James Martin, SJ Responds to the Nashville Statement

  • Thread starter Thread starter John_Paul_Jones
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
gracepoole said:
He/she seems like one of the saner folks posting in this thread.
Click to expand...
It’s sane to randomly and repeatedly post irrelevant non-sequiters? No one is criticizing any priests. In fact, whether he is gay or not, Fr. Martin would certainly reiterate that an “accusation” of homosexuality is not a criticism at all. Not that anyone is accusing anyone of anything.
 
1neophyte said:
It’s sane to randomly and repeatedly post irrelevant non-sequiters? No one is criticizing any priests. In fact, whether he is gay or not, Fr. Martin would certainly reiterate that an “accusation” of homosexuality is not a criticism at all. Not that anyone is accusing anyone of anything.
Click to expand...
Speculating on a Catholic priest’s sexual orientation because he’s repeating basic Church teachings is uncharitable to say the least.
 
gracepoole said:
Speculating on a Catholic priest’s sexual orientation because he’s repeating basic Church teachings is uncharitable to say the least.
Click to expand...
Try telling that to the boys I went to elementary school with … Telling them Church teaching was probably the surest way to get oneself labeled “gay”. :hmmm:
 
The Nashville Statement, written by Evangelicals, seems to be in accord with Catholic teaching. What’s the problem?
 
Joe_5859 said:
Indeed. Far better to read books than forum posts.

For those who encounter the WSJ paywall, there is a summary of Cardinal Sarah’s response on the NCRegister:

ncregister.com/blog/guest-blogger/cardinal-sarah-builds-a-bridge-to-christs-true-peace-and-joy
Click to expand...
Thanks Joe. I wasn’t aware of that article until you mentioned it, but I had found the Crux article, Vatican cardinal critiques Jesuit Martin on homosexuality.

Also, since this thread is specifically about Fr. Martin’s response to the Nashville Statement, this article is worth mentioning: Why I Won’t Sign the Nashville Statement. I don’t mean this as an attack on Fr. Martin, but it’s rather striking that the author of that article, who is Evangelical not Catholic, sounded more Catholic to me than Fr. Martin did – see for example his comments on in vitro fertilization and “wrongdoing within marriage itself”.
 
John_Paul_Jones said:
Seven simple ways to respond to the Nashville Statement on sexuality

By James Martin, SJ August 30 at 12:57 PM

washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2017/08/30/seven-simple-ways-to-respond-to-the-nashville-statement-on-sexuality/?utm_term=.1bf35e0595f3

Who is James Martin, SJ?
Click to expand...
I have no idea at all who he is. But , in the context of this particular controversy , my subjective view of him is that he is another outspoken egoist within the ranks of the Catholic clergy (something that is alarmingly common these days).

How refreshing is the simple dignity found in humility , and how I long for it to sweep through our church like a clean, cool breeze. Give me humble churchmen who preach Chris without uttering a sound.
 
unafraid said:
I have no idea at all who he is. But , in the context of this particular controversy , my subjective view of him is that he is another outspoken egoist within the ranks of the Catholic clergy (something that is alarmingly common these days).

How refreshing is the simple dignity found in humility , and how I long for it to sweep through our church like a clean, cool breeze. Give me humble churchmen who preach Chris without uttering a sound.
Click to expand...
James J. Martin SJ, also known as Jim Martin, is an American Jesuit priest, a writer, and editor-at-large of the Jesuit magazine America.

**Father James Martin appointed by Pope Francis to Vatican department for communications **americamagazine.org/faith/2017/04/12/father-james-martin-appointed-pope-francis-vatican-department-communications

We are all sinners. James Martin is simply modeling the Jesus of John’s Gospel who reveals himself to the Samaritan woman at the well and offers her eternal life, despite being fully aware of her sexual sins. Read John 4 and try to see the parallel.

That is what Pope Francis wants for the church. I wouldn’t be surprised if Fr. Martin is made a Bishop in a few years.
 
Luke6_37 said:
We are all sinners. James Martin is simply modeling the Jesus of John’s Gospel who reveals himself to the Samaritan woman at the well and offers her eternal life, despite being fully aware of her sexual sins. Read John 4 and try to see the parallel.

That is what Pope Francis wants for the church. I wouldn’t be surprised if Fr. Martin is made a Bishop in a few years.
Click to expand...
There is no parallel between offering forgiveness for sins and denying that there are even sins in the first place. The thing that makes Martin suspicious is that he dances around the issue of whether or not homosexual acts are sinful. If he were to “come out” and say that homosexual acts are sinful, but that repentant sinners are offered free and unconditional forgiveness, he would be modeling the Jesus of John’s Gospel. However, he not thus far proclaimed such a thing. This wouldn’t be a big deal if he were some anonymous hermit, but he does, in fact, enjoy some notoriety, which gives him a responsibility to be more transparent than he currently is.
 
1neophyte said:
There is no parallel between offering forgiveness for sins and denying that there are even sins in the first place. The thing that makes Martin suspicious is that he dances around the issue of whether or not homosexual acts are sinful. If he were to “come out” and say that homosexual acts are sinful, but that repentant sinners are offered free and unconditional forgiveness, he would be modeling the Jesus of John’s Gospel. However, he not thus far proclaimed such a thing. This wouldn’t be a big deal if he were some anonymous hermit, but he does, in fact, enjoy some notoriety, which gives him a responsibility to be more transparent than he currently is.
Click to expand...
Quote me the verse where the Samaritan woman at the well in John 4 repents or asks for forgiveness.
 
Luke6_37 said:
Quote me the verse where the Samaritan woman at the well in John 4 repents or asks for forgiveness.
Click to expand...
Wow, you’re right. No such verse can be found there. Is it your conclusion that repentance is irrelevant and unnecessary? That the Samaritan woman was free to continue to engage in whatever sexual relationships she desired, all with Jesus’ endorsement?
 
1neophyte said:
Wow, you’re right. No such verse can be found there. Is it your conclusion that repentance is irrelevant and unnecessary? That the Samaritan woman was free to continue to engage in whatever sexual relationships she desired, all with Jesus’ endorsement?
Click to expand...
My point is that Jesus first spoke to her as a beloved child of God. We do not know what happened later. James Martin is simply emulating Jesus. What happens after that is between the person & Christ.
 
Luke6_37 said:
My point is that Jesus first spoke to her as a beloved child of God. We do not know what happened later. James Martin is simply emulating Jesus. What happens after that is between the person & Christ.
Click to expand...
My point is that James Martin avoids answering valid questions, very similar to what you are doing. What happens after that is typically one deciding for themselves what is and isn’t a sin, while claiming that their behavior is between “them and Christ,” when in reality, Christ has been removed from the equation entirely, and one is worshiping and obeying only himself/herself. I assure you, I am speaking from bitter personal experience.

No one (correct me if I’m wrong) has encountered James Martin and then proceeded to tell everyone “come see a man who told me everything I’ve ever done.” Because that isn’t what he does. Jesus spoke to the Samaritan woman as a beloved child of God, telling her (very tenderly) that she had sinned. James Martin speaks to his hearers as beloved children of the devil, seductively telling them that they can figure out for themselves what is and isn’t a sin. This is not what Jesus commissioned the apostles to do.
 
1neophyte said:
There is no parallel between offering forgiveness for sins and denying that there are even sins in the first place. The thing that makes Martin suspicious is that he dances around the issue of whether or not homosexual acts are sinful. If he were to “come out” and say that homosexual acts are sinful, but that repentant sinners are offered free and unconditional forgiveness, he would be modeling the Jesus of John’s Gospel. However, he not thus far proclaimed such a thing. This wouldn’t be a big deal if he were some anonymous hermit, but he does, in fact, enjoy some notoriety, which gives him a responsibility to be more transparent than he currently is.
Click to expand...
Read the first sentence in this article: americamagazine.org/issue/simply-loving
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top