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

[hosemonkey]

Correct I am rejecting the Catholic “truth” regarding homosexuality. How I am equated to a six year because I disagree with the Church and you on that position is beyond me. As free will intentioned adults we can have a civil discussing about this. Ultimately, we are going to have to just agree to disagree.

You are what is known as a “Cafeteria Catholic.” Also known as a “CINO” or Catholic in name only. Those who pick and choose, selecting only what suits them and ignoring the rest. And yet they identify themselves as “Catholic” and claim to speak for the Church, especially when the hot-button questions come up. These folks are the termites in the structure of the Church. We are so much better off without them, especially in these times, They will listen to no correction, but will pursue their own agenda. Their heresies must be noted and exposed at every opportunity. To accept only some of the truths that the Church teaches and rejects the rest is cowardly at best and heretical at worst.

 

[hosemonkey]

“Heresy” is any belief or theory that is at variance with established beliefs or customs.

Catholic 86 may believe differently than many Catholics on the forum on this matter…but he’s not the only one. There are many debates here where Catholics differ in their opinions on teachings and behavior.
But we don’t ignore them because of it. This is a forum to exchange and throw around different ideas from different kinds of people, not a forum to expect everyone to be exactly the same.
We have Jewish people, for example, on this forum who do not believe Jesus of Nazareth is divine, is the son of God, and they debate this.
Verily, verily, I say to you…that would be considered a BIG heresy. But we do not* ignore*

Jews are not bound to believe in the divinity of Jesus Christ, Catholics are. They are of course, incorrect, but not heretics.

 

[EasterJoy]

Love that song. Walked by The Dakota today and crowds of people were singing it outside at Strawberry Fields…

I think you are missing the point of the song, Easter J. It’s about peace during a time of war and pointing out that people often use religion to fight wars or to spread fear. And as we all know, many people do indeed do this. It’s an example of people using religion in a harmful way.
It is the way of an artist to express ideas in this way.

Last line:…“and the world will live as one…”

Yeah, well, I like the tune, too. I don’t hold it against anybody for wistfully wanting to wash sinful people out of religion. The problem is that it does not work that way, and it isn’t love of humanity to deny that this is so. If you want to love humanity, you have to love them with mercy and compassion that knows that people do fail and will keep failing, and not imagine that people don’t have the inclination to sin that we all have, or that they have it because their leaders are all terrible people who bring out the worst in others. We can’t shove our individual concupiscence off on religious leaders. We have to cop to the fact that we have defective senses of right and wrong.

Lennon stated: “‘Imagine’, which says: ‘Imagine that there was no more religion, no more country, no more politics,’ is virtually the Communist manifesto, even though I’m not particularly a Communist and I do not belong to any movement.” He told NME: "There is no real Communist state in the world; you must realize that. The Socialism I speak about … [is] not the way some daft Russian might do it, or the Chinese might do it. That might suit them. Us, we should have a nice … British Socialism." (Blaney, John (2007). Lennon and McCartney: Together Alone (1st ed.). Jawbone Press. ISBN 978-1-906002-02-2, as quoted by Wikapedia)

So, no, John Lennon was not talking about religion used in the wrong way. He was talking about organized religion being the source of strife in the world. He actually believed that some form of world wide communism would bring about world peace, that people competed and disagreed because they had gotten organized. That is total hogwash. To be blunt, it is the talk of somebody who did a little too much in the way of mind-altering substances. It is the talk of someone who wants to blame someone else’s faults for sin in the world.

The answer to sin in the world is the Lamb of God, who takes it away, the Lamb of God who said, “Go, and sin no more”, the Lamb of God, who emptied himself of his divinity and accepted death on a cross in order to save those who had turned away from God, not John Lennon, who naively wanted to deny that human beings have a fallen nature in the first place. Too bad the tune is copyrighted, because it is a nice tune, and deserved better lyrics, lyrics that were true.

 

[RobbyS]

You are correct that most of the sex abuse cases were with pubescent or especially post- pubescent boys and known as Ephebophilia.

With the recent Vatileaks, the Church acknowledged it had a homosexual priest problem. The book Good Bye Good Men** as detailed the problem. And as seen recently in Scotland, bishops and cardinals were involved in an elaborate network of protecting homosexual priests.

I think the 900 lb gorilla that few want to say is that there seems to be a large correlation between SSA men and Ephebophilia. There are countless examples of SSA men who have had sex with minors. Kevin Clash and Mia Farrow’s brother come to mind as two of the more recent. The group NAMBLA exists just for this purpose–and there is a reason for its existence.

I wish we could deny it was a homosexual priest problem, but nothing else explains it.

The Church seems to have been running away from this fact for a long while. It is something like the problem that that Church has had with “priest wives,” The celibacy ideal does seem to set a high bar for ordinary men. My understanding is that the reason why the seminaries, which had been bursting with young men before Vatican II, emptied out because many had been led to think that celibacy was going to be made optional and when it was not, they simply bailed. Many priests abandoned the priesthood. and it was “hollowed out.” Even men who stayed were demoralized, or angry. Others stayed because they saw an opportunity to change the Church from within. The laity followed a similar path, except that many of them found a refuge in conservative Protestants bodies. The bishops had to have priests, and so standards dropped with respect both to recruits and the priests remaining. It was a kind of replay of the Reformation, but Trent offered an alternative as did the formation of new orders. Our “Counter-reformation” seems to have come with John Paul II and Benedict and the young priests they have inspired. Whatever, we must pray that They can make the people forget the horrific scandal that has shaken the faith of many,

 

[pocohombre]

Love that song. Walked by The Dakota today and crowds of people were singing it outside at Strawberry Fields…

I think you are missing the point of the song, Easter J. It’s about peace during a time of war and pointing out that people often use religion to fight wars or to spread fear. And as we all know, many people do indeed do this. It’s an example of people using religion in a harmful way.
It is the way of an artist to express ideas in this way.

Last line:…“and the world will live as one…”

The song makes me sick .Why, cause it sounds so nice, so right, so enticing. Not sure, but I think the words speak for themselves. I would not color them with your Catholic /Christian background or assume any vestige of it left in the writers. Scripture says hold on to what you have lest you even lose that. It also is very spiritually depraved of truth behind our supposed struggles, good, evil etc. Naive might be a good word. Wikipedia had good info and Lennon based it on Dick Gregory’s prayer book. He was against not religion but organized religion, or anyone that said their’s was "right’ or better than others.That we had it in ourselves to usher in utopia, in a pure communist sense, better than found in Russia or China.Yuk.

 

[RobbyS]

Yeah, well, I like the tune, too. I don’t hold it against anybody for wistfully wanting to wash sinful people out of religion. The problem is that it does not work that way, and it isn’t love of humanity to deny that this is so. If you want to love humanity, you have to love them with mercy and compassion that knows that people do fail and will keep failing, and not imagine that people don’t have the inclination to sin that we all have, or that they have it because their leaders are all terrible people who bring out the worst in others. We can’t shove our individual concupiscence off on religious leaders. We have to cop to the fact that we have defective senses of right and wrong.

Lennon stated: “‘Imagine’, which says: ‘Imagine that there was no more religion, no more country, no more politics,’ is virtually the Communist manifesto, even though I’m not particularly a Communist and I do not belong to any movement.” He told NME: "There is no real Communist state in the world; you must realize that. The Socialism I speak about … [is] not the way some daft Russian might do it, or the Chinese might do it. That might suit them. Us, we should have a nice … British Socialism." (Blaney, John (2007). Lennon and McCartney: Together Alone (1st ed.). Jawbone Press. ISBN 978-1-906002-02-2, as quoted by Wikapedia)

So, no, John Lennon was not talking about religion used in the wrong way. He was talking about organized religion being the source of strife in the world. He actually believed that some form of world wide communism would bring about world peace, that people competed and disagreed because they had gotten organized. That is total hogwash. To be blunt, it is the talk of somebody who did a little too much in the way of mind-altering substances. It is the talk of someone who wants to blame someone else’s faults for sin in the world.

The answer to sin in the world is the Lamb of God, who takes it away, the Lamb of God who said, “Go, and sin no more”, the Lamb of God, who emptied himself of his divinity and accepted death on a cross in order to save those who had turned away from God, not John Lennon, who naively wanted to deny that human beings have a fallen nature in the first place. Too bad the tune is copyrighted, because it is a nice tune, and deserved better lyrics, lyrics that were true.

Socialism lies at the heart of the new sexual morality. Marx and Engels both wanted to destroy the family. Even the utopians imagined communes of individuals without family ties, which is why the radicals of the ‘60s repeated those experiments. Margaret Sanger got her ideas from the same sources. The socialist states were the first to legalize abortion. But liberalism, or progressivism, has the same animus. Neither it nor socialism accepts the family as the basic unit of society. We see both ignoring the biological ties that pull people together and the biological urges that tear us apart, or the spiritual ones that attract and repel, and which are deeper than what psychology can discern.

 

[stlcatholic86]

You are what is known as a “Cafeteria Catholic.” Also known as a “CINO” or Catholic in name only. Those who pick and choose, selecting only what suits them and ignoring the rest. And yet they identify themselves as “Catholic” and claim to speak for the Church, especially when the hot-button questions come up. These folks are the termites in the structure of the Church. We are so much better off without them, especially in these times, They will listen to no correction, but will pursue their own agenda. Their heresies must be noted and exposed at every opportunity. To accept only some of the truths that the Church teaches and rejects the rest is cowardly at best and heretical at worst.

It doesn’t surprise me that conservative Catholics would deem me a “Cafeteria Catholic” it’s the perjorative term for Catholics that disagree with certain doctrines, but at least you acknowledge I’m Catholic, even if so grudgingly so thank you for that. While no doubt you think we are termites on the faith I think varied opinions enrich our faith and strengthen our bonds. The only one thing I would say is that I don’t accept some of the teachings of he Church I accept at worst like 90% of what the church teaches so overall I think that’s a pretty good number.

 

[Soren_Itenu]

I hope this thread is closed soon due to heresy.

 

[adrift]

It doesn’t surprise me that conservative Catholics would deem me a “Cafeteria Catholic” it’s the perjorative term for Catholics that disagree with certain doctrines, but at least you acknowledge I’m Catholic, even if so grudgingly so thank you for that. While no doubt you think we are termites on the faith I think varied opinions enrich our faith and strengthen our bonds. The only one thing I would say is that I don’t accept some of the teachings of he Church I accept at worst like 90% of what the church teaches so overall I think that’s a pretty good number.

Ask an apologist has a question addressing this issue

Is it ok to disagree with Church teaching?
I’ve been searching around the forums a bit and have been a little confused. I know I need to use my brain and that personal posts by forum posters are not official church teaching our doctrine, but out seems like some posters professing they are Catholic openly disagree with the Church’s teaching on same sex marriage, contraception and abortion, in other words they support these things. I thought those three things were non-negotiables. Maybe I’m taking those issues too seriously. Is there room for dissent?

Hi,

You are correct in thinking that the issues you mentioned are non-negotiable. Arrogance is seldom recognized by the arrogant when it applies to them. Hopefully, in this case it is a matter of invincible ignorance.

Fr. Vincent Serpa, O.P.

You have your opinion rarely backed up with any documentation. When you are asked for documentation there is only silence from you.

 

[EasterJoy]

It doesn’t surprise me that conservative Catholics would deem me a “Cafeteria Catholic” it’s the perjorative term for Catholics that disagree with certain doctrines, but at least you acknowledge I’m Catholic, even if so grudgingly so thank you for that. While no doubt you think we are termites on the faith I think varied opinions enrich our faith and strengthen our bonds. The only one thing I would say is that I don’t accept some of the teachings of he Church I accept at worst like 90% of what the church teaches so overall I think that’s a pretty good number.

If you only “accept” 90% of federal law and ignore the rest in the way you actually live your life, they’re not going to call you a cafeteria American. They won’t say, “hey, 90%, that’s a pretty good number”. That’s kind of like skipping a day of work every two weeks and saying, “hey, 90%, that’s a pretty good number!” No, if you choose a serious federal law and give yourself permission to violate it, you’re going to face consequences. They’ll still call you an American, because you’ll still be one of us, but they’ll also call you a felon.

Mr. Coppola is facing consequences for giving himself permission to violate the teachings of the Church, too. This should surprise no one, and it is obviously not a comment on the good things he has chosen to do. Far from it! It is sad, but the consequence that had to be imposed was necessary to reflects the seriousness of the wrong choices he has chosen to unequivocally embrace. I hope he changes his mind and decides to go for 100%, at least as his target.

 

[stlcatholic86]

If you only “accept” 90% of federal law and ignore the rest in the way you actually live your life, they’re not going to call you a cafeteria American. They won’t say, “hey, 90%, that’s a pretty good number”. That’s kind of like skipping a day of work every two weeks and saying, “hey, 90%, that’s a pretty good number!” No, if you choose a serious federal law and give yourself permission to violate it, you’re going to face consequences. They’ll still call you an American, because you’ll still be one of us, but they’ll also call you a felon.

Mr. Coppola is facing consequences for giving himself permission to violate the teachings of the Church, too. This should surprise no one, and it is obviously not a comment on the good things he has chosen to do. Far from it! It is sad, but the consequence that had to be imposed was necessary to reflects the seriousness of the wrong choices he has chosen to unequivocally embrace. I hope he changes his mind and decides to go for 100%, at least as his target.

I see your point, but equating homosexuality with being a felon is quite laughable equivilocation.

In any case, it seems the majority of people on this thread would still say Mr. Coppola should not be allowed a leadership position even if he strived for 100% simply based on the fact that he would still be homosexual. It wouldn’t matter if he got legally divorced, confessed his sin of homosexual acts, and became a celibate man he would still be considered “disordered” by the church. Although, perhaps closer to God, but still not close enough to be in a leadership position.

 

[Soren_Itenu]

Nope!

Being a homosexual is fine.

Practicing homosexuality is not.

That’s the difference.

Wake up!

 

[Holly3278]

This was definitely the right decision. I don’t understand why the pastor didn’t take action against him way before this.

 

[90Domer]

Love that song. Walked by The Dakota today and crowds of people were singing it outside at Strawberry Fields…

I think you are missing the point of the song, Easter J. It’s about peace during a time of war and pointing out that people often use religion to fight wars or to spread fear. And as we all know, many people do indeed do this. It’s an example of people using religion in a harmful way.
It is the way of an artist to express ideas in this way.

Last line:…“and the world will live as one…”

No, I think Easter has it right. It talks about living in a relativistic, Godless world.

 

[mayxanh]

Nope!

Being a homosexual is fine.

Practicing homosexuality is not.

That’s the difference.

!

 

[mayxanh]

The only one thing I would say is that I don’t accept some of the teachings of he Church I accept at worst like 90% of what the church teaches so overall I think that’s a pretty good number.

You accept 90% of the Church teachings that do not interfere with your choice of living.

I only recommend you to learn by heart this verse. Hope that one day God will help you to change your points of view:

John 8:32

If you remain in my word, you will truly be my disciples,
and you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.

 

[pete_29]

It doesn’t surprise me that conservative Catholics would deem me a “Cafeteria Catholic” it’s the perjorative term for Catholics that disagree with certain doctrines, but at least you acknowledge I’m Catholic, even if so grudgingly so thank you for that. While no doubt you think we are termites on the faith I think varied opinions enrich our faith and strengthen our bonds. The only one thing I would say is that I don’t accept some of the teachings of he Church I accept at worst like 90% of what the church teaches so overall I think that’s a pretty good number.

Not to offend, but what makes you think that you are wiser than the Church 10% of the time? Isn’t that a bit arrogant?

 

[90Domer]

Not to offend, but what makes you think that you are wiser than the Church 10% of the time? Isn’t that a bit arrogant?

I still don’t understand why people who dissent with the Church still choose to stay in it and call themselves Catholic. They obviously have other reasons, because is isn’t full ascent to the faith. It is heresy, as spoken before. They are worshipping at the alter of their own opinions.

 

[Lapey]

.
That was a private moment between the priest and the Bishop, presumably in his office…I assume all the young people in the church wouldn’t know about it. Why/how would they?

By the way, do we know why the Bishop advised him not to send the letter?
Was the Bishop worried about his own reputation?
I cannot think of a good reason why he’d tell him not to be honest, except that he was worried the priest would have a negative reaction. But the priest was willing to take that risk.

It may be that the priest was very much a man of truth and could not, did not want to lie to his congregation any longer. That is admirable. And to the priest, whatever the result of his honesty was a price he was willing to pay…and again, I admire that.
It was probably very difficult for him to be honest, but still, he stepped up to do it.
That is a good example for children.

But I assume, since it is not a sin to have SSA…that the priest would have hoped that his congregation would have accepted him with love, not shunned him.

.

You are making some wild assumptions of a real situation which you have no idea about. Please refrain from saying anything negative about my bishop as you infer in your comments.

You know what happens when you assume???

 

[Lapey]

I see your point, but equating homosexuality with being a felon is quite laughable equivilocation.

In any case, it seems the majority of people on this thread would still say Mr. Coppola should not be allowed a leadership position even if he strived for 100% simply based on the fact that he would still be homosexual. It wouldn’t matter if he got legally divorced, confessed his sin of homosexual acts, and became a celibate man he would still be considered “disordered” by the church. Although, perhaps closer to God, but still not close enough to be in a leadership position.

You are wrong again, he has made a public commitment to disobey God’s law by civil marriage. If he would legally end it, confess and be a public witness to the truth by openly rejecting the homosexual lifestyle he had chosen, he would be an incredible witness to the truth, and could be once again placed in a leadership role. It is his choice, as it is yours, to remain obstinate to truth.

We have a lady in RCIA right now who is being an inspirational witness to the faith. She is going through the painful process of getting her life in order, three past marriages and was in a cohabitation relationship which has now ended. She had no place for her and her son to live but walked out of the sin she was living in, now that is an example!

She knows it matters, do you?