Fr. Ryan's Homily at St. James Cathedral in Seattle

[Mike2010]

Hello,

I am just curious what everybody’s thoughts are concerning the recent homily of Fr. Michael Ryan at St. James Cathedral. I’m curious if he has crossed the line on accepting homosexuality, but this has been brought up as potentially a controversial homily (see below link from the Stranger). I agree that sometimes people with same sex attraction often are treated very poorly, and this isn’t right. They should be treated like every other human being with love and compassion. I also admire those who have same sex attraction and struggle with it, but still try to live according to the Church’s teachings; it is a cross they have to bear, and we should try to help them carry that cross. But I think it is wrong to say that the homosexual actions are okay; that they aren’t sinful. The last part of the homily is a little troubling to me, what are your thoughts?

Here is the whole homily from Fr. Ryan: stjames-cathedral.org/main.htm

Here is the article from the Stranger, saying that Fr Ryan says homosexuality is okay: slog.thestranger.com/slog/archives/2012/02/13/father-ryan-stands-up-for-gay-rights?oid=12543719&show=comments&sort=desc&display=

 

[Peggy_in_Burien]

Why are you surprised to find that The Stranger, that filthy rag (that I had to read weekly for a living) that is run by a homosexual would twist Father Ryan’s words?

Just what do you expect The Stranger to do?

Please don’t take this the wrong way, I’m just pointing out the facts. The Stranger will twist anything they want to what they want, and they get their kicks out of being outrageous.

 

[po18guy]

His homily was pretty much OK, but turned morally fuzzy at the end. Fr. Seems to have forgotten that sinners are called to repentance. Not a trace of that in his words, except the very ambiguous ending in which Jesus reaches out to heal us. But, is that to heal us for our lack of acceptance of SSA behavior? To heal those who are homosexually active? The persons themselves? Who?

Fr. Ryan is among a group that is clearly on the fringe. He lent his name and support to a group that resisted the new missal. They feared that the “liberating” aspects of Vatican II would all be lost. And, well do I remember the “gay masses” in the late 1980s that lead to the unprecedented stripping of authority from then Archbishop Hunthausen. By whom? Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger.

The house still needs a little cleaning. An upcoming retirement will allow that process to continue. The “Strange(r) than truth” exhibited typical reporting that is as warped as its world view.

 

[NewEnglandPriest]

Fr. Ryan: “Think, for instance, of gay and lesbian people who struggle so hard for acceptance and understanding, struggle to be respected and loved for who they are.”

CCC: “[Homosexuals] must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided.”

CDF: “It is deplorable that homosexual persons have been and are the object of violent malice in speech or in action. Such treatment deserves condemnation from the Church’s pastors wherever it occurs. It reveals a kind of disregard for others which endangers the most fundamental principles of a healthy society. The intrinsic dignity of each person must always be respected in word, in action and in law.”

What exactly did Fr. Ryan say that isn’t in the CCC or already said by the CDF?

 

[St_Francis]

It seems that a lot of people do not understand the role of repentance in forgiveness. They think we should forgive people, which is true, but how can true healing of a relationship occur withour repentance and penance?

Imagine that a man hires his daughter as an accountant and she steals from him. The man may forgive her, but if she shows up saying Hey Dad, you’re a Christian so your forgiveness should allow you to hire me back. I’ve spent all the money and I’m broke, so you want me to start working again on Monday?

Is that going to work?

 

[po18guy]

Fr. Ryan: “Think, for instance, of gay and lesbian people who struggle so hard for acceptance and understanding, struggle to be respected and loved for who they are.”

CCC: “[Homosexuals] must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided.”

CDF: “It is deplorable that homosexual persons have been and are the object of violent malice in speech or in action. Such treatment deserves condemnation from the Church’s pastors wherever it occurs. It reveals a kind of disregard for others which endangers the most fundamental principles of a healthy society. The intrinsic dignity of each person must always be respected in word, in action and in law.”

What exactly did Fr. Ryan say that isn’t in the CCC or already said by the CDF?

In the context of an archdiocese that openly celebrated masses for active unrepentant homosexuals in the 1980s, and had its Archbishop stripped of power in large part because of that abuse, I think it might be proper to read just a bit into his remarks. Technically, he is 100% correct, but notice how easily and readily the secular paper used his words in support of objectively sinful behavior. Look how directly the secular paper placed Fr. Ryan in juxtaposition to first, his Ordinary, then to the Church herself.

Where was Father Ryan’s call for repentance? That is still a Catholic teaching, is it not? It is no charity to affirm someone in their sin, but rather to call them to repentance. I see no such action or sentiment in the homily. Indeed, Fr. Ryan speaks matter-of-factly of “marriages” which are not sanctioned by the Church - within the context of addressing those affected by same sex attraction. Does he thus re-define marriage as God has establsihed it?

 

[NewEnglandPriest]

In the context of an archdiocese that openly celebrated masses for active unrepentant homosexuals in the 1980s, and had its Archbishop stripped of power in large part because of that abuse, I think it might be proper to read just a bit into his remarks.

I read the Wiki article as well as the CDF letter that was linked within it. I think the above statement is an exaggeration of what transpired.

Technically, he is 100% correct, but notice how easily and readily the secular paper used his words in support of objectively sinful behavior. Look how directly the secular paper placed Fr. Ryan in juxtaposition to first, his Ordinary, then to the Church herself.

So what? Someone took his words out of context, he can’t stop that.

Where was Father Ryan’s call for repentance? That is still a Catholic teaching, is it not? It is no charity to affirm someone in their sin, but rather to call them to repentance.

And here you are taking Fr. Ryan’s statement out of context just like that liberal paper. He wasn’t preaching about homosexual activity, he was preaching about how Catholics treat homosexual persons. His homily had nothing to do with sexuality.

I see no such action or sentiment in the homily. Indeed, Fr. Ryan speaks matter-of-factly of “marriages” which are not sanctioned by the Church - within the context of addressing those affected by same sex attraction. Does he thus re-define marriage as God has establsihed it?

No it was not within that context. He was speaking of how we treat others. Homosexual persons was one example. Then he gave another example of those whose marriages are not recognized by the Church. You do realize that can directly refer to heterosexual civil marriages?

 

[Peggy_in_Burien]

Please, also remember, everyone, that The Stranger is not just a “secular” paper or a “liberal” paper.

It is a filthy, pornographic weekly that is distributed for free. They make great sport of twisting everything that any body says, from the ordinary person on the street to the mayor, and the Church, to their LBGT agenda.

The paper is filth! I know, because I was forced to read it weekly as part of my job as a research reader. Some of the article may be of interest, but the language is from the worst gutter, and most articles and the ads are just filthy.

This is mild, according to their standards.