Cardinal George: “I’m truly sorry for the hurt my remarks have caused”

Details:

Chicago’s Cardinal Francis George apologized Friday for remarks aired on Christmas Day comparing the gay pride parade to the Ku Klux Klan.

“I am truly sorry for the hurt my remarks have caused,” George said in an interview with the Tribune. “Particularly because we all have friends or family members who are gay and lesbian. This has evidently wounded a good number of people. I have family members myself who are gay and lesbian, so it’s part of our lives. So I’m sorry for the hurt.”

George’s initial comments came in response to questions about whether the new route assigned to next summer’s gay pride parade would interrupt morning services at Our Lady of Mount Carmel Church in the Lakeview neighborhood. That dispute was resolved before Christmas, when parade organizers agreed to change the start time of the event.

“When I was talking, I was speaking out of fear that I have for the church’s liberty and I was reaching for an analogy which was very inappropriate, for which I’m sorry,” George said. “I didn’t realize the impact of what I was saying. … Sometimes fear is a bad motivation.”

In his comments, broadcast on Fox Chicago television on Christmas, George addressed what he perceives to be religious discrimination in the name of gay rights. While discussing the pride parade, he cited the anti-Catholicism of the KKK in the early 1940s.

“You know, you don’t want the gay liberation movement to morph into something like the Ku Klux Klan, demonstrating in the streets against Catholicism.” George told the Fox Chicago reporters. “So I think if that’s what’s happening, and I don’t know that it is, but I would respect the local pastor’s, you know, position on that.”

George said he didn’t expect the public uproar over the comments.

Chris Pett, president of Dignity Chicago, an independent ministry for gay, lesbian and transgender Catholics, welcomed the cardinal’s apology.

“This is not about power. This is not about control. This is about a church and its ministry and its shepherd,” he said. “We believe in reconciliation. It’s not a time to continue to draw battle lines and go back to prior history. It’s time to say we’re grateful for that gift for someone realizing that he or she misspoke in a way that caused some harm and seek forgiveness.”

Continue reading.

Comments

  1. “It’s time to say we’re grateful for that gift for someone realizing that he or she misspoke in a way that caused some harm and seek forgiveness.”

    Deo gratias!

  2. Thought the Cardinal’s apology was well said – certainly sounds genuine and sincerely remorseful.
    Part of leadership is modeling the right behavior in public — not just when you act a the boss but when you have to ask forgiveness

  3. Ronald King says:

    Fear is a terrible motivator. I hope everyone hears that.

  4. Cardinal George is well aware of how the Gay Pride Parade in New York City has passed in front of Saint Patrick’s Cathedral, and of the many filthy and obscene words shouted at it, of the many filthy and obscene gestures made at it.

    He knows well the Act-Up poster depicting a condom next to a picture of Cardinal O’Connor with the phrase:

    “Know Your Sc*mbags” emblazoned in red block letters.

    He knows well the war waged against the Church by the gay community in the 1980′s and 90′s here in New York:

    http://gerardnadal.com/2009/12/23/of-cardinals-cathedrals-condoms-and-cretins-part-i/

    He knows of the thousands of gays that descended on Cardinal O’Connor’s Sunday mass at St. Pat’s one Sunday in December 1988 and of how they threw condoms all around and desecrated the Eucharist, an event reported in the New York Times.

    He knows of the weekly disruptions by gay activists at Cardinal O’Connor’s Sunday masses during the homily.

    So, in light of this history and the trajectory of relations between the two groups, his comments were not all that far off the mark.

  5. Well, sure. If you want to posit that just because gays in NYC had their run-ins with the bishop there, you can suggest that just because one bishop covered up sex abuse, they’ve all done it, and should all be jailed.

    Or you can praise a bishop for taking the high road.

  6. Or you could posit that the assaults upon the Church by gays in New York are indicative of a cultural antipathy that merits comparison with the KKK.

    That would of course preclude raising the sex abuse straw man, which is more or less the Godwin’s Law of Catholic discussion.

  7. Sorry Todd,

    Knights of Columbus councils are being sued for not renting out their halls to lesbians for their wedding receptions, Catholic dioceses are being forced to close their adoption agencies because they cannot live their mission in placing children with heterosexual couples…

    It’s more than just one bishop, one diocese, one city. It’s cultural, and the LGBT community has been stepping up its aggression against the Church for decades. The high road is that community practicing the respect, tolerance, openness, and inclusiveness they advocate for others.

  8. I remember a New York St. Patrick’s Day parade in the late 80′s or early 90′s when the parade organizers standing on the steps of the Cathedral turned their backs on gay parade marchers as they went by. I believe the Cardinal was present but am not sure.I dont think he turned his back if he was. So the ammunition has been tossed by both sides, sad to say. I remember that it was very controversial that year whether to allow Gay groups to march and I think that was the only year they have marched (but I could be wrong about that).

  9. The reason Cardinal George, a learned and kind man, would find himself doing something as ludicrous as comparing the KKK to the gay rights movement is due to the attitude of some in the Church who seem to consider homosexuality as one of the great and dangerous sins of our times. As a result, we spend much of our energy as a Church in the public square fighting “gay marriage”, the ability of gay couples to adopt, any sort of discussion in the schools about “gay rights.” If that’s your mindset, as you constantly do battle with the intrinsically evil and disordered homosexual “movement”, it’s easy to slide down that slope and start getting paranoid, seeing a huge conspiracy of homosexuals out to get us all.

    I live in the SF Bay Area, I know many people who identify themselves as gay. They have been devastated by the energy the Church puts into “fighting” homosexuality and the attempt by gay people to acquire (what they see) as basic human rights. Gay people have fought prejudice for years (unlike the KKK) and often suffer overt and subtle persecution and ridicule every day of their lives (unlike the KKK). They have one of the highest suicide rates in our country, including many young people who feel terribly alone. Comparing them to the KKK, a group of bigots acting from positions of power who killed people because of their race and religious/political beliefs is beyond insensitive. It’s also grossly inaccurate and, from the mouth of a Church leader, it feeds and justifies people’s bigotry and preconceived notions. It also gives gay Catholics another reason to turn from their Church.

    I usually agree with Gerald. Yet he too sees some sort of huge, hateful, monolithic conspiracy of gay people against the Church and apparently sees no problem with the comparison to the KKK. It’s horrible. They are the persecuted minority…the majority of them are good and kind and “normal” people who struggle to find who they are, how they fit in this world and in our Church. Some act out in very inappropriate ways…the rest of us need to stop responding by seeinng this small group as representative of all gay people. I know most people who agree with Cardinal George’s original comment would prefer all gay people just quietly go away. I think Jesus would have been appalled by His Church.

    Forgive the length of this post.

  10. Gerard, you need to get more informed on adoption. Trust me: you just don’t know what you’re talking about on that one.

    Your additional arguments could be used to run every Catholic bishop out of town on a rail because at least one has been shown to be a criminal.

    Cardinal George isn’t the brightest bulb in the fixture, but he did a good thing on this one.

  11. Oops…sorry Gerard….reread my post and realized I misspelled your name.

  12. If he did indeed apologize for his choice of words, good for him. I’ve taken him to task at great length over on Mark Shea’s blog so I won’t repeat all that, but it was a truly unfortunate choice of words. Whatever legitimate grievance he may have with the gay community or its more provocative elements, there is still no factual basis or proportionality to likening them to the KKK, not least of all because it diminishes the real horror committed done by that group over a century and more.

    The really unfortunate thing about this whole dustup is that it was completely avoidable. The issue never ever was about a “protest” or a march against the Church. It was a parade that was re-routed for reasons which had nothing to do with the church, and the organizers fairly quickly changed the start time to help avoid any conflicts.

  13. Oregon Catholic says:

    Charles B,
    Calm down. The cardinal wasn’t talking about all gays. He was referring to the Gay Pride types which in your own words “act out in very inappropriate ways”. Or do you defend their offensiveness and think Catholics should just smile and nod?

  14. Oregon Catholic,
    Sorry, I’m not going to calm down (though I’m glad the Cardinal apologized.) The Cardinal spoke very generally of the “gay liberation movement.”, not just the extremists. Aside from the fact that I or no one else has any idea exactly what “gay liberation movement” means, I imagine it applies to a lot more than just people who desecrate churches. For instance, many family members of gay people march in Gay Pride Parades, as do many organizations which do a lot of good in society. These are the people he’s referring to? When the Cardinal, speaking from his position of power and authority, demonizes this group (and most people just hear “gays”) by comparing them to the KKK, he plays into people’s bigotry, fear, and stereotypes. What’s more, it’s bullying at its worst because the comments are directed at a small group that has throughout history been persecuted (forgive them if they now try to protect themselves by speaking up and refusing to be marginalized.) Jesus was ALWAYS found with the weak and the outcasts and those despised and ignored by society. It’s one reason I so love Him. I repeat, He’d have been appalled.

  15. Deacon Mike says:

    Excellent…I agree completely.

  16. Oregon Catholic says:

    Semantics aside, the cardinal was clearing talking about the parade. You are the one who is generalizing his comments to all gays.

    I can assure you that if I were gay I would not be caught dead marching in or supporting a parade where others were simulating sex acts and reveling in their in-your-face hedonism. Any gay person who wants to be respected shouldn’t either. I would be just as quick to condemn heterosexuals doing the same. I can also say with certainty that Jesus wouldn’t be marching in such a parade or clapping and cheering on the sidelines.

  17. Although I think their should be more empathy, having SSAs myself and all, it is a grave sin according to Catholic teaching. And according to the teaching of pretty much every Abrahamic, and at least some Dharmic, religion before about 1960. (As well as psychoanalysts seeing it as a mental illness before the 1970s)

    Granted many other cultures do practices Catholics would deem “grave sins” for their members. But most of the time I don’t think Catholics are pressed on those issues. I believe Islam allows abortion in the first trimester, based on something similar to Aristotle’s “ensoulment” idea, but I don’t think Muslims are “put-out” that Catholic hospitals might not go for that. Or that Catholic organization may not recognize any polygamous marriages they may have had back home. Or that we don’t perform sterilizations for Protestants. However that Catholic Churches themselves won’t perform same-sex marriages, or recognize them, is something I have certainly seen gays be genuinely mad about.

    Although I certainly favor gays having all the explicitly constitutional rights, which includes assembly.

  18. Chris Sullivan says:

    I’m impressed by Cdl George’s apology.
    His point about the dangers of speaking out of fear is a very apt one – our fear has often led us into all sorts of difficulties.
    Jesus constantly taught us not to be afraid.

    God Bless

  19. No. I believe that you are mistaken here. When the Cardinal spoke of the gay liberation movement, it was understod that he was addressing the activists, who do not represent all gays, just as the radical feminists in the women’s liberation movement do not represent all women.

  20. No problem on the spelling. God Bless.

  21. Barbara,

    You are mistaken on the entire comment. The Ancient Order of Hibernians won every court case that kept ILGO out of their parade. ILGO never marched under their banner, but held a separate protest march apart from the St. Patrick’s Day Parade. So nobody on the steps of St. Pats turned their backs, because ILGO never marched.

  22. Well, Todd. Enlighten me about adoption.

  23. Joe Cleary says:

    Chris

    I agree. Cardinal George’s apology was so refreshing as well because it was so rare in an age where we get – especially from those in high positions or in the public eye – half-baked “apologies” such as ” sorry you didn’t like what I said” ( but not implying that they take back anything) or ” because the other guy is a ‘son-of a gun’, that’s why I said or did…”
    All of us know those are not sincere apologies ( even an all loving God would tell me, ‘come’on Joe you must be able to do better then THAT’)

    He turned what started as a pre-holiday culture war PR fiasco into a moment of humility and grace.
    I, for one, will view him in a different light in the future.

  24. Gerard:
    Allow me to refine your statement:
    “…radical feminists in the women’s liberation movement do not represent all women.”

    “…radical feminists in the women’s liberation movement do not represent all feminists.”

    I am thinking of such organizations as Feminists for Life.

  25. Ronald King says:

    The question becomes, “Are we truly sorry for the fear and hostility we hold in our hearts for those who have SSA regardless of whether they are activists or not?”

  26. Gerard, let me give it a brief try. Here in Illinois, Catholic Charities has gotten dis-invited from participating in state-funded foster-care and adoption services. There is, however, no law, no court judgment, that forbids Catholic Charities from participating in and encouraging the adoption process WITHOUT state funding. The issue is taking state funds, which requires following state law — which forbids discrimination. No church (or any other organization) automatically has a right to state funds. But if you are going to take the funds, well yes, those funds come with strings attached.

    Do I wish (as an Illinois citizen, and a strong proponent of adoption services, and a Catholic, and a supporter of equal rights for LGBT citizens) that the state had been able to enact a good-faith waiver provision that would have allowed Catholic Charities (and groups with similarly held, religiously based objections) to simply refer gay and lesbian couples to other agencies that have a proven track record of working with them and not discriminating against them? Yes, I do wish such a deal had been worked out. (I have friends who are a same-sex couple, and I can’t imagine them NOT being parents to their child.) However, I also wish that folks in the church were not using this situation to spread fear of a new wave of anti-Catholic persecution. That is not what’s happening — at least not in Illinois. The question is one of demanding state money and then rejecting the non-discrimination provisions that are tied to that money. And the bishops in Illinois know it. (Nothing is stopping those bishops, by the way, from living in smaller homes — selling the more extravagant residences some of them live in now — and donating all that money Catholic Charities to help fund adoptions and other pro-life, pro-family activities.)

  27. Oregon Catholic says:

    Steve,
    The effect might be as minimal as you imply EXCEPT we are talking about a lot of foster children which are typically more difficult to place. The effect this law has on their lives by cutting out the Church is drastic and chilling.

  28. I have a very good memory of the incident because I called the Archdiocese to complain and the woman who answered the phone got angry at me.

  29. Gay marchers participated as part of Mayor Dinkins’ contingent in the March 1991 New York parade.

  30. Gerard, go to my website. Do a search for adoption posts. Read them.

    If you want it in brief, Steve’s point about state funding is well-taken. Especially when you consider that if the bishops had such a concern about same-sex couples adopting children, and if that was really such a terrible outcome, the bishops would do everything they could to flood the rolls of prospective adopters with good Catholic couples and families.

  31. So what does that mean, Ronald? Are you suggesting that the Church no longer regard homosexual activity as immoral and sinful? Because if so, that is not going to happen. Ever. Sexual activity outside of marriage (real marriage, that is) is always immoral and can never be condoned.

    Should we love people with the burden of homosexual inclination? Of course. But loving them does not mean approving of or celebrating sinful and destructive behavior. We love them by helping them remain chaste.

    So, which is it, Ronald?

  32. The cardinal’s analogy was correct. The gay lobby is trying to prevent catholics from exercising their religious liberty. They are also a teeny tiny minority of men, less than 1%. They need to grow up and accept the Church will never accept homosexual behavior.

  33. Exactly. I don’t know why he caved, but I would warn him of Christ’s words on seeking the love of the world. If you’re truly a follower of Christ, the world will hate you. Cardinal George appears to want to be loved by the world.

    Sad day for him. The homosexual blogs are celebrating this as a victory, especially this little gem he added:

    “The question is, ‘Does respect mean that we have to change our teaching?’ That’s an ongoing discussion, of course. … I still go back to the fact that these are people we know and love and are part of our families. That’s the most important point right now.”

    Its time for him to retire.

  34. I’ll add that if homosexual activity is no longer sinful, then we might as well all start having affairs, masturbating to porn, and toss out the 6th Commandment entirely. And, while we’re at it, lets throw out the other 9 too.

    What would stand in our way? If Christ and His Church is not to be trusted (i.e., the rules can be thrown out on a whim), then the whole house collapses.

    Its time for the Cardinal to retire.

  35. David_J_White says:

    I’m sorry, but Card. George has just shown himself to be a wuss. Did he really think that it was possible to articulate the Church’s teaching on homosexuality without “offending” someone? Is that really the new standard — you can’t say anything that might “offend” someone? We might as well stop preaching the Gospel right now — it’s bound to “offend” someone!

    I’m reminded of a line from the musical *1776*. The Continental Congress is going through the draft of the Declaration of Independence, and various delegates are objecting to various passages because they might “offend” Parliament, or the King. Finally, in frustration, John Adams says, “This is a revolution, dammit! We’re going to have to offend *somebody*!”

  36. St. Augustine, in the City of God (within the first few books, if I recall correctly) warned Christians against not admonishing sinners out of “fear of offending” them. The Doctor and Saint of the Church is correct – we must NOT fear offending others with the truth, because to say nothing (or worse, condone immoral behavior) is not only unloving, it is sinful.

    I think an argument could be made that the Cardinal is, at best, sugar-coating the truth in order to avoid offense, and at worst, is committing a sin.

  37. awashingtondccatholic says:

    I am sorry that the Cardinal backed down. We need more of our bishops to tell it like it is…many, but not all, in the gay lobby are looking to push the Catholic Church and her members into the “leave your religious beliefs at the chruch door when you leave on Sunday.”

    Dr. Nadal did fail to mention at at the height of he AIDS crisis in the 1980s, the Catholic Church (NYC) provided a little over 10% beds to AIDS patients. The Cardinal at the time — I think it was O’Connor — was vilified. In fact, he would go an minister to those — changing bedpans and sheets — and was vilified. You would have thought, that the way the gay activists in NYC spoke, Hitler, Stalin and Mao had been combined into one.

    No, Cardinal George should not have backed down. He should have stood his ground.

  38. awashingtondccatholic says:

    Oh..and one important point I forgot…that many of those in those beds…were treated at little or no cost.

  39. Does the Cardinal wish to be holy and saintly, like St. Augustine, or cowardly and loved by the world?

    Unfortunately, for the last several decades, we have had more of the latter than the former.

    God bless Archbishop Nienstedt for proclaiming the truth on marriage without worry about offense. And God bless Cardinal Burke and Cardinal-Elect Dolan for doing the same.

  40. What did Jesus say about marriage?

    What did Jesus say about the world loving Him and His followers?

    Methinks you doth pick and choose what Jesus said.

  41. Methinks you’ve never been to a homosexual blog and read the abusive hatred they have for the Church.

    Perhaps you should take a look at Joe.My.God or Towle Road sometime.

  42. To those who have never seen the New York City Gay Pride parade, it is disturbing especially for those with small children.

    Live sex acts in the streets and plenty of public nudity.

  43. It is amusing that you don’t believe the LGBT community of 2012 does not hold great animus toward the Catholic church. Have you never read any of their publications and seen the contempt they hold for Catholics?

    The LGBT community believes that if you don’t agree with their lifestyle and automatically accepting of their behavior — then you are labeled as ‘intolerant’ and ‘homophobic’. You are not entitled to an opinion, period.

    Your Catholic church has mores and a set of standards which does not allow for gay marriage. So, now you are backward and a troglodyte for being a Catholic.

    Google the ‘Gay Liberation Network’ prior protests against Catholic churches prior to this hubbub.

  44. Ronald King says:

    Bruce, What do have in your heart before you point out the sins of another?

  45. Ronald King says:

    You don’t have to be a follower of Christ for the world to hate you. Minorities keep proving that.

  46. Bottom line: Gay lifestyle is immoral. KKK is immoral. Sex abuse is immoral. All Sin is immoral.

  47. Can’t even criticize the Sacred Cow of Gay Rights. You get savaged.

  48. He was committing good sense. He realized that a foolish and absolutely factually indefensible statement equating gays and the klan was costing him whatever moral authority he still has with sane society. He never backed down or recanted the Church’s position on homosexuality at all. He wisely realized that his tactics were an unproductive way to advance that agenda. His flip-flop, was, if anything, MORE in line with the Church’s real teaching on the matter, which condemns gay behavior but specifically prohibits dehumanizing or villifying gays as people.

  49. Homosexuals deserve love and respect – and that means encouraging them to be chaste. Homosexual activists don’t do that, do they kenneth? No, they encourage them to act out their disorder.

    Homosexual activists dehumanize and villify homosexuals.

    I’m just pointing it out, and you don’t like it. Are you a homosexual activist?

  50. Kenneth is an apologist for those who allow homosexuals to wallow in sin and destruction.

    Kenneth needs fraternal correction: You’re wrong, brother. So very wrong.

    To love a homosexual is to help him or her be chaste. To hate a homosexual is to encourage him or her to act out their disordered desires.

    Which do you prefer, kenneth? Love or hate? Seems like you hate them…

  51. Bruce in light of the many recent scandals(not merely the child abuse scandal, byt financial et al) and Western Society in general, the whole house HAS collasped. Whatever linchpins were once left are now gone and so are many “once” Catholics.
    Don’t you get it?

  52. Ronald, you didn’t answer the question.

  53. Ronald – if a homosexual is guilty of homosexual sex, and nothing else, than I am FAR worse than he.

    But I admit it. I don’t throw parades about it or force others to tell me its okay and accept it.

    I am a miserable, awful sinner deserving of Hell. That is the truth.

    It takes one to know one. Homosexuals do not need a pat on the back and encouragement to sin anymore than I do.

    I won’t hate them and tell them its okay to sin. Will you?

  54. And that is the heart of the matter, isn’t it Ronald?

    If you love homosexuals, and I do, you would want them to be chaste and avoid the sin of sodomy.

    If you hate homosexuals, you will tell them to continue to act out their disordered desires.

    Which is it, Ronald?

  55. So I’d be curious to know, exactly, how did George’s tarring an entire movement as being like the KKK, an insult not really at all different from calling someone a Nazi, display love for them? How many gays do you suppose he enticed into chastity or Catholic virtue by that sort of “correction”? For that matter, if a man displays the sort of ignorance of high-school level history and inability to distinguish grossly different moral phenomenon, why should I or anyone be inclined to trust him with something as weighty as the state of our souls?

  56. I am disappointed in the Cardinal’s apology, although it is carefully worded and limited. He is quite correct about the gay “pride” parades becoming anti-Catholic marches in the streets. And KKK had anti-Catholic marches in the streets. True fact.

    IN fact, today’s gay showcase parades are indeed anti-Catholic in their nature. They usually have some Catholic mockery in them, such as Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence. IF they pass Catholic Churches, hate is spewed. And it can be nothing less than offensive to have the nudity and lewdness in the streets in front of a Catholic Church. And gay crowds are already demonstrating in the streets outside Catholic Cathedrals to get attention and sometimes go in to disrupt the mass. The Rainbow Sash movement is known for that. Look they’re not going to change the Church’s teaching. So, go to a different church or learn to live chaste as the rest of us are to do.

  57. How do you suppose George’s ludicrous rant and insults worked to call even one gay person to chastity? When angry gays equate you or other Christians to the KKK or Nazis, does that incline you toward a charitable consideration of their arguments?

    Am I a homosexual activist? By the standards of this forum – ie disagreement with any of you on the matter, I suppose I would be defined as such. I support the right of adult gay people to make their own choices on how and who to love. I also support the right of any church to hold its own opinion on that.

    Am I a homosexual? As it happens, no. I happen to be terribly fond of my ladies, and at any rate the man at the gay recruiting station just laughed and tore up my application several years ago when he saw how I dressed. Said something to the effect that this wasn’t 1969 Castro, and now they have standards!

  58. 1. Kenneth.. a “Movement” that attempts to advance the specious proposition and thus practice that human beings should try to correlate “Spontaneous or Insidious Compulsions” with some kind of self-accepted “Human Identity & Norm” is so vapid, that only the MSM and Cultural Liberals could possibly continue to hold it up as “True”. Even though any use of this “Method” for any different type of compulsion they don’t agree with would immediately be shouted down by them of course.
    2. In addition to mistaking “Compulsion for Identity” the “Movement” as you put it…those that are okay with both “The Compulsion-as-perfectly-acceptable-Identity AND the ACTS that come from this….Breaks the “6th Commandment”. Which I will remind you that we are militantly suppose to obey and that Jesus had no intention of throwing away and was given to us by “The Creator of the Entire Universe and Everything In It”.
    3. Kenneth…you speak as if “THE MOVEMENT” you mention is innocent, holier-than-thou and incapable of inequity let alone the persecution of people who refuse to accept that ones “Sexual Proclivities & Appetites” should dominate themselves individually or for that matter the “Public Square & The Main Stream Media”. How about some evidence than?
    5. Kenneth you will most like deny that “The Movement” is doing any real damage but…BEHOLD, In CALIFORNIA..Kindergartners will be taught which HISTORICAL FIGURES were “Homosexual & Engaged in Homosexual Activities”….because it is so “RELEVANT” isn’t it to history. Who somebody slept with… NOTHING…TO…SEE…HERE….Right Kenneth? http://www.mercurynews.com/breaking-news/ci_19646690

  59. Kenneth,

    What “Kind” of “Love” I wonder? Eros-thru-Venus? That love is explicitly forbidden by God unless enabled in a marriage. Othewise “Homosexuals”…you know those that self-identify themselves primarily by sexual predilictions..can practice all the other kinds of love they want…Storge, Phileo, Agape… The “Big Lie” that we we need to change the definition of “Marriage” so that “Homosexuals-can-love-who-they-want” is such an incredible lie at so many levels it makes me want to pull all my hair out. We could start to scalpel it to molecules with this first proposition…..You, Me, anybody…does not need the governments blessing to “Love Somebody”.

  60. pagansister says:

    Charles B.
    Well said in your 6 January 10:28 PM post.

  61. pagansister says:

    Haven’t quite figured out how anyone can compare activities (even not acceptable ones) by gay marchers to the KKK. Oh well, Cardinal George at least apologized—-a good thing and hopefully he was sincere.

  62. naturgesetz says:

    It seems to me that this is one of those situations where everybody is right, but the whole truth has to include what everybody is saying — not all of it, but at least some.

    It is true that there are people who commit sexual sins. It is true that there are people who hate the Church for our clear moral teaching. It is true that Catholics and other Christians have been prejudiced against presumed homosexual sinners in ways that we have not been against other sinners. It is true that our personal prejudice has sometimes made it seem that the Church hates homosexuals and thinks God does too. It is true that it is not easy to find a way to proclaim the Church’s moral teaching without driving away those we wish to teach. It is true that we are called to make our own actions examples of God’s infinite love which “welcomes sinners and eats with them.”

  63. The issue is one of discrimination based on religious beliefs. We fund wars with public tax money, and even when there was a draft, excemptions were made for religious beliefs to not have to serve. The state should have provided a waiver to the Catholic Charities in place whose long held religious beliefs were a serious issue. Thus it is easy to see simply another attack on the Catholic belief that the homosexual act is gravely disordered. The state should not have to power to dictate that children were to be given to people who the adoption agency saw as unfit to raise them. I am sure the few gays living together could have found children elsewhere to live in their lifestyle. Lets face it, the ObamaCare HHS group has given almost 2000 waivers to their buddies to not have to abide by the laws and there is a ton of government money involved with that mess.

  64. naturgesetz, well said. The issue with all sin is that even mentioning a sin causes somone to squirm since all of us have thorns in our heel. However, when you have some group who is hell bent to force their sin as being normal on everyone else you get people up in arms. Over the past 60 years or so, we have seen a growth in this activity and if you take on the discussion supporting the fact that it is sin and not normal, you are attacked from on high in the world of political correctness. In fact, it seems on a growing basis that the only people who are exempt from being discussed in the most vile ways are Catholics or Catholic teaching. Frankly, it was up to Cardinal George to make a decision on what he should or should not apologize for in today’s society. If he felt he was not truthful or wrong, it seems an appropriate measure to take. If howerver, what he said was in line with Church teaching, I see no reason for him to back off or apolgize unless he felt he had done a bad job in expressing that teaching. This is what I would bet he believed happen more than anything else because he has been very supportive of actual Church teaching.

  65. Comparing something to the KKK is pretty serious business. And I know that’s not precisely what he was doing, but I think many Church leaders do have to be aware of how things are going to sound. This isn’t a world where people listen to long lectures and reflect seriously upon them. It’s a sound-bite age, sad to say. And he probably should have had some sense he was giving people a “Gays are the KKK” soundbite.

    I might have preferred if he had rendered the apology to victims of the Klan, but I do get we’re supposed to remember the humanity of gays. And of KKK members for that matter, but maybe that would be for another day.

  66. if you rely On blogs to demonstrate hatred then all blogs are to be condemned. blog do not represent what a large groups believe. Please do not use an extreme to represent the whole.

  67. naturgesetz says:

    The blogs do not represent the whole, but I think they represent some. And it is precisely those anti-Catholic bigots, however few or many, whom the Church rightly seeks to defend itself against. But nobody, in the Church or outside, should think that they represent all homosexuals, or that the Church opposes all homosexuals because it opposes them. We seek only to speak the truth so lovingly that all are drawn to it.

  68. Jesus quoted Genesis in Matthew 19:
    He said in reply, “Have you not read that from the beginning
    the Creator made them male and female and said,
    For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother
    and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh?
    So they are no longer two, but one flesh.
    Therefore, what God has joined together, man must not separate.”

    Seems pretty clear to me–male and female.

  69. Ronald King says:

    Bruce, I would want them to know that I love them but not the way you express love. Your love sounds like hostility.

  70. Ronald King says:

    I haven’t been around. Time with spouse and friends. Love wants to know the life story of the other and how one got to where one is. 1Cor13 is my answer.

  71. I’ll need some English subtitles to this if I’m to have any hope of analyzing it in detail, but nothing I’m gleaning from it comes close to making a case for how the gay movement bears any reasonable comparison to the KKK. It’s clear you find the gay movement disagreeable and immoral, but that does not demonstrate any proportionality between that movement and the klan, which murdered thousands and intimidated millions over more than a century.

  72. I think comparisons like these are increasingly the result of a society which has lost any sense of moderation or decency or proportion in the sphere of public debate. The anonymity and microsecond attention span fostered by online media and a 24/7 news cycle favors the argument which is the loudest and most outrageous, not those which persuade by the power of demonstrable fact and logic.

    The play of events suggests that George’s apology was driven more by the press of bad publicity than by a change of heart, although I’m willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. Even if it was not, I take heart from the fact that the public, the majority of it, still has a sense of fair play and proportion even in these times of extreme polemics.

  73. Peggy, the cardinal has apologized for his remarks, admitting that they arose out of fear, rather than reason — and he went on to add that fear is a bad motivator for public thought. I’m surprised you (and folks at other blogs that are commenting on this issue, bringing up the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence stuff, etc., to tar gays and lesbians and their families) are not simply willing to agree with the cardinal: Fear and careless analogies are something we should reject.

    Also, please bear in mind that the parade organizers were willing to change the route/timing BEFORE the cardinal ever got in his first two cents on the subject. In other words — no, they weren’t engaged in some terrible conspiracy against Catholics attending Mass, much less engaged in the violent, terrorist-based acts that the KKK has committed in this country. Cardinal George is right: He shouldn’t have said what he said. He was entirely right to apologize. Good on him (as a friend of mine likes to say).

  74. I too am disappointed in the Cardinal’s apology. He had nothing to apologize for. The militant gays are viscious, slanderous, and obscene. Whether the KKK is a perfect anaolgy is beside the point. The point was the similarity in hatred.

  75. Ronald King says:

    What about militant Catholics?

  76. naturgesetz says:

    They should not be vicious, slanderous, obscene, or hateful either. Such things do not advance the Kingdom of God, and when they happen, they should be pointed out and rebuked.

  77. I’m sorry Kenneth that was rather rushed..this one will be as well………. but I will summarize
    1. Homosexual Compulsions, either spontaneous or insidious are not equivalent to an “Identity”. The reasons are many but primarily because this kind of faulty reasoning could than logically be used to ascribe identity and thus legitimacy, to any kind of Human compulsion, including ones that are currently not fashionable.
    2. So at any given time, humans may have “Compulsions” that are compelling them to act out in a number of ways..racist, pedophilia, murderous, adulterous, thieving, jealous, polygamist/bigamist, rapist to name just some really bad compulsions. Indeed on any given day there may be a whole slew of generally bad ideas that may “Pop” into the average person’s brain.
    3. The point being that these unwanted compulsions do not define me as a human being and they are not part of my identity as a created human being. They most certainly ARE NOT equivalent to the way “Science” identifies & classifies the material world, primarily by “Physical Characteristics” see Aristotle/Plato. Homosapien, Black, Male are unchangeable material realities they are NOT equivalent to a “Thought” or “Compulsion” that exists in my mind but may manifest itself in an action. (Actions & Thoughts can be controlled….being “Black or Male” cannot be controlled)
    4. I maintain that this methodology equating human compulsions with a human identity is, SPECIOUS, and that if cultural liberals and MSM-types saw the same kind of reasoning be used to justify a human compulsion they “Didn’t Like or Approve of” they would shout it down….thus they are the greatest of hypocrites and they specifically don’t like their own rules when applied to them.
    5. In regards to KKK vs Homosexual Movement…the analogy I believe was being used is that the KKK used to publicly march and publicly bully & intimidate the Catholic Church…the homosexual activist movement, in that EXACT description, are very much using the media and other public square opportunities to do the same thing. That is where the analogy begins………….. and ends.

    A better analogy could probably have been used by the good Cardinal. I would maintain however that it is cultural liberals and MSM types that are quick to make DRAMATIC analogies of people and organizations…HITLER, HITLER, HITLER..NAZI NAZI NAZI…these are the mindless parrotted vomit often found by people of leftist persuasion.

    Also Kenneth, You are right I find people who deny they sin and work hard to convince the young, ignorant or otherwise that they do not sin either as not just immoral……….. but outrageously immoral.
    At the same time, I have great compassion for people who are hounded unmercifully by compulsion, weakness and sin. I have no Same Sex Attraction myself but Lord knows I have compulsions that beat the living crap out of me everyday, every week and send me to the confession box often.

    Here is the difference Kevin…and its Big…I do not try to justify my sins as defensible to myself or most importantly to anybody else…let alone try to organize and pass laws to force people and organizations to accept my sins, make room for them or bow down to them in homage. I try like Jesus to bear them..and have him lift take the weight off me often through the sacraments.

    Thanks Kenneth God Bless

Trackbacks

  1. [...] applaud the archbishop of Chicago for his remarks–I saw this piece (where else?) at the Bench. When I was talking, I was speaking out of fear that I have for the church’s liberty and I was [...]

Leave a Comment


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X