“Catholic” VP Candidate Kaine Doesn’t Understand Church’s Doctrine on Marriage, the Book of Genesis and Pope’s Statement

Featured

In his desire to remain relevant in a capricious society, Tim Kaine said the Catholic Church may one day allow same-sex “marriages.”

“Kaine, who attends a primarily African-American Catholic parish in Richmond, Virginia, acknowledged that his “’unconditional support for marriage equality is at odds with the current doctrine of the church I still attend.’…”

The Democratic VP candidate, a self- proclaimed Catholic, not only approves of such impossible unions, but he doesn’t understand the basics of his faith as evidenced by:

“’But I think that’s going to change, too,’ he said to applause, invoking both the Bible and Pope Francis as reasons why he thinks the church could alter its doctrine on marriage.”1

But  Church  Doctrine  Can’t  Change

But, Mr. Kaine, doctrine is in unchangeable.  Practices may change over the years, but doctrine is permanent.

For example, the doctrine of Jesus’ “hypostatic union”2 of the divine and human has always been true despite the Arian heresy (arising around AD 300) which “was willing to grant Out Lord every kind of honor and majesty just short of the full nature of the Godhead… He was granted, one might say (paradoxically), all the divine attributes – except divinity.”3

Also, the Church knows that Jesus is present body, soul and divinity in the Eucharist4 starting with the Last Supper and no Christian revolution can change that reality.5

Doctrine is in unchangeable.6

The same goes for marriage.  That it can only be between one man and one woman goes back to its very beginning.  It was not invented by humans and thus cannot be redefined by humans.

Kaine  Forgets  About  the  Reality  of  Sin  as  well  as  the  Definition  of  a  Family

” ‘I think it’s going to change because my church also teaches me about a creator in the first chapter of Genesis who surveys the entire world including mankind and said it is very good, it is very good,’ he said.”1

Yes, God saw that His creation was good.  Then, two human beings threw a wrench into this wonderful situation by introducing sin into the world.  Some sins are “disordered behavior”7 and homosexual acts are in this category.  God’s creation is good, but some human actions are not.

Like most errors, Kaine took a verse from Genesis out of context in order  to justify his acceptance of same-sex “marriage” plus the way he came to that conclusion: “‘My three children helped me see the issue of marriage equality as what it was really about, treating every family equally under the law,’ he said.1

He summarized with: “‘To that I want to add, who am I to challenge God for the beautiful diversity of the human family?’ Kaine asked. ‘I think we’re supposed to celebrate it, not challenge it.’“1

The family, a very nice sentiment.  However, to suggest that we can invent a family headed by two homosexual men or women is flawed because the “arrangements of two men or two women are incapable of such witness and present motherhood and fatherhood as disposable.”  [ For the complete answer to the question of single parents vs. two homosexual heads of household, see footnote 8]

Kaine,  Like  Many  Others,  Takes  “Who  am  I  to  judge?”  Out  of  Context

He concluded his argument for same-sex marriage by saying, “Pope Francis famously said, ‘Who am I to judge? ‘ Kaine continued, referencing the pope’s 2013 comment when asked about gay priests in the church.”

One would expect the secular new media to take comments from a religious leader out of context, but a self-proclaimed Catholic like Tim Kaine?

Here’s a good summary of the issue: “When the Pope said, ‘Who am I to Judge’, he was not talking about a situation where an active and unrepentant homosexual was the subject of discussion. In the Pope’s own words, he was talking about a person who had, ‘experienced a conversion’, has gone to confession and ‘seeks the Lord’… “

“When they cannot take one of his statements out of context and when they cannot twist their interpretation to somehow support progressivism, they ignore it completely. This is why you do not see major news outlets reporting that Pope Francis calls on Catholics to defend marriage as a relationship between one man and one woman….”

“You will not see the NBC Nightly News reporting the Pope’s recent speeches and homilies in the Philippines, such as:

‘The family is also threatened by growing efforts on the part of some to redefine the very institution of marriage, by relativism, by the culture of the ephemeral, by a lack of openness to life.’9

Case closed.

Conclusion

This much can be said about Tim Kaine.  If he were to be elected Vice-President, there is no doubt he could continue the error-riddled legacy of the current pseudo-Catholic in that same office, Joe Biden.

If Kaine believes the Church will someday change the definition of marriage, he needs to be prepared for an endless wait!

 

 

 1 – “VP Candidate Tim Kaine Says Catholic Church Will Accept Marriage Equality,” from “Bondings 2.0” reposting a newwaysministryblog, https://wordpress.com/read/blogs/29908851/posts/38582

2 – “The union in one person, or hypostasis, of the divine and human natures. Jesus Christ is both God and man in virtue of the hypostatic union, a mystery of faith in the strict sense… Although he is God and man, he is not two but one Christ. And he is one, not because his divinity was changed into flesh, but because His humanity was assumed to God. He is one, not at all because of a mingling of substances, but because he is one person…”  From New Catholic Encyclopedia, copyright 2003, http://www.encyclopedia.com/article-1G2-3407705521/hypostatic-union.html

3 – “The Great Heresies,” by Hilaire Belloc, TAN Books and Publishers, Inc.; Rockford, Illinois, republished in 1991 (first published in 1938 by Sheed and Ward, London).

 4 –“The Eucharistic presence of Christ begins at the moment of the consecration and endures as long as the Eucharistic species subsist.  Christ is present whole and entire in each of the species and whole and entire in each of their parts, in such a way that the breaking of the bread does not divide Christ.”  Paragraph 1377 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church, second edition, Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 25th printing; November , 2013.

5 – “It was above all on ‘the first day of the week,’ Sunday, the day of Jesus resurrection, that the Christians met ‘to break bread.’From that time on down to our own day the celebration of the Eucharist has been continued so that today we encounter it everywhere in the Church with the same fundamental structure.  It remains the center of the Church’s life.”  Paragraph 1343, Ibid.  A – Acts 20:7.

6 – “In catechesis, ‘Christ, the Incarnate Word and Son of God,…is taught – everything else is taught with reference to him – and it is Christ alone who teaches – anyone else teaches to the extent that he is Christ’s spokeman, enabling Christ to teach with his lips… Every catechist should be able to apply to himself the mysterious words of Christ: ‘My teaching is not mine, bu his who sent me.’”  Paragraph 427, Ibid.

7 – “… Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravityB, tradition has always declared that ‘homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered.’C  They are contrary to the natural law… Under no circumstances can they be approved.”  Sections of Paragraph 2357, Ibid.

8 – “What about single parents? These families lack a father or a mother, just like households headed by two men or two women.
A child is meant to be raised by his or her own, married father and mother. But there are times when, due to family tragedies or other unfortunate circumstances, this ideal cannot be realized. The Church acknowledges the difficulties faced by single parents and seeks to support them in their often heroic response to meet the needs of their children. There is a big difference, however, between dealing with the unintended reality of single parenthood and approving the formation of “alternative families” that deliberately deprive a child of a father or a mother, such as arrangements headed by two men or two women. Undesired single parenthood can still witness to the importance of sexual difference by acknowledging the challenges faced by single parents and their children due to the lack of a father or mother. In contrast, arrangements of two men or two women are incapable of such witness and present motherhood and fatherhood as disposable. These arrangements of themselves contradict the conjugal and generative reality of marriage and are never acceptable. Children deserve to have their need for a father and a mother respected and protected in law.”  http://www.usccb.org/issues-and-action/marriage-and-family/marriage/promotion-and-defense-of-marriage/frequently-asked-questions-on-defense-of-marriage.cfm

9 – “Did You Hear What Pope Francis Said?” by Bob Sullivan, http://bsullivan.org/did-you-hear-what-pope-francis-said/

Advertisements

Jeremiah Was Criticized for Speaking Truth of Bad State of Affairs — Trump Knows How He Felt

Featured

Two weeks ago, the 20th Sunday in ordinary time for the Catholic liturgical year, the first half of the first reading was taken from Jeremiah 38:4-6 as follows:

In those days, the princes said to the king:
“Jeremiah ought to be put to death;
he is demoralizing the soldiers who are left in this city,
and all the people, by speaking such things to them;
he is not interested in the welfare of our people,
but in their ruin.”
King Zedekiah answered: “He is in your power”;
for the king could do nothing with them.
And so they took Jeremiah
and threw him into the cistern of Prince Malchiah,
which was in the quarters of the guard,
letting him down with ropes.
There was no water in the cistern, only mud,
and Jeremiah sank into the mud.1

The rest of the reading included the part of how the king was approached and he relented to having Jeremiah pulled from the cistern.  The reason Jeremiah acquired so many enemies was what he said:

“Thus says the LORD: He who remains in this city shall die by sword, or famine, or pestilence; but he who goes out to the Chaldeans shall live; his life shall be spared him as booty, and he shall live.  Thus says the LORD: This city shall certainly be handed over to the army of the king of Babylon; he shall capture it.”2

CLAIMS  of  TRUMP’S  DETRACTORS

Jeremiah’s was not being sentenced for lying, but for telling the truth of their dire situation which many did not want to hear.  This is the same response Donald trump is receiving, with examples such as:

  • Tony Fratto, a former top Republican official in the administration of George W Bush, said the speech was the “darkest, most negative acceptance speech of a major party” that he had heard in his lifetime.3

 

  • Bloombergwent even further: “Donald Trump completed his hostile takeover of the Republican Party on Thursday with one of the most ominous speeches of his campaignshowing his already dystopian view of America has darkened considerably since he first announced his campaign.3
  • “Tonight, Donald Trump painted a dark picture of an America in decline. And his answer – more fear, more division, more anger, more hate — was yet another reminder that he is temperamentally unfit and totally unqualified to be President of the United States,” campaign chairman John Podesta said in a statement shortly after Trump wrapped his lengthy address.3

 

  • “Donald Trump gambled that Americans share his vision of a nation teetering on oblivion, casting himself as a renegade outsider who is the last, best hope to stand up to a discredited and depleted establishment.”4

But  the  Facts  ARE  Dismal

Let’s examine some of our nation’s problems to see if Trump is exaggerating that if we don’t change our ways, dire consequences will be ours.

A)  FEDERAL  DEBT:  At the end of the fiscal year 2000-2001 (9/30/2000), the federal debt was not quite $5.7 trillion dollars.  As George W. Bush took office four months later, we’ll consider this to be his starting point.  By 9/30/2008, or four months before he left office, the debt had grown to $10.0 trillion.Senator Obama, running for President, said this increase was “unpatriotic.”6

Interesting, as of 9/30/2015, the debt was $18.1 trillion4 and as has passed $19 trillion this year – even with some of the lowest interest rates ever.  As a percentage of Gross Domestic Product, it’s even scarier:

Federal Debet as % of GDP7

Political battles aside, here is the true outlook: “Assuming that the economy was operating at its full potential, the researchers estimated the sustainable upper limit of the debt-to-GDP ratio is around 93 percent. ‘A higher debt to GDP ratio is unsustainable and will drive the economy into a succession of lower growth periods accompanied by increased unemployment,’ they concluded.”8

So, Trump isn’t exaggerating here.

B)  WORKER PARTICIPATION RATE:  Although the unemployment rate has been cut in half since Obama took office, it has been known for a long time that this statistic means little as the demographics of our nation have changed since this number started being calculated.  When originally instituted, the unemployment rate was fairly accurate as the unemployed generally continued looking for jobs.  As the decades passed, this is no longer the case.

 The U.S. had a worker participation rate reached a low of 62.4% last September before rebounding slightly, and that was the lowest since 1977.  Retirements cannot account for a significant part of this.9

 Looks like Trump is painting an accurate picture here.

C)  HOME OWNERSHIP:  “High levels of student loan debt, tight mortgage underwriting standards and overheating home prices are all contributing to very low homeownership rates among the nation’s youngest workers.  Homeownership among those aged 25-34 today is nearly 10 percentage points lower than it was a decade ago… Some of this is a long-term shift toward marrying and having children later in life. Some of this is that the recovery has been slow among young adults.”10

 Undue pessimism by Trump?  No.

D)  CHILDREN in  SINGLE-PARENT  FAMILIES:  Crucial point to be made first.  The initial reaction to “children born out of wedlock” should be one of thanks for the parent(s) having chosen life.  Then the second thought  is that the breakdown of the family, the basic unit of a civilized society, is accelerating.  As the data shows:

 Since 1970, out-of-wedlock birth rates have soared. In 1965, 24 percent of black infants and 3.1 percent of white infants were born to single mothers. By 1990 the rates had risen to 64 percent for black infants, 18 percent for whites.”11

Here is more recent data:

Percentage of Births to Unmarried Women12

But, why should this be a concern?

“The family is the original cell of social life.  It is the natural society in which husband and wife are called to give themselves in love and in the gift of life.  Authority, stability, and a life of relationships within the family constitute the foundations for freedom, security, and fraternity within society… The importance of the family for the life and well-being of society entails a particular responsibility for society to support and strengthen marriage and the family.13

 BUT  MUCH  FEDERAL  ASSISTANCE  DISCOURAGES  FORMING  of  FAMILIES

“The marriage penalties that are embedded in welfare programs can be particularly severe if a woman on public assistance weds a man who is employed in a low-paying job. As a FamilyScholars.org report puts it: ‘When a couple’s income nears the limits prescribed by Medicaid, a few extra dollars in income cause thousands of dollars in benefits to be lost.  What all of this means is that the two most important routes out of poverty—marriage and work—are heavily taxed under the current U.S. system.’”

“William Galston, who served in the ’90s as Deputy Assistant to the President for Domestic Affairs, estimated that the welfare system, with its economic disincentives to marriage, was responsible for at least 15% to 20% of the family disintegration in the United States. Libertarian scholar Charles Murray has placed the figure at somewhere around 50%.”14

 Has Trump been unnecessarily negative here?  No way.

E)  MILITARY PREPAREDNESS:

“Top Army and Marine Corps generals warned lawmakers their combat readiness is ebbing and expressed concern they would be unable to fight and win another war in the midst of budget cuts, two wars and heightened global threats…”

“Army Chief of Staff Gen. Mark Milley said the Army can meet regional combatant command requirements and do counterterrorism and counterinsurgency missions. But the four-star had “grave concerns” that fighting a “higher-end” foe, such as China, Russia, Iran and North Korea, risks failure…”

“When we talk about risk, we’re talking about great-power war with one or two countries: China, Russia, Iran and North Korea.”“We can collectively roll the dice and say those days will never come and that’s a course of action; that is not a course of action I would advise,” Milley said. “There is a high level of risk associated with those contingencies right now…”

“According to a committee aide, [Committee Chairman Mac Thornberry, R-Texas] Thornberry is mulling further action on the issue and sees it as linked to maintenance and training shortfalls. ‘The combination of war fighters who aren’t trained and equipment that doesn’t work is a perfect storm,’ the aide said.”15

No, Donald Trump is not being overly negative, just reminding us of things those accountable don’t want the voters to believe.

 

1http://www.usccb.org/bible/readings/081416.cfm

2 – Jeremiah 38:2-3.  From The New Catholic Answer Bible, Fireside Catholic Publishing; Wichita, Kansas, 2005.

3 – “Trump Accused Of “Apocalyptic” Fearmongering In Speech Promising “Security And Prosperity,” by Tyler Durden, http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-07-22/trump-accused-apocalyptic-fearmongering-speech-promising-security-and-prosperity, 7/22/2016.

4 – “Trump Paints Dark Portrait of Fading Nation Only He Can Save,” by Justin Sink, John McCormick and Mark Niquette, http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2016-07-21/trump-goes-on-cruz-control-with-speech-that-could-transform-race, 7/21/2016.

5 – Data from https://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/histdebt/histdebt_histo5.htm

6 – “The problem is, is that the way Bush has done it over the last eight years is to take out a credit card from the Bank of China in the name of our children, driving up our national debt from $5 trillion for the first 42 presidents – #43 added $4 trillion by his lonesome, so that we now have over $9 trillion of debt that we are going to have to pay back — $30,000 for every man, woman and child. That’s irresponsible. It’s unpatriotic.”  From “Flashback: Obama Talks ‘Unpatriotic’ Debt In 2008, http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2013/03/13/flashback_obama_talks_unpatriotic_debt_in_2008.html

7 – ”Only Yesterday – How the Federal Debt Went From $1 Trillion To $18 Trillion In 33 Years,” by David Stockman, http://davidstockmanscontracorner.com/only-yesterday-how-the-federal-debt-went-from-1-trillion-to-18-trillion-in-33-years/, 12/5/2014.

8 – From “The Morning After America’s Debt Binge,” by Ronald Bailey, http://reason.com/archives/2013/10/11/the-morning-after-americas-debt-binge, 10/11/2013.

9 – “Record 94,708,000 Americans Not in Labor Force; Participation Rate Drops in May,”  by Susan Jones, http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/susan-jones/record-94708000-americans-not-labor-force-participation-rate-drops, 6/3/2016.

10 – Homeownership near its lowest in history,” by Diana Olick, , http://www.cnbc.com/2016/04/28/homeownership-near-its-lowest-in-history.html, 4/28/2016.

11 – “An Analysis of Out-Of-Wedlock Births in the United States,” by George A. Akerlof and Janet L. Yellen, https://www.brookings.edu/research/an-analysis-of-out-of-wedlock-births-in-the-united-states/, 8/1/1996.

12http://www.childtrends.org/?indicators=births-to-unmarried-women

13 – Parts of paragraphs 2207 and 2210 from the Catechism of the Catholic Church, second edition, Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 25th printing; November 2013.

14 – “How the Liberal Welfare State Destroyed Black America,” by John Perazzo, http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/262726/how-liberal-welfare-state-destroyed-black-america-john-perazzo, 5/6/2016.

15 – “Generals Worry Army, Marines Unready For A New War,” by Joe Gould, http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/2016/03/16/army-marines-readiness-war-congress/81876210/, 3/16/2016.

Regarding Private, Family Matters

“Government should not intrude on private family matters,” said President Obama in January 2011.1

“About 78% of Canadians believe that abortion is a private matter between a woman and her doctor.”2

”In May, 2012, the White House announced President Obama’s opposition to a bill to prohibit the use of abortion to kill an unborn child simply because the child is not of the sex desired by the parents. The White House said that the government should not ‘intrude’ on ‘private family matters.’ (H.R.3541)”3

The message is clear: proponents of baby-killing want to hide behind the “private, family matter” facade as a justification to fighting restrictions of abortion.

As a pro-life individual, I must disagree with them because abortion is an intrinsic evil as it denies the most vulnerable humans of their inalienable right to life. This affects all of society. Abortion is the ultimate child abuse.

Speaking of issues involving families, I am also in favor of laws criminalizing spousal and child abuse in order to protect these vulnerable individuals.

But, then, why isn’t the “pro-choice” crowd opposed to laws dealing with abuse? After all, these are private, family matters.

1 – from “Obama recalls Roe v. Wade, backs abortion rights,” by David Jackson, USA Today, 1/23/2011
2 – from “Misconceptions About Abortion,” http://www.prochoiceactionnetwork-canada.org. Ironically, the next sentence reads, “Human rights are guaranteed for everyone and are not subject to the whim of the electorate.”
3 – http://www.nrtlc.org, October 2012

Why All of the Fuss About “Sequestration” and Losing Some Border Patrol and TSA Agents?

Like her boss in the White House, Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano has been expressing theatrical concern over the possible effects which “Sequestration” will have should Congress and the President not agree on a budget by the end of the week.

True, there will be across the board “cuts” (or more accurately, decreases in federal spending increases as Fox News and the WordPress blog “Quiner’s Diner” have been reminding us).  But the worry about it damaging our national interests and security is particularly humorous in view of what has been happening for some time.  Losing some border patrol and TSA agents is miniscule compared to the internal destruction going on right now with the approval of 50.7% of the voters last November 6.  (It might actually be beneficial to the border patrollers – being displaced means they’ll stand less of a chance of being killed with our guns in the hands of foreign drug criminals.)

For the 50.7% (including, sadly, many of my fellow “Catholics”), let me remind them of the modern version of the Fall of the Roman Empire unfolding in front of us (the order of this list does not necessarily indicate priority):

1)  $16 trillion in debt, 48% owned by foreign governments and individuals.As of last June, China owned ¼ of our foreign owned debt.Two huge problems here.  Climbing debt slowly strangles our government’s ability to deal with anything except servicing the debt, not to mention weakening the dollar.  And, do we really want an ideological opposite like China to have this level of power over us?  (Well, maybe not such an ideological opposite as we’ll see in the following items.)

2)  Disregard for the dignity of human life.  (This should be first, as all other rights are in danger when this one is ignored.)  “Choice” and “reproductive rights” are the morbid euphemisms resulting from a terribly flawed Supreme Court decision forty years ago.  Oh well, Obama and his followers don’t need to worry.  Those 55 million murdered can never vote against them.  Incidentally, an ardent Obama supporter, George Soros, contributed to the development of the abortifacient “RU-486”and its use.3,4

3)   Major contributors to the President’s political party who are opposed to our nation’s survival.  Not true?  Well, back to George Soros again, one of the masterminds pushing for Democratic election victories since 2003.  Soros commented that “Some global system of political decision-making” in which “the sovereignty of states must be subordinated to international law and international institutions” when “collective interests” are at stake.5  Also, “[Soros] argued that a vision of ‘open society idealism’ must supersede traditional state sovereignty if globalization is to benefit all.”6

4)  Doing away with the basic unit of civilized society, the family, by attacking the sanctity of marriage.  OK, so you don’t believe in the Ten Commandments, then I hope there is some acknowledgement of Natural Law.  Men and women are different physically for a reason.  (surprise!)  Same gender sexual activity must be condemned because it is intrinsically disordered.  We are morally bound to afford those afflicted the same care and consideration as we do for anyone else experiencing disordered tendencies such as gambling addiction, alcoholism, heterosexual addiction, pedophilia, greed for power and money, etc.7
Marriage was not invented by the Church or the state.  Neither of these institutions has the authority to redefine it.  Legitimizing same sex “marriage” has ripple effects which disrupt the structure of the family.

5)  Making it so that citizens are dependent on Big Brother for everything.  Food stamp recipients increased by about 47% or 15 million during Obama’s first term.

Laws using distorted definitions of “discrimination” and “equality” are threatening the major areas of non-governmental social programs and agencies.  Religious organizations, many of which are Catholic, are finding that they are running afoul of creative laws which declare them to be discriminatory.  Catholic adoption agencies have closed because they cannot accept same-sex couples as appropriate guardians because of Natural Law and core beliefs.  The very existence of religious schools, hospitals and social organizations is threatened because they will not deny deeply held faith beliefs in order to be compliant with government directives such as the HHS mandate.

6)  Essentially suspend freedom of religion, an inalienable right, by limiting its practice to church buildings.  Not only are there dangers such as the HHS mandate, but we also have, “Lawsuits a plenty against religious freedom and expression in the land of the free. Christianity in the U.S. is under attack as it was during the early period of the Soviet Union when religious symbols were against the law.”8

7)   A federal government so insecure that it touts the crimes of a few, criminally insane as justification to work toward disarming the citizenry.  You and I are such a threat to their vast teams of undercover, armed agents and military might?  This warrants therapy for us, but they’d better hurry before all Catholic Social Services are out of business!

8)   Increasing invasions of privacy under the guise of “protecting” us.  Cameras everywhere.  Drones at Obama’s disposal.  New cars in 2014 required to have “little black boxes” to record vehicle operations data similar to that of 600 mph jets.  Chip implants, just for “high security workers” now, but eventually for “medical records” followed by “etc.”

And we’re supposed to lose sleep because Janet Napolitano’s budget will be affected if Congress doesn’t give in to an executive-order happy President? 


1
– Kimberly Amadeo, www.About.com, 1/8/2013
2 – Ibid., 9/5/2012
3 – Rachel Zimmerman. “Choice Allies: Awaiting Green Light, Abortion-Pill Venture Keeps to the Shadows,” The Wall Street Journal, 9/5/2000, reference posted in www.churchmilitant.tv
4 – “Contributed $1 Million To Planned Parenthood For “Outreach, Education and Training” Relating To RU-486,” Marc Kaufman, ”Abortion Pill Deliveries Begin Soon,” The Washington Post, 11/16/2000, also in www.churchmilitant.tv
5 — Matthew Rees, “Saving Capitalism From Soros,” The Ottawa Citizen, 12/9/1998, in www.churchmilitant.tv
6 — Carlin Romano, “George Soros Offers A Plan To Help Poor Via Globalization,” The Philadelphia Inquirer, 3/24/2002, also in www.churchmilitant.tv
7 – “The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible.  They do not choose their homosexual condition: for most of them it is a trial [blog author’s note: “trial” as in a “tribulation,” not trial as an experiment].  They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided.  These persons are called to fulfill God’s Will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord’s Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.”
“Homosexual persons are called to chastity.  [blog author’s note:  just as any man and woman not married to each other are called]  By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested [note: meaning not self-serving] friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection” (paragraphs 2358 and 2359 of the “Catechism of the Catholic Church,” Liguori Publications, Liguori, MO, 1994)
8 — Xavier Lerma, pravda,ru web site, 11/19/2012, posted in the article “Fiscal Cliff: Obama Poised to Win Either Way, U.S. Loses Either Way,” on www.CartaRemi.wordpress.com, 12/29/2012

NEITHER THE CHURCH, NOR THE STATE, CAN REDEFINE MARRIAGE

This should be an easy concept to understand:  absolutely no one has the authority to change the Ten Commandments or the sacraments, which obviously includes marriage.  These are divinely inspired and they stand for all time.  In today’s parlance, God is the author and retains all rights, explicit or implied.

BILL  BEFORE  THE  ILLINOIS  STATE  LEGISLATURE

What set my fingers to tapping on the keyboard this time was a news article about yet another legislative group which is being presumptuous enough to vote on legalizing “gay marriage.”  In this case, the Illinois state legislature will vote on its bill before the next assembly is sworn in on January 9.1

A declaration was issued by “more than 250 Illinois clergy” who stated their support by for the bill noting that “fostering faith, justice and compassion is a key component of their jobs.” 1 (While my article is addressing how attempting to redefine marriage contradicts Scripture and Church teaching, I must also point out that they are incorrect in calling church leadership a “job.”  Leading God’s flock is one of the three “vocations” [from the Latin “vocare” which means  “to call” or “to summon”].2  That is why candidates for the priesthood go through a period of discernment involving not just study, but prayer, reflection and guidance from experienced priests and their bishop. The man and the Church must have a significant degree of certainty that he is being called to this life, not just wanting, to be.)

WHAT  IS  A  VALID  MARRIAGE?

Our human sexuality is a gift from God; thus, from the beginning of our existence we have been bound by His rules on this.  Scripture and Church teaching have always been clear that sexual relations outside of a validly married man and woman are serious wrongs.  Valid marriages are described in many ways.  Here are a few:

1)  Genesis 2:24 “That is why a man leaves his father and mother and clings to his wife, and the two of them become one body.”3
      
2)  Mark 10:6-8 “But form the beginning of creation, ‘God made them male and female.  For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother [and be joined to his wife] and the two shall become one flesh.’”3

3)  1 Peter 3:7  “Likewise you husbands, live considerately with your wives, bestowing honor on on the woman as the weaker sex, since you are joint heirs of the grace of life, in order that your prayers may not be hindered.”4

(Note:  The term “weaker sex” refers to general strength differences, not implied inferiority.)  All of the myriad of Biblical references to marriage describe a union of one man and one woman.  “Same sex marriages” are not part of God’s design.

HOMOSEXUAL  ACTS  ARE  SERIOUS  WRONGS

Again, both the Old and New Testaments are clear and in agreement:

1)  Leviticus 18:22 “You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; such a thing is an abomination.”3

2)  Romans 1:25-27 “They exchanged the truth of God for a lie and revered and worshipped the creature rather than the creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.  Therefore, God handed them over to degrading passions.  Their females exchanged natural relations for unnatural, and the males likewise gave up natural relations with females and burned with lust for one another.  Males did shameful things with males and thus received in their own persons the due penalty for their perversity.”3

3)  1 Corinthians 6:10 “Do you not know that the unjust will not inherit the kingdom of God?  Do not be deceived; neither fornicators nor idolaters nor adulterers nor boy prostitutes nor sodomites nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor robbers will inherit the kingdom of God.” 3

Homosexual actions are “disordered behavior” (see next section).  So, when the declaration supports “equality for same-sex couples,”1 it must be reaffirmed that the Church cannot grant equality between spiritually healthy actions and disordered ones.

CHURCH  TEACHING  IS  CONSISTENT  WITH  SCRIPTURE

Paragraph 2357 of the Catechism includes this on homosexuality: “… It has taken a great variety of forms through the centuries and in different cultures.  Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained.  Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity, tradition has always declared that ‘homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered.’  They are contrary to the natural law…” 5

This statement and the verses listed earlier contradict Rev. Kevin Tindell’s (New Dimensions Chicago and one of the Illinois clergy supporting the bill) assertion that “It has nothing to do with natural order…”With all due respect, it has everything to do with natural order, which God created from the beginning and which no human has the authority to change.

Rev. Tindell continued with, “and everything to do with support, family and love.”The Church does instruct us to support individuals with such inclinations.  Paragraph 2358 of the Catechism states: “The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not neglible.  They do not choose their homosexual condition; for most of them it is a trial. [“trial” meaning a challenge, not an experiment (my clarification)]  They must be accepted with respect, compassion and sensitivity.  Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided.  These persons are called to fulfill God’s will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord’s Cross the difficulties they encounter from their condition.”5

“DISCRIMINATE”  HAS  TWO  MEANINGS

Where well-meaning people may become confused is with the term “unjust discrimination.”  In addition, what is often forgotten is that the word “discrimination” has two meanings, the now more popular legal aspect and the original definition.

1)  The unjust or prejudicial treatment of different categories of people or things, esp. on the grounds of race, age, or sex.
2)  Recognition and understanding of the difference between one thing and another.6

Discrimination does not always pertain to matters of fairness.  To discriminate can also mean to discern differences.  The Church recognizes that differences in behavior are due to our fallen state as human beings.  When a behavior falls outside of what Scripture says is acceptable, the Church has no authority to say “it’s OK” even though the secular world has rationalized it otherwise.

Likewise, “sexual orientation” may have become a protected legal issue when it pertains to things like housing and employment.  However, civil law cannot make it apply to marriage because:  1) it is contrary to the entire concept of marriage itself and 2) civil law has no authority to define something not originating from that law.

JESUS  WAS  COMPASSIONATE,  BUT  NOT  AN  ENABLER

Often we hear of people’s desire to be compassionate to “gay” individuals and to invent a category of same-sex unions so that they may share the same legitimacy which heterosexual married couples have.  While we are always called to love the sinner in his struggles, we cease showing true love to him/her if we also condone the wrongdoing.  By enabling disordered behavior, we risk serious eternal consequences for all involved.

Jesus loved the sinner, but was intolerant of sin.  We can recall the way He dealt with the scribes and Pharisees who wanted to trap him on the issue of the woman caught in adultery.  The law at that time required for her to be stoned to death.  Jesus, whose life and eventual sacrifice represented the New Law, refused to condemn her.  He made His point firmly when he acknowledged the existing law’s penalty, but ordered that “Let the one among you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her.”However, while He forgave her sin, He also reminded her of the gravity of the wrongdoing by instructing her to “… Go, [and] from now on do not sin [any more].”8

WHAT  IS  TRUE  COMPASSION   AND  TRUE  LOVE?

The Church teaches that compassion should be in the forefront of our actions.  When assisting a fellow human being with a challenge, we must do so in a way which respects the person’s dignity.  However, the Church would be abdicating her responsibility if she ignored those differences which conflict with God’s design for the human race, His creation not ours.  To suggest that homosexuality can be legitimized as a form of marriage would be as nonsensical as expecting the Church to disregard the Commandments regarding adultery and coveting thy neighbor’s spouse for those who have a seemingly uncontrollable desire for heterosexual activity with persons they are not married to.

Compassion means being supportive and not judging harshly when someone fails over and over despite sincere attempts at conquering a moral weakness.  True love means a desire to aid the individual, without becoming an accessory to the weakness.  For example, an alcoholic may have a genetic cause for his predisposition to drink excessively.  Loving behavior would be to encourage him in his attempts to remain sober, not to give him a few bottles and say “I’ll pray you don’t hurt anyone.”

THE  FAMILY  IS  AT  STAKE,  TOO

Rev. Tindell’s statement tried to associate the acceptance of homosexual so-called marriage with promoting the good of the family.  This is not accurate if we understand the actual origin of the family and from whom it came.  As Pope Benedict XVI said recently, “Man and woman in their created state as complementary versions of what it means to be human are disputed. But if there is no pre-ordained duality of man and woman in creation, then neither is the family any longer a reality established by creation. Likewise, the child has lost the place he had occupied hitherto and the dignity pertaining to him. Bernheim shows that now, perforce, from being a subject of rights, the child has become an object to which people have a right and which they have a right to obtain. When the freedom to be creative becomes the freedom to create oneself, then necessarily the Maker himself is denied and ultimately man too is stripped of his dignity as a creature of God, as the image of God at the core of his being. The defence of the family is about man himself. And it becomes clear that when God is denied, human dignity also disappears. Whoever defends God is defending man.9

PROTECTING  AN  ALREADY   INALIENABLE  RIGHT?

Supporters of the Illinois bill also said, “The important thing is that the Religious Freedom Protection and Marriage Fairness Act protects religious freedom and guarantees that all faiths will decide which marriages should be consecrated and solemnized within their tradition.”How generous of the bill’s authors!  However, as I recall, freedom of religion is already an inalienable right and, just to make sure, we have the First Amendment to the U. S. Constitution which reads: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…”  Perhaps the authors were hoping to distract the defenders of marriage from the illogic of the bill by pretending to add protection to something which is technically already secure (the infamous HHS mandate notwithstanding).

IN  CONCLUSION

The state has no authority to redefine marriage or to dictate its terms as it did not create the institution.  It regulates the secular legal effects of marriage insofar as they impact inheritance or if the man and woman decide to go separate ways.  In other words, it handles the materialistic effects of marriage.  However, marriage is much more than its tangible aspects.  The inherent reason for marriage, its spiritual origin and commitment, is far beyond the state’s authority.  Its interference on this level is as absurd as if it decided that gravity represented an unreasonable burden and should be banned from the universe.

The Church is responsible for administering the sacrament of marriage.  However, it too, cannot redefine marriage.  That is the domain of its creator, God Himself.  Recognizing that His truths are eternal, then everyone might as well accept the fact that marriage is the union of one man and one woman.  This definition is reality: past, present and future.

1Hamilton JournaNews,12/29/2012, article by Manya A. Brachear, Chicago Tribune
2www.ablemedia.com, Latin-to-English site
3The New Catholic Answer Bible, Fireside Catholic Publishing, Witchita, KS, 2005
4The Holy Bible, Revised Standard Version, Catholic Edition, Thomas Nelson & Sons, Camden, NJ, 1966
5Catechism of the Catholic Church, Liguori Publications, 1994
6 – google.com
7– John 8:7, The New Catholic Answer Bible, Fireside Catholic Publishing, Witchita, KS, 2005
8 – John 8:11, Ibid.
9 – Vatican.va, translation of the Pope’s message, 12/21/2012