the organization, COURAGE, founded by Fr. John Harvey,OSFS, For helping homosexual persons to live in accordance with the laws of God and the teaching of His Church.”(July 7,1994)….Courage requires a commitment to living a chaste life according to the teaching of the Catholic Church. Will Fr. Unni and the members of the Rainbow Ministry publicly and in writing endorse the way of Courage now?
Take Action on Tuesday to address this scandal by calling the Apostolic Nuncio, Archbishop Pietro Sambi at 202-333-7121. Leave a message saying that you need the Nuncio’s intervention to get Cardinal O’Malley to do the following:
- issue a written statement clearly stating Catholic Church teaching on homosexuality and homosexual activity
- insist that Fr. John Unni publicly acknowledge those teachings on sexual morality
- either cancel the June 19 GLBT prayer service (still being held at the same time, date and location as the previously promoted event celebrating Gay Pride) or replace the theme and speakers with a talk by a priest representing the Courage ministry, talking and praying about how people with same-sex attractions can live a life of holiness consistent with the Gospel and Word of God.
If you’ve got time for more than one phone call, you can also try calling Cardinal O’Malley at 617-782-2544 and Bishop Robert Hennessey at 617-269-4001.
Cardinal O’Malley said in 2006,
“It is important to express the moral teachings of the Church with clarity and fidelity. The Church must be Church. We must teach the truths of the Gospel in season and out of season.Calling people to embrace the cross of discipleship, to live the commandments and at the same time assuring them that we love them as brothers and sisters can be difficult. Sometimes we are told: “If you do not accept my behavior, you do not love me.” In reality we must communicate the exact opposite: “Because we love you, we cannot accept your behavior.”
Your Eminence, which season is now, “in season” or “out of season”? Are you going to teach the truths of the Gospel and insist that your bishop, spokesman, and pastors do the same, or will we continue being “out of season” with you sitting silently by, letting your spokesman and Fr. Unni muddy the message of the truths of the Gospel?
To those currently administering the Archdiocese of Boston,
Where are our masses/ prayer services celebrating Adultery Pride Month or Pedophile Pride Month or Incest Pride Month? Consistency in your theology, please.
The Catechism of the Catholic Church, of which I am a member, says that homosexual acts are sinful, but the people who commit them are not bad people. I suggest you pick up a copy and give it a read. Also, there are a few fantastic books about this guy named Jesus. I guess he went around telling people to love their neighbors and they would love themselves. Worth the time.
Right — and 4thepriests is pointing out that celebrating being gay is as viable theologically as celebrating a propensity to infidelity, pedophilia or incest. Having an inclination isn’t sinful, but acting on it is, and celebrating the inclination is scandalous (scandal being another sin).
I thought of that exactly…..and almost wrote it all too- though not so eloquently
Then I thought…..oh, the Sin of Pride.
Those who follow the truth should stand up and be the TRUTH.
Pretty soon this ridiculousness will subside…..God has a plan and I have faith.
I think this whole thing is ridiculous. Homosexuality is not a choice. God made all of us in his own image. He did not make mistakes. If two people love each other and intimacy is involved and God is present in their relationship.. then who are we to judge it.. God is the only judge. So with all due respect to the powers that be in the Holy Roman Catholic Church.. God is the judge not any of you. So kindly take a seat and play nice.
Blossom, you got ‘ridiculous’ right, but you applied it in the wrong place. Same sex attraction may be involuntary, but homosexual activity is a choice whether you agree or not.
Yes, God is the judge and the judgment has already been entered. Scripture, the word of God, says homosexual activity is an abomination in His eyes and those who engage in homosexual sex will not enter the kingdom.
It was this blog which stated that the Archdiocese was only “stalling” This was a claim that was similar to that of the Russian military negotiating freely with the rebellion in Czechoslovakia at the very same time that they were “bringing up paratroopers” to overthrow the attempt at rebellion. Once the paratroopers went in, the leaders of the rebellion were arrested and then taken off to reeeducation camps and worse. This is the next step for the Archdiocese. They will identify their enemies and then use covert measures to eliminate their influence in one way or another. That is why the identification of Joe Sacerdo is of penultimate priority.
Why are you not respecting the Cardinal and protesting as if our archdiocese were a democracy? Why not look for the deeper wisdom here? God works in mysterious ways. Please pray and open your hearts. You’re missing something very wise and very loving and very Christ-like.
We are respecting the Cardinal. We have repeated his words on this matter multiple times because we think they are right on the mark. We are just asking him to preach them in-season and out-of-season as he said should be done. In-season includes right now.
You are being coy about your identity, Anonymous, but why be coy about your message? What is this ‘deeper wisdom’ you detect in the confusion raised by the Archdiocese in this matter? Are you suggesting God has mysterious ways to promote homosexual practice? I’m not aware that Christ promotes homosexual practice so, please, tell us what we are missing that is, according to you, “very wise and very loving and very Christ-like.” I would really like to know just what you have in mind.
Please I ask that you only consider that you may be missing something. Just like I can be open that I may be missing something. The church is an alive institution and it’s growing and evolving over two thousand years. We are merely one little drop in this ocean of history. I’m not really sure what the deeper wisdom is – I have glimpses of it – but each individual person has their connection to God that brings its own wisdom and at the same time we respect the wisdom of the larger church. I really ask that you be open to seeing a deeper wisdom about this situation that may connect us and not divide. I only ask that you individually pray and go deeper and perhaps you will find a treasure of love. :)
All of this would be academic to gay people if you didn’t want to have the same argument and “moral” enforcement in the secular world outside of your church. You don’t want to keep it locked inside. You want to pass laws that reflect the often ignored catechism in civil affairs and inflict that nonsense on everyone, including me, who doesn’t want to be impacted by your ignorant beliefs.
Keep fighting amongst yourselves, but welcome gays to every institution outside of your church with full recognition, regard, standing, and respect that heterosexuals enjoy.
Gay Doctor, all this would be academic to serious followers of Christ if you weren’t in the courts in every state in the union demanding rights not found in any Constitution; if you were not in most public schools indoctrinating children into your twisted ideas about what constitutes a moral life. Your sexual activity would be unnoticed by us if you kept it in your bedrooms, or wherever it is you choose to cavort. But you don’t want to keep it locked inside. You insist on parading your perversity in front of us and our children and we object to that. You insist on forcing your agenda on society at large and compelling us to bless your deviant activity, and we object to that, too.
You are a citizen of our country and already enjoy the rights and privileges common to all. It’s those extras and concern us. Leave us alone and we’ll leave you alone, but as long as you insist on foisting your agenda on us, we will oppose you. That is OUR right and we will exercise it in full.
AMEN!
Amen, indeed! Thank you Ferde, for your eloquence.
Amen three!
Wow, well said!
Thanks for the continued updates. I agree with the comments from Alice regarding the mission of the Rainbow Ministry? By using the word ‘pride’, they are affiliating themselves with the LGBT groups that fight for same sex marriage and have strong ties to the HRC. They could easily clatify their position and mission by aligning themselves with Courage, which shows compassion and support for those with same sex attraction while staying true to the teachings of the Catholic Church.
One of the authors of the Catechism and Archbishop of Vienna, Cardinal Christoph Schoenborn, has called on the Church to re-evaluate the moral quality of committed same gender relationships. This is because you are simply wrong; no amount of theology, tradition, or Scripture can make you right. A doctrine that leaves a trail of blood in its path, proves its own error.
Fr. Unni is absolutely correct.
http://www.glaaforum.org/glaa_forum/2010/05/cardinal-sch%C3%B6nborn-church-should-respect-longterm-gay-relationships.html
So what if ONE of the authors of the Catechism said his personal opinion was that a stable homosexual relationship is better than if someone chooses to be promiscuous?
He’s one individual speaking his personal opinion. The Vatican has taken issue with other things Cardinal Schoenborn has said, as exemplified here:
http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/1002654.htm
One contributor’s opinion on one matter does not rewrite the Catechism. The Catechism still stands.
The doctrine of the Church teaches chastity for homosexuals. Your statement that doctrine leaves a trail of blood in its path is preposterous. Vastly more deaths come from sexually transmitted diseases than come from chastity. Please do us a favor and find another forum for your terribly flawed and false comments.
I’m now 40 and proud to be Catholic. Throughout my life I’ve witnessed several ocassions where my fellow friends in the Catholic church (both fellow lay people and in one case a priest) struggle with their sexuality and ultimately conclude they are only happy pursuing a homosexual lifestyle. They are the same person before and after this struggle yet suddently they’re no longer accepted by the Catholic Church. It’s almost comical to me that the Church suddenly considers them unwelcomed especially when they are more Christian than me.
I realize people like Mr. Sacerdo will recite some Church dogma that justifies to him why gays should be excluded. I thought it was St. Augustine that taught we are all sinners struggling to find our way to Jesus and it’s not our role to judge our fellow Church members. Judgement will be done by God when our journey is over.
Don’t we publicly welcome into our Church women that have had children out of wedlock, women that have had an abortion, people whose divorces have not been annuled, people who have committed grave sins, etc.? I fully support Rev. Unni and would be deeply disappointed to see Cardinal O’Malley try to restrict his efforts to make the Church more welcoming.
That is an entirely specious argument, Kevin. The issue is not whether homosexuals are welcome in the Church, but whether the Church should be promoting homosexual activity. Please try to follow the argument. If you think the Church, or any Catholic parish, should be promoting homosexual sex, say that. Accusing the Church, and us, of something we’re not doing doesn’t clear the air.
It’s homosexual behavior that is unwelcome in the Church. It’s always been that way. Should the Church accept as normal and proper, homosexual sex? The Lord told the prostitute to go and sin no more. Do you think we should change that?
There is a double standard here. You require Fr. Unni and Cardinal Sean to issue explicit statements affirming the Church’s teachings on homosexual activity (which the Cardinal has already done in a statement quoted on this blog. And unless they obey your orders you claim they are denying the Church’s teaching. But when neither Cardinal Sean nor Fr. Unni has made a statement condoning homosexual activity, you intuit it because of the use of a word, “Pride”. As Joe suggested I looked at the Pride website, and even there I didn’t find anything that explicitly mentioned homosexual sex.
The Church is not promoting homosexual activity when there is a Mass or prayer service with the theme “All are welcome.” People on this blog claim to believe that all are welcome, but let someone in an official position say the same thing and all of a sudden they are promoting homosexual activity and need to resign. There really is a lot of illogic, hypocrisy, and slander going on here.
naturgesetz,
Your posts on other sites and here are just repeating the same thing over and over again, and you continually choose to ignore the key point being made. Have you seen or been to a “Gay Pride” parade? If not, google Gay Pride parade and look at the images. Gay Pride promotes the gay lesbian lifestyle, transgenderism, and sadomasochism, including “same-sex marriage” and homosexual activity. Look at the PICTURES here:
http://bryanhehirexposed.files.wordpress.com/2011/06/gay-pride.jpg.
The advertised theme of the Mass was “Commemorate Gay Pride 2011.” Please read the bulletin and this blog post. “Gay Pride” is the theme.. The Mass was to be “in celebration of Boston’s Gay Pride Month.” You continue to refuse to acknowledge that or acknowledge the fact that Gay Pride celebrates the gay lifestyle which includes immoral acts considered sinful by the Catholic Church. That the Mass was celebrating Gay Pride means it is not in accord with Church teachings. If you pretend that to not be the objective reality, you really should find another blog to post at, because we’re tired of repeating this multiple times to you.
Out of curiosity, are you Catholic?
Do you believe sex between a man and man, or a woman and woman is OK?
Do you support “gay marriage”?
All are welcome, but we are all sinners called to repentence. Fr. Unni is not calling gays and lesbians to sin no more. I’ve been to St. Cecilia’s and heard his preaching. I’ve read what the Rainbow Ministry there is about.
This blog is asking the Cardinal and Fr. Unni as pastors and shepherds to lead the flock by clearly teaching what the Church teaches on homosexuality–including the reasons for chastity. This has not happened at St. Cecilia’s.
In the first place, as I told Ferde Rombola, the organizers of the week and the Mass call it “Pride,” not “Gay Pride.” Apparently it is important to you to misquote them. Why?
Much more importantly, you are continuing to find fault with the Mass. But the Mass was cancelled. That fight is over. You won. There is no point in your discussing it further as if it were still an issue.
The issue now is the “All Are Welcome” prayer service. IMO, it would be dishonest to pretend that it is no different from the “Pride Mass.” I think the response should be a sigh of relief with the acknowledgment that now there is something we can all agree on: all are welcome. And then let it go. (Or even go to the service and see if anybody in an official role says gay sex is okay.)
I’ve never been to St. Cecilia’s. Therefore I don’t know what Fr. Unni has said, other than what has been reported in the newspaper. I certainly can’t claim to know everything he has said. Much less do I know what he says to individuals who come to him for advice, counseling, spiritual direction, or sacramental reconciliation. His job as pastor is to lead the flock to greater faith, hope, and love, and increasing holiness of life. He must decide if and when a public statement of the teachings of the Church on homosexuality (which virtually all of the flock are doubtless already aware of) will help or hinder that work.
You asked me three questions. I’ll be very happy to answer them once you have answered the question I previously asked you, namely, “Who set you up as judge of the prudential decisions of our God-given shepherds as to how to go about presenting gospel to all?”
Naturegesetz,
You asked, “who set you up as judge of the prudential decisions of our God-given shepherds…? No one set me up as a judge of the prudential decisions of our God-given shepherds, but Canon Law explicitly tells Catholics it’s their responsibility to let pastors know of their needs. Here is what the Code of Canon Law says:
Can. 211 All the Christian faithful have the duty and right to work so that the divine message of salvation more and more reaches all people in every age and in every land.
§2. The Christian faithful are free to make known to the pastors of the Church their needs, especially spiritual ones, and their desires.
§3. According to the knowledge, competence, and prestige which they possess, they have the right and even at times the duty to manifest to the sacred pastors their opinion on matters which pertain to the good of the Church and to make their opinion known to the rest of the Christian faithful, without prejudice to the integrity of faith and morals.
If you were unaware that this is the duty and obligation of a Catholic to make their opinion known on matters that pertain to the good of the Church–which is exactly what this blog is doing–then that suggests you are not Catholic. However, if this blog is yours: http://naturgesetz-takecourage.blogspot.com/ “Naturgesetz: Catholic and Homosexual” that suggests you are Catholic. Is that your blog?
Gay-friendly Catholic Mass postponement irks the faithful
June 14, 2011
By Chuck Colbert / TRT Reporter
Not since Seán Cardinal O’Malley fought same-sex civil marriage on Beacon Hill – or last year’s column in The Pilot newspaper, suggesting a reason not to allow children with gay parents in Catholic schools is the danger they would bring pornography to class – has a decision by the Boston archdiocese struck such a raw nerve in the local LGBT community, among Catholics and beyond.
As the Boston Globe first reported, Saturday, June 11, Church officials have ordered Rev. John J. Unni, pastor of St. Cecilia’s Parish, located in the city’s Back Bay neighborhood, to cancel a Mass scheduled for 6:00 pm, Sunday, June 19.
(For more, see http://www.therainbowtimesmass.com/2011/06142011/gaymass.html)
Chuck,
We edited your post because the comments section of this blog is not the place for anyone to republish their own articles. By the way, weren’t you the man who disrupted a Catholic Mass in 2004 to protest the Archdiocese’s efforts to defend marriage as between one man and one woman? A google search turned up this article where you were mentioned:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1107087/posts
Man Disturbs Mass to Defend Gay Marriage
A gay man interrupted a church Mass on Sunday when he told congregants he objected to a video opposing same-sex marriage that was shown moments earlier.
Chuck Colbert created a brief disturbance when he stood up after the eight-minute video, identified himself as a Catholic and said he objected to the video, said the Rev. Michael Doyle of St. John the Evangelist church.
“We called police to maintain order,” Doyle said. “We had no interest in pressing charges against anyone.” Canton police said they went to the church but made no arrests.
The video was shown during the 9 a.m. Mass and Doyle decided to not show it during the 11:30 a.m. service.
The video was shown a day before the Massachusetts Legislature renews debate on a proposed constitutional amendment that would ban same-sex marriage.
Archdiocese spokesman the Rev. Christopher Coyne said it was appropriate to show the video and said only Colbert objected.
“He’s not even a member of that parish,” he said. “He doesn’t even worship in Canton. He was obviously alerted and decided to disrupt that Mass.”
Let me get this straight Chuck … a few years ago you had the gall to interrupt a Holy Mass to promote a political agenda (a jackass move) and now YOU claim to be upset that the Archdiocese (in upholding the teachings of the Catholic Church) has prevented your ilk from once again perverting and dishonoring another Holy Mass. Let’s be honest … anyone, like you, trying to drive the gay agenda through the Catholic Church is not Catholic (and is a jackass).
Here’s the thing: we are all sinners, every single one of us falls short, and no one wants to hate and exclude members of Christ’s body, but sin is sin.
The devil (diablo) is our great accuser. The devil would have us believe that our sins name us (thief, drunk, adulterer, murderer, etc.). In Christ Jesus, we are invited to be who we are – children of our Father in heaven. Our sin does not name us – in Jesus, our sin is overcome and we are free.
What many here are struggling with in this issue is calling sin “not sin” and demanding the Church call it “not sin” as well.
Our Lord began His public ministry with the words, “Repent and believe the Good News!” He did not say, “Keep sinning and believe the Good News!”
All are welcome: Cain or Abel, Judas or Jesus, God or Adam…just have your check made out to the Archdiocese of Boston or Vatican City Rome…
Would that GK Chesterton could comment on this gay confusion. This passage from “Orthodoxy” would surely apply:
This is the thrilling romance of orthodoxy. People have fallen into a foolish habit of speaking of orthodoxy as something heavy, humdrum, and safe. There never was anything so perilous or so exciting as orthodoxy. It was sanity: and to be sane is more dramatic than to be mad. It was the equilibrium of a man behind madly rushing horses, seeming to stoop this way and to sway that, yet in every attitude having the grace of statuary and the accuracy of arithmetic. The church in its early days went fierce and fast with any warhorse; yet it is utterly unhistoric to say that she merely went mad along one idea, like a vulgar fanaticism. She swerved to left and right, so exactly as to avoid enormous obstacles. She left on one hand the huge bulk of Arianism, buttressed by all the worldly powers to make Christianity too worldly. The next instant she was swerving to avoid an orientalism, which would have made it too unworldly. The orthodox church never took the tame course or accepted the conventions; the orthodox church was never respectable. It would have been easier to have accepted the earthly power of the Arians. It would have been easy, in the Calvinistic seventeenth century, to fall into the bottomless pit of predestination. It is easy to be a madman: it is easy to be a heretic. It is always easy to let the age have its head; the difficult thing is to keep one’s own…It is always simple to fall; there are an infinity of angles at which one falls, only one at which one stands. To have fallen into any one of the fads from Gnosticism to Christian Science would indeed have been obvious and tame. But to have avoided them all has been one whirling adventure; and in my vision the heavenly chariot flies thundering through the ages, the dull heresies sprawling and prostrate, the wild truth reeling but erect. (Chesterton, 145-150)
Kevin writes: “Throughout my life I’ve witnessed several ocassions where my fellow friends in the Catholic church (both fellow lay people and in one case a priest) struggle with their sexuality and ultimately conclude they are only happy pursuing a homosexual lifestyle. They are the same person before and after this struggle yet suddently they’re no longer accepted by the Catholic Church”.
I don’t know where he got the impression that those with homosexual inclinations are not accepted in the Church. Every one of us is a sinner; every one of us is accepted by the Church. The minor requirement – and minor it is – is that we give up out sinful practices. Do we encourage a drunk to drink, an addict to continue using his cocaine?
There is the group called COURAGE. It is like Alcoholics Anonymous. AA also has a requirement: not a drop to drink. Many people succeed. Why not the homosexuals and their lifestyle?
HAHA. because it’s not an addiction…
“Should ‘and can’ lead a life of chastity…” (emphasis here on “and can”). Let’s not forget faith in the Holy Spirit Who makes the life of beatitude possible in the first place.
Why not homosexuals? They don’t want to quit. Sex is very important to them, which is why they want society to bless their behavior. Among the homosexuals I knew, sex was ##1, 2, 3, 4 and 5. Oxygen was 6. Food was 7.
If the prayer service is for the conversion of those in attendance to chastity and obedience to the Church, then I support their efforts. In no way we should be praying for tolerance of the sinful actions outside of what God ordained between a man and a woman in Holy Matrimony.
It is tolerance of the people, not of sins which they may or may not be committing. It is respect for their God-given dignity as human beings. It is for their right to worship as Catholics without people who have never met them forming rash judgments about what they do at other times. It’s about removing the beam from our own eye. It’s about not casting the first stone. It’s about being images of the love of God which invites all to salvation. It’s about letting God work on hearts in his own time and not insisting on instantaneous perfection. It’s about not putting obstacles in the way of those who want the Lord in their lives and recognize the Catholic Church as his chosen instrument. It’s about not being so anxious to find something wrong that one infers the worst about people and their actions.
What do you mean “tolerance of the people”? No one should be beat up. There are laws against that. Sure, we all have human dignity. All can attend Mass at any given Mass time at any given parish. Yes, all have been invited unto salvation. It is conditional on the way we respond to the invitation/ His grace. Salvation is a gift and a gift can be thrown away. It is thrown away every time we commit a mortal sin.
Am I correct in understanding that the prayer service will be one in which the prayers will be to end sinful actions outside of Holy Matrimony? If you are praying for tolerance of a deviant behaviour, then you are praying for the wrong thing.. BTW, is there going to be Confession offered?
Sorry if I gave the impression that I am personally familiar with the planning for the service. I was simply responding, based on the stated theme, to your concern about tolerance of sinful actions, and I kind of “got on a roll.”
Although I do not know the plans, I think it highly unlikely that anyone will pray for tolerance of sinful sexual activity. I would expect that it will be for acceptance as individuals in a society in which gay-bashing and anti-gay bullying still exist.
Joe, you assert, without qualification, as absolute fact, that “the archdiocese has flipflopped and now has ‘no objection’ to a ‘prayer service’ by the same group at the same time for the same purpose as before.” Later a glimmer of nuance appears when you write that, “‘the Rainbow Ministry will hold a sidewalk prayer service next Sunday at 6 pm’ apparently for the same purpose.” THat “apparently” is telling. It tells us that you can point to nothing that actually states the purpose. You are inferring it. And on the basis of your personal inference by which you chose to put the worst possible interpretation on things, you are calling on people to call the Apostolic Nuncio down on the head of the Archbishop of Boston.
As I replied to another comment, it seems that in your mind it’s okay for you and me to say all are welcome, but the minute a priest says it, he is supporting homosexual activity, and the minute a bishop lets him get away with saying it, he is a failed shepherd.
Who set you up as judge of the prudential decisions of our God-given shepherds as to how to go about presenting gospel to all?
naturgestez, I’m going to reply to an earlier message of yours directed to me, then to the above message later. Your first went like this:
<<>>
You may disagree, but the activities, statements and actions of the heretic priest for whom this blog is named, and the Archbishop’s refusal to control him have left the position of the Archdiocese and the Archbishop, whose statement was made 6 years ago, sufficiently cloudy regarding the whole subject of homosexuality to require clarification. Do you object to an official statement from the Cardinal taking a clear, unambiguous position about homosexuals, homosexual behavior, gay pride events and whether such events should be promoted in a Catholic parish?
If there’s a double standard here, my friend, it’s the one created by you and other enablers. You call yourselves Catholics, but when anyone rises to defend the Faith from the dubious actions of its leaders, you target us instead of the real offenders. Guess what. We will not be intimidated by you, the Archdiocese or homosexual activists.
<<>>
No one here has the authority to order them to do anything. We can’t even get them to answer important and valid questions about the activities of Brian Hehir or defend themselves or even comment on the allegations made against them, so let’s cut the histrionics, shall we?
Let’s reword your accusation: we claim the Archbishop is silent when an heretic priest, under the guise love and compassion, offers support and comfort to practicing homosexuals. Or perhaps you don’t know what ‘gay’ means.
<<>>
A more disingenuous remark has yet to be seen in this thread. What did you expect to see? “Let’s have a Pride Mass and get it on!!” If you’re not completely clueless, you’re dishonest. And the offending word is not ‘pride.’ It’s ‘gay.’ That’s another disingenuous remark from you. Or perhaps you don’t know what ‘gay’ means.
<<>>
Maybe not, but when the bill says in support of “Gay Pride” some of us know what that means and that’s what this is all about. Perhaps you don’t know what ‘gay’ means.
<<>>
Your remarks misstate, I think deliberately, the position of this blog and we who oppose the actions of the Pastor of St. Cecelia’s. Misstatements like yours are the meat and potatoes of homosexual activists.
<<>>
And a lot of denial, a lot of enabling and a lot of basic dishonesty. You can quote me.
You call Fr. Hehir a heretic. The definition of heresy is “the obstinate post-baptismal denial of some truth which must be believed with divine and apostolic faith, or it is likewise an obstinate doubt concerning the same.” I haven’t been following this blog from the beginning. Can you point me to the posts where the words of Fr. Hehir explicitly declaring that homosexual activity is not sinful are quoted? That would be denial. Then direct me to the posts which show that he was officially warned that he was denying a truth which must be believed and that he continued to deny the truth. That would make the denial obstinate. Unless you have that, the accusation of heresy is false. You can’t just throw words around with no regard for their real meaning just because you think someone is behaving badly. It is an offense against truth. It is unjust. It is sinful.
No I wouldn’t object in the least to “an official statement from the Cardinal taking a clear, unambiguous position about homosexuals, homosexual behavior, gay pride events and whether such events should be promoted in a Catholic parish,” but I would consider it completely superfluous, because he has already issued such a statement, which this blog has pointed out. But you are right that I do not find any merit in your invented doubt about the Cardinal’s position.
You “claim the Archbishop is silent when an heretic priest, under the guise love and compassion, offers support and comfort to practicing homosexuals.” The Archbishop does not have to speak if he doesn’t want to. When you refer to “an heretic priest” are you still talking about Fr.Hehir, or is it Fr. Unni this time. If the latter, I’ve seen nothing on this blog or anywhere else that quotes a denial on his part of a truth which must be believed with divine and apostolic faith, much less any showing of obstinacy. Unless you have knowledge of such a denial (not a failure to affirm when you want him to, but an actual, explicit denial) you are misusing the word “heretic” and in doing so you have libeled him.
You say, “And the offending word is not ‘pride.’ It’s ‘gay.’” But they didn’t use the word “gay.” So there is, by your standard, no ground for offense.
Look, we can be reasonably sure that most of the people who organized “Pride Week” — and, again, they didn’t use the word “gay;” it is writers on this blog who insist on misquoting them by adding it — believe that homosexual activity is not wrong, and it is likely that many engage in it. But the theme this year was one of (unspecified) equal rights. It is my position that instead of reading into the event what is wrong, we should take what is acceptable and go with that. And the Church officially opposes unjust discrimination against homosexuals.
It is important to acknowledge that because of the possibility of the Mass being seen as supporting the excesses of Pride Week, the Archdiocese cancelled it (and there’s an indication that the Cardinal still upholds Catholic doctrine). So what the Mass might have been thought to mean is really no longer relevant.
Naturegesetz,
Your parsing of words and attempt to paint us as mischaracterizing the situation is simply wrong.
The fact is that “Pride Week” or “Pride Month” is the same as “Gay Pride.” Any other interpretation is false. What happens at the parade and other events is celebrating the GLBT lifestyle. The theme of equality has as a part of it “marriage equality” which means legal approval of “gay marriage.” A video is posted on the “pride” website “Happy Gay Pride from Lady Gaga.” This party is headlined, “Gay Pride 2011″
http://www.bostonpride2.dreamhosters.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/machine-friday.jpg
For you to keep pretending “Boston Pride” is not the same as “Gay Pride” is deceptive and wrong.
We agree that most of the people who organized “Pride Week” believe that homosexual activity is not wrong, and it is likely that many engage in it.. It’s your position that instead of reading into the event what is wrong, we should take what is acceptable and go with that. It’s our opinion that most of what the event is about is wrong, including the celebration of the GLBT lifestyle.
Is this your blog?
http://naturgesetz-takecourage.blogspot.com/
You say, “I accept the teachings of the Catholic Church on homosexuality, and I hope to help people understand what those teachings are and are not.” Great!
You have a link to the Courage apostolate. Awesome!
If you’re trying to help people understand those teachings, including, in your words, “Here is how we believe God, in his love for you, wants you to live; and here is why we believe it” then why do you keep criticizing us? “Boston Pride” doesn’t do this tell people who God wants people with same sex attractions to live? Fr. John Unni is not doing this. The Rainbow Ministry at St. Cecilia’s is not doing this. If you think they are, why is Courage not the focus of their ministry?
Joe — I began commenting on this blog because I was very disturbed at the tone and the verbiage that was being used against Cardinal Seán. The phrase “leading the archdiocese into heresy” comes to mind. I thought that such hostility to our archbishop was unjustified and hurtful to the Church of Boston. So I responded, attempting to get people to calm down. And I guess you could say one thing led to another.
Thanks for answering my question. I don’t know what particular “knowledge, competence, and prestige” you possessed which gave you the right — which clearly from the canon not all the faithful have — to go beyond informing your pastors of your needs and start making your opinions known to the rest of the faithful. But assuming that you do possess some special knowledge, competence, and prestige (which perhaps you should manifest by identifying yourself so your opinions could be given their due weight), having the blog is fine. But still, it seems to me that there is an “attack mode” here which can tend to tear the community apart and set the flock in conflict with their shepherd.
Now to answer your questions.
“Out of curiosity, are you Catholic?” Yes.
“Do you believe sex between a man and man, or a woman and woman is OK?” No.
Do you support “gay marriage”? No. I have posted numerous comments on various blogs in response to arguments in favor of same-sex “marriage.” In those comments I have pointed out that, historically, marriage predates both church and state. It exists naturally. The pagan philosopher Aristotle states, “First of all … [m]ale and female must unite for the reproduction of the species.” He sees this as the foundation of civil society; and it is this connection to the future of society which makes marriage of interest to the state. Whatever the relationship of two people of the same sex is, it is not that same thing as marriage, to call it by the same name is a misnomer, and the state does not have the reason for supporting it which it has with true marriage. With Christians, I also write of the meaning of sex, trying to encapsulate the insight of Bl. John Paul II that the sexual act is designed by God to be a physical image of the communion of the persons of the Trinity, which it can only be between husband and wife.
So why do I oppose your “crusade” against Fr. Unni and, to a lesser degree Cardinal Seán? It is because I want homosexuals who are engaged in sexual sin to be converted. I believe that the Church is the divinely constituted agency for, among other things, the conversion of sinners. I believe, therefore, that it is surpassingly important for people to be connected with the Church as the channel of grace. I also believe, as I have said, that virtually every Catholic, including those who attend St. Cecelia’s, know that the Church teaches that homosexual activity is wrong: it is impossible for them not to know. Therefore, I believe that telling them that this is what the Church teaches is not making them aware of something that they didn’t know. IMO, what is needed is not a repetition of what they know, but a chance for God to touch their hearts with his grace so that they will come to realize the truth and beauty of this doctrine. IOW, I think that for Fr. Unni to insist on that doctrine in his homilies would probably do more harm than good by driving people away. It’s always there in the background. At any rate, I can see that a pastor could reasonably and honestly conclude that the conversion and salvation of the souls entrusted to his care is better served by not speaking from the pulpit on this doctrine.
I hope that in private conversations Fr. Unni does not contradict the teaching of the Curch, and that he recognizes and takes advantage of opportunities to explain and defend the doctrine is a pastorally sensitive way adapted to the person of his interlocutor.
I also would not condemn a pastor whose judgment was different and who therefore preached about the demands of chastity in his Sunday homilies; but I don’t think it helps matters to come down on Fr. Unni like a ton of bricks. I don’t think it is justified.
Patience.
BTW, it occurred to me last night that if we want to call on pastors to speak on morality, we never hear homilies explaining the immorality of detraction, calumny, and rash judgment in all their forms. I think those, much more than sexual morality, are areas in which the faithful are unaware of Church doctrine.
Note: I neglected to stop the italics after the paragraph on same-sex “marriage” in my previous post. The remainder is not part of the answer to that specific question and so should not have been italicized. Sorry.
Can anyone tell me where I can find a Welcoming Mass for Orthodox Catholics trying to be faithful to the Magisterium? I’m feeling very much on the fringes these days and feeling the weight of the painful barbs being hurled at me calling me uncharitable, bigoted, and narrow-minded. If only this WAS a joke…..
Karen,
Know you are not alone.
Pray for continued discernment.
Karen,
Try http://www.latinmassnetwork.net and search on your zip code in the upper right.
You sound like the Prodigal Son’s sister Karen
A quick note on my message above. Where you see <<>>, I quoted naturgesetz. For some reason the system deleted the quoted remarks. His message is above mine. If you wish, you can match his remarks and my comments.
The Catholic League is weighing in on this controversy now. At their website and on Facebook.
D’ya hear that noise that sounds like air being let out of a tire? That’s the sound of credibility leaving the Archdiocese of Boston.
Joe, you really bring out the best in folks! It seems that the rainbow types want to jack you around. It’s sad. The poor souls who have been lured into this horrible vice never get the help and forgiveness they need because of the Cardinal and these sodomy sympathizers. If they succeed in remaking the American church in their own image, they will take a multitude into perdition.
Souls who want out: look over this page for information on Courage and pay heed to your conscience that is crying for you to be free from this vice. There is only One Way out, and He wants to set you free.
As for the rest of the destroyers posting here, we must understand it’s us or them. They would kill us if they could. Friends, don’t waste your time and energy.
So the Paulist Center and St. Ignatius were also involved in promoting this event. It looks like there is plenty of blame to spread around.
The holy thing to do is what Jesus would do….respect all of God’s creation including gay and straight people. The blame lies with so called “conservatives” who love condemning anyone different. You are the true Un-Christians. I would say ant-Christ but that calls to mind the “church” that loves to look down on those Jesus most loved. They should look at what they are “conserving” The church still holding to culture of ancient imperial Rome. The exact opposite of the reign of God.