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.
J

John_Paul_Jones

Guest
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
Re #Nashville Statement:
  • I affirm: That God loves all LGBT people. I deny: That Jesus wants us to insult, judge or further marginalize them.
  • I affirm: That all of us are in need of conversion. I deny: That LGBT people should be in any way singled out as the chief or only sinners.
  • I affirm: That when Jesus encountered people on the margins he led with welcome not condemnation. I deny: That Jesus wants any more judging.
  • I affirm: That LGBT people are, by virtue of baptism, full members of the church. I deny: That God wants them to feel that they don’t belong
  • I affirm: That LGBT people have been made to feel like dirt by many churches. I deny: That Jesus wants us to add to their immense suffering.
  • I affirm: That LGBT people are some of the holiest people I know. I deny: That Jesus wants us to judge others, when he clearly forbade it.
  • I affirm that the Father loves LGBT people, the Son calls them and the Holy Spirit guides them. I deny nothing about God’s love for them.
Click to expand...
Who is James Martin, SJ?
 
Yes God loves them, but sex outside of Holy Matrimony is a sin to the God who loves them, and this response to the Nashville statement says nothing to clearly reference that. The call to chastity is so very important for everyone to hear and that call to chastity is sadly not specifically referenced in the response.
 
Fr. Martin is a self-styled advocate for gay Catholics; his views and statements often times stretch Church teaching to its absolute limit and sometimes can be construed to be contrary to Church teaching. I strongly suspect that he supports the Catholic Church marrying gay couples, although he would not likely admit it publicly, but that is just a suspicion on my part. I will not say that he outright opposes Church teaching on homosexuality, but I will not say that he supports Church teaching either. The bottom line is, faithful Catholics should be cautious in assuming his statements accurately represent authentic Catholic teaching when statements like this are made public.
 
_Abyssinia said:
Yes God loves them, but sex outside of Holy Matrimony is a sin to the God who loves them, and this response to the Nashville statement says nothing to clearly reference that. The call to chastity is so very important for everyone to hear and that call to chastity is sadly not specifically referenced in the response.
Click to expand...
But the call to chastity applies to everyone, not only to those who are gay. Why single them out? If you want to make an inclusive statement, go ahead: We are all called to chastity whether male or female, gay or straight, single or married, old or young. There’s no need to point a finger at any particular group since everyone needs conversion.
 
SuscipeMeDomine said:
But the call to chastity applies to everyone, not only to those who are gay. Why single them out? If you want to make an inclusive statement, go ahead: We are all called to chastity whether male or female, gay or straight, single or married, old or young. There’s no need to point a finger at any particular group since everyone needs conversion.
Click to expand...
Can you find an example of Fr. Martin publicly calling everyone to chastity?
 
SuscipeMeDomine said:
But the call to chastity applies to everyone, not only to those who are gay. Why single them out? If you want to make an inclusive statement, go ahead: We are all called to chastity whether male or female, gay or straight, single or married, old or young. There’s no need to point a finger at any particular group since everyone needs conversion.
Click to expand...
I said in my previous comment on this thread that the call to chastity is important for everyone to hear.

There is no mention of chastity specifically at all in the response by Fr James Martin.
 
A priest who stretches the teachings of the Church. A priest who pushes boundaries. A priest who says some very eye opening things. A priest who clashes with very conservative Catholics and Christians.

The main factor and word, the main thing you need to know, is he is a priest. Pray for him, try to understand where he is coming from and what he is trying to do. Do not judge him, bring your concerns before the Lord. Pray for him!

If you truly feel that Father Martin has fallen please read the below quote.

"CRITICISM OF PRIESTS

Our Lord’s revelations to Mutter Vogel

“One should NEVER attack a priest, even when he’s in error, rather one should pray and do penance that I’ll grant him My grace again. He alone fully represents Me, even when he doesn’t live after My example!” (page 29, Mutter Vogel’s Worldwide Love, St. Grignion Publishing House, Altoting, South Germany (29. 6. 1929)).

When a Priest falls we should extend him a helping hand THROUGH PRAYER AND NOT THROUGH ATTACKS! “I myself will be his judge, NO ONE BUT I!” “Whoever voices judgment over a priest has voiced it over Me; child, never let a Priest be attacked, take up his defense.” (Feast of Christ the King 1937) "Child, Never judge your confessor, rather pray much for him and offer every Thursday, through the hands of My blessed Mother, Holy Communion (for Him) (18.6. 1939)&nsp; “Never again accept an out-of-the-way word about a Priest, and speak no unkind word (about them) EVEN IF IT WERE TRUE! Every Priest is My Vicar and My heart will be sickened and insulted because of it! If you hear a judgment (against a Priest) pray a Hail Mary.” (28. 6. 1939)

“If you see a Priest who celebrates the Holy Mass unworthily then say nothing about him, rather tell it to Me alone! I stand beside him on the altar!” “Oh pray much for My priests, that they’ll love purity above all, that they’ll celebrate the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass with pure hands and heart. Certainly the Holy Sacrifice is one and the same even when it is celebrated by an unworthy priest, but the graces called down upon the people is not the same!” (28. 2. 1938)

Mary. Queen of the Clergy, pray for them."
 
Peter_J said:
I don’t disagree with any of the things he said there, but the “Re #NashvilleStatement” seems slightly odd, as the connection between those statements and the Nashville Statement is unclear.
Click to expand...
It’s a criticism and refutation of the Nashville Statement, in which Protestant and Evangelical leaders have taken a Catholic position on certain teachings concerning sexuality. It only stands to reason that a Catholic priest would want to refute the Catholic ideas expressed by the Evangelicals.
 
At least two of signatories are gay: Christopher Yuan and Sam Allberry.
I haven’t read the Statement but the comments and critiques from those who did indicate some flaws are present.

From what I’ve read about it, the Statement already does the following:
I affirm: That God loves all LGBT people.
I deny: That Jesus wants us to insult, judge or further marginalize them.
I affirm that the Father loves LGBT people, the Son calls them and the Holy Spirit guides them. I deny nothing about God’s love for them.
Click to expand...
To some extent:
I affirm: That LGBT people are some of the holiest people I know.
Click to expand...
Things that I haven’t seen mentioned from those who did read it:
I affirm: That all of us are in need of conversion.
I affirm: That when Jesus encountered people on the margins he led with welcome not condemnation.
Click to expand...
The fact people automatically declare something that isn’t a carbon copy of their own opinions as ‘hate’ is problematic and you have to wonder why political discourse is where it is. Like the mayor of Nashville.
 
1neophyte said:
It’s a criticism and refutation of the Nashville Statement, in which Protestant and Evangelical leaders have taken a Catholic position on certain teachings concerning sexuality. It only stands to reason that a Catholic priest would want to refute the Catholic ideas expressed by the Evangelicals.
Click to expand...
It is a criticism of the Nashville Statement but it is in no way a refutation of it in that his statement doesn’t address a single assertion made in the document he supposedly refutes. That the claims were made by Protestants and Evangelicals is also irrelevant: either they accord with Catholic teaching or they don’t, and having read them I must have missed the part that a Catholic would find objectionable. Unless, that is, one objects to the Catholic teaching on the subject.

Ender
 
Pythagoras said:
The priest who refuses to admit in public that he is gay…
Click to expand...
What are you basing that on?

A wise priest in high school told us that the one that calls others gay the loudest are probably gay. I tend to agree that at the very least there’s some severe sexual insecurities involved.
 
I’ve never heard Fr Martin state that homosexual acts are sinful. If he has I’d be interested in seeing a link.
 
• In case you’ve not heard, the Nashville Statement, issued this week by the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood (CBMW), an Evangelical “coalition for biblical sexuality” founded in 1987, is “controversial,” “bigotry-filled,” “anti-LGBT,” hateful, nasty, mean, and downright un-Christian.
Of course, when you actually read the document—assuming you have some basic grounding in traditional Christian teaching about marriage, sexuality, and anthropology—you’ll discover it simply reiterates what the Catholic Church, the Orthodox churches, and traditional Protestants have always held. Which is why some Catholics have signed the document.

From Catholic World Report
 
JimG said:
• In case you’ve not heard, the Nashville Statement, issued this week by the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood (CBMW), an Evangelical “coalition for biblical sexuality” founded in 1987, is “controversial,” “bigotry-filled,” “anti-LGBT,” hateful, nasty, mean, and downright un-Christian.
Of course, when you actually read the document—assuming you have some basic grounding in traditional Christian teaching about marriage, sexuality, and anthropology—you’ll discover it simply reiterates what the Catholic Church, the Orthodox churches, and traditional Protestants have always held. Which is why some Catholics have signed the document.

From Catholic World Report
Click to expand...
Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood? If they are basing their view strictly on the Bible, lesbians are A-Okay then. There’s no mention of female homosexuality in the Bible.
 
J_Peterson said:
Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood? If they are basing their view strictly on the Bible, lesbians are A-Okay then. There’s no mention of female homosexuality in the Bible.
Click to expand...
I’m not familiar with the Evangelical coalition which issued the statement. According to the CWR article, they are basing it on traditional Christian teaching on matters of family and sexuality, much of which is common to both Protestants and Catholics.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top