Nicolas Coppola, gay catholic who married, is banned from church duties, was this right?

[achmafooma]

No, this has to do with being in public defiance of a non-negotiable Church teaching. The fair question to ask, then, is this: Do heterosexuals who have married a second person civilly after marrying someone else validly in the Church and not having obtained an annulment face the same restrictions? If not, they ought to, because that, too, is to have defied Church teaching by a deliberate legal action that is in the public record and a serious offense against divine law.

…]

Another example would be someone who obtained a box-top “ordination” for the purpose of performing weddings. You cannot do that and expect to be given a position of trust in the Church. This is different from someone who has a job as a civil authority which does not allow them exemptions on account of conscience when it comes to performing weddings they believe are bigamous or otherwise morally offensive.

I can’t speak for every parish, but certainly in mine somebody who is divorced and remarried outside of the church, or somebody purporting to be an ordained minister and performing weddings, would not be permitted to hold a teaching position.

Of course, if the person had done these things privately and quietly and nobody knew about it, there would be no way to stop them. But if it came out, they would be removed. Those of us with responsibility for teaching the faith must live the example as best as we can. If we obstinately refuse to do so, we have no business teaching the faith!

Don’t get me wrong; I sin as much as anybody else, but I repent and confess and try to amend my ways. If a practicing homosexual person began living chastely, or a divorced and remarried person did the same (or was able to obtain an annulment and convalidation), or a box-top ‘ordained minister’ renounced his ‘ordination’ and stopped performing weddings, they would be welcomed back (perhaps after a bit of a ‘waiting period,’ depending on the individual circumstances).

It’s the obstinate refusal to amend one’s ways or attempt to live in accord with the faith that is the issue – especially in cases like that brought up by the OP, where the person doesn’t only live in opposition to the faith, but claims that the Church is wrong, not him! That’s a dangerous thing to teach to others, especially the young and those learning about Catholicism in RCIA classes.

God bless.

 

[stlcatholic86]

So I just joined this forum as a way to connect with other Catholics around the world maybe. I am new Baptized and Confirmed. I am also a gay man. My calling to Christ is not me ashamed of my sexuality or trying to change. I’m an extremely happy person. It was just time for me to set down all the mess and get right with the Lord. Now what this man did, okay so it goes against Church teaching. But think about it. The nation is in an uproar about this throwing Scriptures around like confetti. His Union with this man is out of love and should be respected just as you want YOUR marriage, union, partnership, whatever accepted and respected. As a gay man I came into the church because I found the Catholic faith to be a lot more welcoming. I was raised a Baptist and experienced so much hatred and intolerance towards anything different it was ridiculous. So I left the church. I left Christ. But I felt him tugging on my heart telling me that it’s okay. No need to be afraid. Just as these two men were not afraid to do what comes naturally when you love someone so much. As far as him not being able to continue work in the Parish that is ridiculous and absurd. How you gonna turn somebody away, then turn around and preach the message of love? I guess I must be lucky that people in my Parish did embrace me and saw me for more than my sexuality. I’m a caregiver, brother, son, god son, uncle. In the end the more you preach about what is and is not sin and what is right and not right you are moving farther away form from the message of Jesus Christ. Which is to love and be loved without fear. I don’t know. That’s just how I feel. Everyone is entitled to their own opinions. I just know that it must be a blessing to find someone that you love and cherish that you can go to church with. Pray with. In the LGBT lifestyle so many are running away from the Church. I’ve actually lost friend because of my decision to come to Christ. It’s fear of rejection and hatred. So if someone is devout in their faith and lives their faith to the BEST OF THEIR ABILITY JUST AS WE ALL DO then what makes them wrong and unjust in the eyes of God? Nothing. At least that’s what I’ve gotten out of the Scriptures. I believe in this Church and I believe that the new Pope will make great strides. Not for LGBT people, but for all people. And I pray that one day this man and his partner are able to continue in the life they had.

Amen brother. Jesus teaches above all to love. I think for many we let rules get in the way of love and compassion.

 

[estesbob]

Amen brother. Jesus teaches above all to love. I think for many we let rules get in the way of love and compassion.

And many let their personal feelings and desires get in the way of the Truth.

Love never expresses itself through sin.

 

[stlcatholic86]

And many let their personal feelings and desires get in the way of the Truth.

Love never expresses itself through sin.

The assumption is that you hold the Truth and I do not. I make no claim that I hold the Truth. I can’t possible know all of Gods Truth. I find nothing inconsistent with the way I strive to life my life as Christ taught us to. I don’t reduce my identity to my sexuality it’s only but a part of me.

 

[estesbob]

The assumption is that you hold the Truth and I do not. I make no claim that I hold the Truth. I can’t possible know all of Gods Truth. I find nothing inconsistent with the way I strive to life my life as Christ taught us to. I don’t reduce my identity to my sexuality it’s only but a part of me.

No I dont-the Church does. Not you, not me, not our personal interpretations of what Christ taught. The Church.

Chastity and homosexuality

2357 Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex. 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,141 tradition has always declared that "homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered."142 They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.

*2358 The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. 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.

2359 Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection.*

 

[stlcatholic86]

No I dont-the Church does. Not you, not me, not our personal interpretations of what Christ taught. The Church.

Chastity and homosexuality

2357 Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex. 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,141 tradition has always declared that "homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered."142 They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.

*2358 The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. 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.

2359 Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection.*

Well to be clear you profess that you had the Truth and I didn’t. I completely understand what it in the Catechism regarding homosexuality. Even our beloved Church doesn’t have the full truth, for if it did would it reinterpret how we should profess our faith? There was a time all not that long ago when homosexuality was a crime punished by death, mostly because the sin of homosexuality was considered as grave as murder. This no longer seems to be the case in the Catholic church. Thus for me while I respect the Catechism and its value to interpret the word of the Lord I do also indeed acknowledge the possibility of it fallibility in regard to its interpretations.

 

[estesbob]

Well to be clear you profess that you had the Truth and I didn’t

No I didnt

. I completely understand what it in the Catechism regarding homosexuality. Even our beloved Church doesn’t have the full truth, for if it did would it reinterpret how we should profess our faith?

819 “Furthermore, many elements of sanctification and of truth” are found outside the visible confines of the Catholic Church: “the written Word of God; the life of grace; faith, hope, and charity, with the other interior gifts of the Holy Spirit, as well as visible elements.” Christ’s Spirit uses these Churches and ecclesial communities as means of salvation, whose power derives from the fullness of grace and truth that Christ has entrusted to the Catholic Church. All these blessings come from Christ and lead to him, and are in themselves calls to “Catholic unity.”

There was a time all not that long ago when homosexuality was a crime punished by death, mostly because the sin of homosexuality was considered as grave as murder. This no longer seems to be the case in the Catholic church. Thus for me while I respect the Catechism and its value to interpret the word of the Lord I do also indeed acknowledge the possibility of it fallibility in regard to its interpretations.

The Churchs teaching on homosexual behavior has not changed in 2,000 years. The Church is not concerned with temporal punishments-rather spiritual. The Church is not fallible.

 

[stlcatholic86]

The Churchs teaching on homosexual behavior has not changed in 2,000 years. The Church is not concerned with temporal punishments-rather spiritual. The Church is not fallible.

While you may believe all these things to be true Today, historical record would paint a much different picture.

 

[EasterJoy]

…Now what this man did, okay so it goes against Church teaching. But think about it…

Stop. Right. There. You are all set to take a big bite out of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Do not think that your knowledge of right and wrong makes you into a god, someone who has the authority to** define **right and wrong. That authority belongs to God alone, because God alone truly understands the human heart.

…His Union with this man is out of love and should be respected just as you want YOUR marriage, union, partnership, whatever accepted and respected. … I felt him tugging on my heart telling me that it’s okay. No need to be afraid. Just as these two men were not afraid to do what comes naturally when you love someone so much…

Do you think the man who abandons his marriage to marry his “soul mate” does not think along these lines, that is, “do what comes naturally when you love someone so much”?

Don’t you see where it leads when we follow our inclinations without stopping to examine whether our consciences are correctly formed? And no, not everyone has a correct conscience! This is possibly the greatest lie that is widely believed by those who are otherwise devoted to God! What about the people who tell you to be ashamed of yourself and your temptations because they “love you so much” and it seems the right thing for them to do in order to keep you from sin? Shouldn’t they act on what their “hearts” are prompting them to do? Or should they look at themselves and what truly loving behavior is?

… As far as him not being able to continue work in the Parish that is ridiculous and absurd. How you gonna turn somebody away, then turn around and preach the message of love? I guess I must be lucky that people in my Parish did embrace me and saw me for more than my sexuality…

Again: a) are you saying that no defiance of Church teaching ought to be a reason to remove someone from a leadership position?
b) if some defiance is incompatibale with leadership, then what makes this man’s defiance into an exception?

… In the end the more you preach about what is and is not sin and what is right and not right you are moving farther away form from the message of Jesus Christ. Which is to love and be loved without fear. I don’t know. That’s just how I feel.

Stop. Teaching about right and wrong is moving away from the message of Jesus? Huh?

Where did you get this?

“You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ But I say to you, everyone who looks at a woman with lust has already committed adultery with her in his heart. If your right eye causes you to sin, tear it out and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one of your members than to have your whole body thrown into Gehenna. And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one of your members than to have your whole body go into Gehenna.” Matt. 5:27-30

How does that fit with your definition of a loving preacher? Or can only heterosexuals commit sexual sin?

Everyone is entitled to their own opinions. I just know that it must be a blessing to find someone that you love and cherish that you can go to church with. Pray with. In the LGBT lifestyle so many are running away from the Church. I’ve actually lost friend because of my decision to come to Christ. It’s fear of rejection and hatred. So if someone is devout in their faith and lives their faith to the BEST OF THEIR ABILITY JUST AS WE ALL DO then what makes them wrong and unjust in the eyes of God? Nothing. At least that’s what I’ve gotten out of the Scriptures. I believe in this Church and I believe that the new Pope will make great strides. Not for LGBT people, but for all people. And I pray that one day this man and his partner are able to continue in the life they had.

No one says that this dear man cannot go to church with anyone or pray with anyone he likes. No one says he cannot love other people. How did the right to have any sexual relationship one wants get slipped in with that, though? How did doing as one is inclined to do become (in all caps, no less) living your faith to the best of your ability?

What is at issue is not whether this man is not very fine in other respects. What is at issue is whether or not he can feel free to re-define marriage to suit himself and in defiance of the Church, and by a very public and legally-binding act, at that, an act that he knows that the Church teaches is totally unacceptable and which he chooses to do, anyway. He knows, too, that the Church has the authority to teach definitively on matters of faith and morals. It isn’t a democracy with the wrong party temporarily in power. There has never been a time when the Church taught anything different. If we can re-write moral law to fit us, after all, then how is it possible to be either wrong or unjust? Anyone who says, “this is my best” can count himself a just man…where did you find that in Scriptures? I do not see how you can read Scriptures for meaning and fail to come to the conclusion that sexual self-mastery is required of a Christian!

You will find nowhere in Holy Scriptures that an unjust man will be known by what temptations he struggles with. That is very true, and many people forget that. You will also not, however, find that the just man is someone who is his own law or who acts against moral law without repentance. If you want to do what you want to do and define right behavior for yourself and call that right behavior, you won’t find that in the Bible.

 

[estesbob]

While you may believe all these things to be true Today, historical record would paint a much different picture.

The Churches teachings on Homosexual behavior haven’t changed in 2,000 years. it has always been taught as a mortal sin. if you have anything to refute this please post it.

 

[EasterJoy]

Well to be clear you profess that you had the Truth and I didn’t. I completely understand what it in the Catechism regarding homosexuality. Even our beloved Church doesn’t have the full truth, for if it did would it reinterpret how we should profess our faith? There was a time all not that long ago when homosexuality was a crime punished by death, mostly because the sin of homosexuality was considered as grave as murder. This no longer seems to be the case in the Catholic church. Thus for me while I respect the Catechism and its value to interpret the word of the Lord I do also indeed acknowledge the possibility of it fallibility in regard to its interpretations.

The Church teaches that in most cases the death penalty is not necessary to give just punishment to anyone, even murderers, because modern prisons can keep murderers without them ever escaping to re-offend. Does this mean there are no grave sins anymore?

The value you are putting on the Church to teach you any truth you do not want to hear is, if one were to judge only by the account you give in the quote above, essentially zero. Spare us protests about how much you respect the Church. That is the way that men talk when they’re trying to talk a naïve virgin into going to bed with them…“oh, yes, yes, I respect you, I love you, you are so beautiful, you are cruel to not let me defile you for my pleasure.” The only “moral law” you think is infallible is…yourself!!

 

[adrift]

While you may believe all these things to be true Today, historical record would paint a much different picture.

What historical records are you referring to?

 

[stlcatholic86]

The Church teaches that in most cases the death penalty is not necessary to give just punishment to anyone, even murderers, because modern prisons can keep murderers without them ever escaping to re-offend. Does this mean there are no grave sins anymore?

The value you are putting on the Church to teach you any truth you do not want to hear is, if one were to judge only by the account you give in the quote above, essentially zero. Spare us protests about how much you respect the Church. That is the way that men talk when they’re trying to talk a naïve virgin into going to bed with them…“oh, yes, yes, I respect you, I love you, you are so beautiful, you are cruel to not let me defile you for my pleasure.” The only “moral law” you think is infallible is…yourself!!

My point is to suggest the church has never changed is incorrect. You are correct that is the Church’s current position on the death penalty, but it has not always been the case. In its’ history it has executed people for committing homosexual acts and supported laws that criminalize homosexuality.

There are a lot of things I don’t want to hear as I am sure there are many things you don’t want to hear either. However, I have thought and prayed a lot about my own gayness and membership in the Catholic faith and from that have arrived that the Church is wrong about this. However to suggest that I just disregard everything she teaches is simply ridiculous and your comparison is offensive. You may think I am a lesser Catholic than you, but just because you think it doesn’t make it true. Finally, as I’ve stated before I don’t profess to know the true. I am human, therefore I am fallible. I could be wrong. Instead it seems pretty clear that because you hold the Truth of the Church you can’t be wrong yet I’m the one who claims to be infallible?

 

[Hovannes]

So a Caholic Homosexual gets married and publicly repudiates what the Catholic Church teaches, and the only newsworthy story is that he’s asked to stop teaching CCD.

Why is this a problem?

 

[adrift]

My point is to suggest the church has never changed is incorrect. You are correct that is the Church’s current position on the death penalty, but it has not always been the case. In its’ history it has executed people for committing homosexual acts and supported laws that criminalize homosexuality.

How is this a change?
The Church has maintained the right of the state to execute. It still does.
Capital Punishment - The Pope’s Position

 

[Daizies]

I think a quote from Pope Francis’ homily today, is perfect for this situation:

“Throughout history, the people of God have always been tempted to chop a piece off faith,” the Pope said. More or less everyone is tempted “not to be too rigid.” “But when we start to cut down on faith, to negotiate faith, selling it to the highest bidder – he emphasised – we take the path of apostasy, we begin to lack faith, lack faith in the Lord.”

Or, as Father said in his homily “Whenever we focus too much on ourselves, we become the losers”

We don’t get to define what is right and wrong, God does. The problem is that when we look at morality, we often begin with ourselves. I want, I think, I feel - it becomes all about the self. Instead, we should be looking to God and the Church to set the standard.

As far as the OP, the only reason why it is news is because he is homosexual, which is the cause du jour. Like many others have said, at our parish the same would have happened for any other open sin that can be a source of scandal (like a lector stepping down for being pregnant and unmarried). It is reasonable to expect that those representing the church in leadership/ministry roles should reflect the teachings of the church. Otherwise it would be like hiring the CEO of planned parenthood to organize the March for Life.

 

[EasterJoy]

My point is to suggest the church has never changed is incorrect. You are correct that is the Church’s current position on the death penalty, but it has not always been the case. In its’ history it has executed people for committing homosexual acts and supported laws that criminalize homosexuality.

There are a lot of things I don’t want to hear as I am sure there are many things you don’t want to hear either. However, I have thought and prayed a lot about my own gayness and membership in the Catholic faith and from that have arrived that the Church is wrong about this. However to suggest that I just disregard everything she teaches is simply ridiculous and your comparison is offensive. You may think I am a lesser Catholic than you, but just because you think it doesn’t make it true. Finally, as I’ve stated before I don’t profess to know the true. I am human, therefore I am fallible. I could be wrong. Instead it seems pretty clear that because you hold the Truth of the Church you can’t be wrong yet I’m the one who claims to be infallible?

You are talking about a change in what is a just punishment for a grave offense, not whether or not crimes that used to rate the death penalty are still grave offenses, and talking as if these two are the same thing. That is a rhetorical foul, as the two things are in different classes of teaching. You’re mixing apples and oranges, and it is not as if you have no authority to believe who can keep you straight on what is what. You have one, I have one, we have one who claims to be the one and only one in the realm of faith and morals, and if we decide to stray from what that single definitive authority teaches, that is a moral choice, not an “opinion”.

I never said you are a lesser Catholic than I am. I am saying that if you say you respect the Church but say at the same time that you do not believe it teaches the truth definitively because it still teaches that you may not act on your sexual inclinations (or because it teaches anything else that you refuse to believe), then you are talking out of both sides of your mouth. Rather, when we doubt what the Church teaches, we ought to respond “I do believe, help my unbelief!” (Mark 9:24)

It is not I, but the Church herself who claims to have the authority to teach definitively about faith and morals. If you know the Church makes this claim and you believe it to be false, then why do you “respect and value” the Church? It is like these people who say they respect Jesus as a great prophet even though he believed he was the Son of God. No! Either he is being lied about or he is some nut who thinks he was the Son of God and wasn’t, or else he really is the Son of God and that needs to be believed. He went out on a limb with a very grand claim, the Church is out on a limb with a very grand claim, and there isn’t a squishy middle ground and a patronizing answer allowed.

 

[Soren_Itenu]

Well put, EasterJoy. There’s just way too much equivocation going on in these forums, people saying they follow the Church but then denying some of its moral teachings. :nope:

 

[Frank_Drebin]

What historical records are you referring to?

The Gospel of Mary Magdalene and the Hitler Diaries. Both found in Al Capone’s vault in 1986.

 

[stlcatholic86]

I think a quote from Pope Francis’ homily today, is perfect for this situation:

Or, as Father said in his homily “Whenever we focus too much on ourselves, we become the losers”

We don’t get to define what is right and wrong, God does. The problem is that when we look at morality, we often begin with ourselves. I want, I think, I feel - it becomes all about the self. Instead, we should be looking to God and the Church to set the standard.

As far as the OP, the only reason why it is news is because he is homosexual, which is the cause du jour. Like many others have said, at our parish the same would have happened for any other open sin that can be a source of scandal (like a lector stepping down for being pregnant and unmarried). It is reasonable to expect that those representing the church in leadership/ministry roles should reflect the teachings of the church. Otherwise it would be like hiring the CEO of planned parenthood to organize the March for Life.

Well I agree we ought to look at God for questions of morality and I often look to the Church to set the standard. However, I’m not defining morality on my own just because I happen to be affected by it. There are certain moral truths like one should not kill, hence why regardless of the Catholic position on Capital Punishment I am against it. I do not believe the Church’s position on homosexuality is unequivocal and therefore I have serious doubts about God’s condemnation of it.

Finally no is suggesting this man become Pope. The Church is hurting for Eucharist Ministers and Lectors and to condemn people because they don’t always follow the tenets of the faith is just silly and sends the message that these people are welcome to attend but must be silent. Is that really the message our Church should send?