NJ: Archbishop's Statement Causes Controversy

  • Thread starter Thread starter TempleofTheSoul
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
T

TempleofTheSoul

Guest
NJ: Arbishop’s Statement Causes Controversy
Same sex marriage, Abortion…

fios1news.com/longisland/node/19181

Archbishop John Myers of the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Newark has released a statement encouraging the more than one million Roman Catholics he leads to defend life and traditional marriage when they vote in November. The statement, released in the most recent issue of The Catholic Advocate, drew controversy over whether members of the church should be mixing religion and politics. FiOS1’s Kimberly Wallace reports.​

MODS, I tried to link to the Associated Press’ article entitled “Archbishop asks voters, pols to defend marriage” that was printed in my local newspaper but conveniently the article doesn’t show up in the search engines and this is the only news outlet I could find on the controversy online.

You can read the Archbishop’s pastoral letters defending the sanctity of traditional marriage that are deemed so controversial at the links below. Also be sure to let his emminence know that he is doing a good job and that you admire his courage!

rcan.org/archbish/jjm_letters/jjmletters.htm

If anyone can find the article which was printed by the Jersey Journal, please post it. This is too important to let the secular throw it into obscurity… We need to defend and encourage our good Bishops!
 
A Catholic Bishop supporting and encouraging the faithful to support Catholic teachings. How controversial.
 
CaptFun said:
sacbee.com/2012/09/25/4851909/newark-archbishop-urges-voters.html

Not sure if it makes any difference, but here is the AP story the OP was looking for published in the Sacramento Bee.

Some newspapers used the Bishops’ second line as their headline.

He urges Catholics who disagree with the Church’s marriage policy to sit out communion.
(see article).
Click to expand...
And so they should. All catholics owe the obedience of faith to the Church’s moral teaching. If they can’t then they cannot take part in the sacrament which causes the body of Christ to be one with the communion of the faithful. To reject the Church’s teaching is to reject Christ who, through the Spirit, guides the Church to all truth. The Church cannot error in matters of faith and morals. 👍
 
1,000 Pastors to Challenge IRS, Talk Politics From The Pulpit

More than 1,000 pastors will challenge the IRS on October 7 by preaching sermons that present biblical perspectives on the positions of electoral candidates.
In so doing, they will exercise their constitutionally protected freedom to engage in religious expression from the pulpit despite an Internal Revenue Service rule known as the Johnson Amendment that activist groups often use to silence churches by threatening their tax-exempt status.
lifenews.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/chchst.jpgGroups such as Americans United for Separation of Church and State have taken advantage of the vagueness of the tax law and have reported churches to the IRS in an attempt to remove their tax-exempt status. The organization has also sent threatening letters to church warning them not to allow election literature from pro-life groups to be distributed on their property.
The pastors are participating in Alliance Defending Freedom’s fifth annual Pulpit Freedom Sunday and the figure of 1,000 pastors doubles doubling last year’s participation. Registration continues until October 7, so the number continues to rise.
“Pastors should decide what they preach from the pulpit, not the IRS,” said Senior Legal Counsel Erik Stanley of ADF. “It’s outrageous for pastors and churches to be threatened or punished by the government for applying biblical teachings to all areas of life, including candidates and elections. The question is, ‘Who should decide the content of sermons: pastors or the IRS?’”

more…
 
CaptFun said:
sacbee.com/2012/09/25/4851909/newark-archbishop-urges-voters.html

Not sure if it makes any difference, but here is the AP story the OP was looking for published in the Sacramento Bee.

Some newspapers used the Bishops’ second line as their headline.

He urges Catholics who disagree with the Church’s marriage policy to sit out communion.
(see article).
Click to expand...
Thank you for posting this. It’s not the exact same wording as the article in my local newspaper but close enough. 🙂

God bless
 
We need to pray for our bishops that they will continue to have the strength and fortitude to stand up for the truth this way. God Bless them!
 
anp1215 said:
A Catholic Bishop supporting and encouraging the faithful to support Catholic teachings. How controversial.
Click to expand...
Agreed.

People who claim that this is controversial might as well claim that religions shouldn’t be teaching their teachings…

Sounds like an attempt to gin up ratings or sales or whatever this media outlet needs…
 
He stated Catholic teaching…big deal. Isn’t that what he’s supposed to do?

It’s only when people feel that the Church is trying to use the force of civil law to require all Americans to follow that Catholic teaching that it becomes “controversial”.
 
I wonder how many of these people would have told the Rev Martin Luther King, Jr not to mix religion with politics.
 
Brendan said:
I wonder how many of these people would have told the Rev Martin Luther King, Jr not to mix religion with politics.
Click to expand...
That is always one of my favorite counters to these types of things. They seem to have no problem with him quoting scripture in defense of his values.
 
CaptFun said:
He urges Catholics who disagree with the Church’s marriage policy to sit out communion.
(see article).
Click to expand...
Yes, if they disagree with the Church’s marriage policy. What does that have to do with the state’s marriage policy? I see them as two different things. If you say they are the same then why doesn’t the Church recognize a civil marriage?
 
J_Peterson said:
Yes, if they disagree with the Church’s marriage policy. What does that have to do with the state’s marriage policy? I see them as two different things. If you say they are the same then why doesn’t the Church recognize a civil marriage?
Click to expand...
The Church does recognize civil marriages between non-Catholics and of Catholics who got the Church’s permission.
 
We have separation of church and state.

We have never had separation of religion and politics.

His statements were perfectly fine.
 
J_Peterson said:
Yes, if they disagree with the Church’s marriage policy. What does that have to do with the state’s marriage policy? I see them as two different things. If you say they are the same then why doesn’t the Church recognize a civil marriage?
Click to expand...
Because the Church’s “marriage policy” is to never support any civil law that tries to change the definition of marriage or that creates a construct to treat same-sex unions as something appoximating marriage.

BTW, the Church **does **recognize civil marriage. As long as the spouses are both non-Catholic, the marriage wold be viewed as valid. If they are both non-Catholic Christians, its valid AND Sacramental.
 
Corki said:
Because the Church’s “marriage policy” is to never support any civil law that tries to change the definition of marriage or that creates a construct to treat same-sex unions as something appoximating marriage.

BTW, the Church **does **recognize civil marriage. As long as the spouses are both non-Catholic, the marriage wold be viewed as valid. If they are both non-Catholic Christians, its valid AND Sacramental.
Click to expand...
It doesn’t have to support it and it never will. Sacramental is the word I was looking for. Nobody can force the Church to declare that a same sex union is Sacramental or valid for that matter. Marriage in a civil sense is different than a Catholic. I know the difference even though they use the same word as does everybody else. The state may choose to recognize a religious marriage but the Church is under no obligation to recognize a civil marriage.
 
J_Peterson said:
It doesn’t have to support it and it never will. Sacramental is the word I was looking for. Nobody can force the Church to declare that a same sex union is Sacramental or valid for that matter. Marriage in a civil sense is different than a Catholic. I know the difference even though they use the same word as does everybody else. The state may choose to recognize a religious marriage but the Church is under no obligation to recognize a civil marriage.
Click to expand...
To not accept the civil marriages of non-Catholics would be contrary to the theology of marriage. A civil marriage is often Sacramental. From the Catholic standpoint, there is no difference Sacramentally between a Church marriage between two Catholics and a JP marriage between two non-Catholic Christians. They are both valid and Sacramental.

The debate is not about “forcing” the Church to accept anything. We have an obligation to resist the societal change to the definition of marriage.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top