Fr. James Martin

  • Thread starter Thread starter Polak
  • Start date Start date
It is important if one is going to try and be so exact in parsing statements by a priest, one be capable of precision in the English language. What I said, is not that you judged the spiritual condition of another’s soul. If you do not get this, then it best to leave Fr. Martin to his superior and not try and add to or twist what he says.
 
Okay, so here’s the listing for that parish on the diocesan website. Interesting.
So presumably the bishop of Montreal is on board with the Gathering Space.
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
 
Last edited:
To be clear, I am not a fan of Fr. Martin. I am glad he does what he does, will leave it for his boss to deal with him, and move on with life. I feel the same way about some extremely conservative clergy that I am glad for their ministry, though I am dumbfounded by some of the things they say or do. I am glad the Church is not full of either, but has a rich variety of priests and bishops.

As to his ministry, I note that anytime I would spend tearing him down for how he evangelizes would be better spent in evangelization. Few here would have the calling, talents, or inclination for ministering to those he does. But we all have those to whom we too must be the hands of Jesus. I know that I make mistakes and am not above criticism in what I do for the Kingdom of Christ, were everything to be splashed over the internet.
 
pnewton said:
To be clear, I am not a fan of Fr. Martin. I am glad he does what he does, will leave it for his boss to deal with him, and move on with life. I feel the same way about some extremely conservative clergy that I am glad for their ministry, though I am dumbfounded by some of the things they say or do. I am glad the Church is not full of either, but has a rich variety of priests and bishops.

As to his ministry, I note that anytime I would spend tearing him down for how he evangelizes would be better spent in evangelization. Few here would have the calling, talents, or inclination for ministering to those he does. But we all have those to whom we too must be the hands of Jesus. I know that I make mistakes and am not above criticism in what I do for the Kingdom of Christ, were everything to be splashed over the internet.
Click to expand...
But he himself puts his writings and thoughts on the Internet, right? They’re not intended to be some sort of obscure esoteric work, are they?
 
27lw said:
Are you sure that this stuff from CCC2352 applies to people who are PUBLICLY not living in accord with Catholic sexual morality?
Click to expand...
How is it public? You are sitting in church, and someone goes up for communion. This is a large city (3 million+) parish. Not everyone knows one another. So that person goes up for communion. Other than it being an LGBQT-friendly parish, how, in fact, do you know that person is gay? How do you know for sure that they are “married” or not to a same-sex partner? If they’re there with someone else, how do you know it’s his/her lover rather than his/her sister/brother/father/uncle/simple friend? How do you know that the person isn’t chaste? How do you know (s)he hasn’t just been to confession a few minutes before Mass? How do you know all these things?

That’s the premise on which nobody is turned away. In fact, the Church directive is for the priest to NOT turn away anyone from the communion line; that is not the place to deal with scandal, public or otherwise. In this large parish, the priest may see the communicant only once or infrequently. Or the communicant may never approach the priest for spiritual guidance. Or may be visiting from another parish.

So there is nothing really public here unless the LGBQT person wears a scarlet letter…

I’ve been to Masses where I recognize business people with very dodgy business ethics, go up for communion. I guess I should be publicly denouncing them too right?

IMHO, being a public busybody is just as much of a public scandal.
 
Last edited:
OraLabora said:
40.png
27lw:
Are you sure that this stuff from CCC2352 applies to people who are PUBLICLY not living in accord with Catholic sexual morality?
Click to expand...
How is it public? You are sitting in church, and someone goes up for communion. This is a large city (3 million+) parish. Not everyone knows one another. So that person goes up for communion. Other than it being an LGBQT-friendly parish, how, in fact, do you know that person is gay? How do you know for sure that they are “married” or not to a same-sex partner? If they’re there with someone else, how do you know it’s his/her lover rather than his/her sister/brother/father/uncle/simple friend?

That’s the premise on which nobody is turned away. In fact, the Church directive is for the priest to NOT turn away anyone from the communion line; that is not the place to deal with scandal, public or otherwise. In this large parish, the priest may see the communicant only once. Or the communicant may never approach the priest for spiritual guidance. Or may be from another parish.

So there is nothing really public unless the LGBQT person wears a scarlet letter…

I’ve been to Masses where I recognize business people with very dodgy business ethics, go up for communion. I guess I should be denouncing them too right?

IMHO, being a public busybody is just as much of a public scandal.
Click to expand...
In the parish? The parishioners don’t know who’s openly gay, living as married people when they are gay, etc?
Yes, to a visitor, or someone who doesn’t know them, there’s no scandal.
But the parish itself advertises that they have open communion, right?
How is this (“open communion”) in accord with Catholic teaching?
I’m genuinely confused.
 
Last edited:
For one thing, I accept my own feelings, and even opinions, are not objective truth and fall short of divinity. Second, he does minister to people. He is a priests, meaning he brings to the altar the Body and Blood of Christ, and like all priests, deserves appreciation for that. If we had no priests, we would have no Eucharists. Few here have given up everything to follow Jesus as our priests have.

I am no fan of his because I believe he misses, or doesn’t care, how many people cannot understand with great precision what he is saying, and misinterpret it or embellish it to the point it looks like he is contradicting the Church.
 
27lw said:
In the parish? The parishioners don’t know who’s openly gay, living as married people when they are gay, etc?
Click to expand...
As I said, it’s a large city parish, located right downtown. My experience is that very few people know each other in large parishes like these. Unless it’s a publicly known gay activist, there’s unlikely to be public scandal. Most people even in my area, tend to mind their own business.

As for open communion, I prefer to say “they leave it to everyone’s conscience”.
 
pnewton said:
I am no fan of his because I believe he misses, or doesn’t care, how many people cannot understand with great precision what he is saying, and misinterpret it or embellish it to the point it looks like he is contradicting the Church.
Click to expand...
So just to be clear you believe he isn’t contradicting the Church with anything he says?
 
I have not heard or read anything he said that is a direct contradiction of Church teaching. That is as far as I can go.
 
None of the numerous examples I provided in this thread of things he has said were a contradiction of Church teaching to you? I find that amazing, but you have a right to your opinion.
 
Even if Fr. Martin put himself out there and wrote an entire article about how he accepts Church teaching, it would not be good enough for his detractors.

(hint: he did that.)
 
I understand what you’re trying to say. And I agree with you in certain points that you’ve made. I do believe that too often Christians (i use that term broadly) have done more harm then good when trying to address the sin at the expense of the sinner.

For example, women who’ve had abortions need a great deal of healing of understanding and you can’t expect to share the love of Christ when all they hear are Christians using language like “murderer“ and “wh*re” thrown at them.

I do believe the Church has fallen prey to evil men who have donned the collar and have carried out some heinous and revolting crimes against the laity. This is what I believe has triggered the Church’s response to LGBTQ issues. Not solely because they are sinful, but because too many clergy have engaged in these actions and have harmed the Church.

Men like James Martin aren’t seeking to bring healing and salvation in light of Church teaching, he’s trying to reclassify what is sinful in order to change Church teaching.
 
Last edited:
Anesti33 said:
Even if Fr. Martin put himself out there and wrote an entire article about how he accepts Church teaching, it would not be good enough for his detractors.

(hint: he did that.)
Click to expand...
Very true.

Fr. Martin is, and has always been, a priest in good standing with his order and the Vatican. EVERY single book he has ever written carries the imprimatur.

The scandal of threads like this is that those things aren’t good enough for some Catholics.

To those critiquing Fr. Martin when his order and the Vatican do not see fit to agree with you: Is it possible, even remotely, that you are wrong and the Church is right?

Edit: His books actually carry the imprimi potest because he is a member of a religious order. Mea Culpa. See my post below for more details.
 
Last edited:
billsherman said:
Fr. Martin is, and has always been, a priest in good standing with his order and the Vatican. EVERY single book he has ever written carries the imprimatur.
Click to expand...
These days Imprimatur does not mean much. It simply means let it be printed. A book needs additionally the Nihil Obstat which is the one that means there is nothing in the book that contradicts Church doctrine.
 
Sort of. It was a long time ago, for starters, and I’ve read that article and it’s more of an “Here is the official Church teaching on homosexuality, and I’m not going to publicly disagree with it” than anything else. He presented Church teaching - he didn’t say he agreed with it. Subtle distinction.
 
Last edited:
Montrose said:
These days Imprimatur does not mean much.
Click to expand...
I was actually wrong in my previous post, and I will update it.

As a member of a religious order, his books don’t carry the Imprimatur but the imprimi potest. Under CDF requirements this certifies that the book: “does not contain anything which might be harmful to the doctrine of the faith or morals.”

It achieves the same goal.

Again, the scandal in this thread is that the Church is not good enough at determining Fr. Martin’s status as some Catholic would like. That is a shame.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top