Priest In Texas Newspaper: "Homosexual Acts Lead To The Damnation Of Souls" [EWTN]

[marci]

Brace yourself You will soon be inundated with posts telling you the voter guides are in error and that everything is negotiable depending on the circumstances.

After having been on CAF for a while, I know what to expect on pretty much any topic I comment on. However, that doesn’t mean I’ll stop commenting. I know what the church teaching on homosexual acts, abortion, etc. is and I’ll never cease in reminding my fellow christians.

I AM familier with the good Bishop and what goes on in this diocese and what is taught at TEPIAC. It would turn your stomach to have to attend one of the classes there.

The only moral issue priests are encouraged to admonish their congregations on is that of imigration. Amazing how that issue remains strictly moral in this neck of the woods, while abortion and homosexuality are simply “political matters”.

I will continue to do my best to remain charitable in these matters and pray for the bishop and Father Stowe as well as Father Micheal, but I’m done tip toeing around the truth.

 

[marci]

Yeah, I wondered about the appropriateness of handing out a pamphlet of teachings from a website not under the aegis of the Catholic Church hierarchy. I actually can’t imagine that anything other than bishop-approved materials from the USCCB or the Vatican is ever handed out at at Catholic churches as Catholic “non-negotiables”. Especially if they touch on political issues, or are likely to be seen that way.

There is nothing in that pamphlet that goes against church teaching. Nothing. The problem was that it was just a little to clear for some who would prefer that the conscience of catholics remain clouded in the case of certain moral issues.

 

[Dale_M]

You will soon be inundated with posts telling you the voter guides are in error and that everything is negotiable depending on the circumstances.

Now, Bob… I think you know better. Just because a political organization issues a voter’s guide doesn’t make that guide official Church teaching. The fact that the guide is unofficial doesn’t mean it is in error, nor does it mean that it is an accurate application of Church teaching. It simply is a political document, not drawn up by the Catholic Church. As such, discretion is prudent.

 

[cyb]

I AM familier with the good Bishop and what goes on in this diocese and what is taught at TEPIAC. It would turn your stomach to have to attend one of the classes there.

The only moral issue priests are encouraged to admonish their congregations on is that of imigration. Amazing how that issue remains strictly moral in this neck of the woods, while abortion and homosexuality are simply “political matters”.

I will continue to do my best to remain charitable in these matters and pray for the bishop and Father Stowe as well as Father Micheal, but I’m done tip toeing around the truth.

Thank you for your honesty. While I am saddened to hear of the troubles Fr. Rodriguez is enduring under your Bishop, it does not surprise me. All too often, when the rare priest decides to speak up for God’s Truth, his Bishop not only doesn’t back him up, but proceeds to make life difficult for the man.

I have sent Fr. Rodriguez a short note of support. Let’s all pray for him, the Bishop, and the whole diocese.

Thanks again for your (name removed by moderator)ut, marci.

 

[1holycatholic]

Now, Bob… I think you know better. Just because a political organization issues a voter’s guide doesn’t make that guide official Church teaching. The fact that the guide is unofficial doesn’t mean it is in error, nor does it mean that it is an accurate application of Church teaching. It simply is a political document, not drawn up by the Catholic Church. As such, discretion is prudent.

IIRC the guide in question merely reiterated what the CDF stated.

 

[Dale_M]

There is nothing in that pamphlet that goes against church teaching. Nothing.

Yes, but simply because a political tract doesn’t contradict Church teaching doesn’t mean that it is equivalent to Church teaching. Something can avoid contradicting the truth, but that doesn’t mean that it has captured the truth.

 

[marci]

You are talking about a political tract. Yes, it draws its reasoning from Catholic teaching, but it also goes beyond Catholic teaching to proclaim “non-negotiables.” Even Cardinal Ratzinger, writing about abortion and politics, was not willing to declare the issue to be a “non-negotiable.”

Are you telling me that you believe the Pope allows for the “develpment of conscience” to form one’s believe in the intrinsic evil of abortion. What is intrinsic evil, afterall, if not something which may not ever be believed? In other words, “non-negotiable”.

Perhaps it would be good to give Bishop Ochoa the benefit of the doubt. He is looking after the spiritual welfare of his diocese. This doesn’t mean he will censure Fr. Rodriguez. But it also doesn’t mean he will embrace a political agenda.

That benefit has been extended long ago. There is definate political agenda embracing going on, just not one that considers most of the issues discussed here. The bishop is very supportive of certain local political groups (EPISO being one of them) and not just spiritually, but monetarily as well. Many a CCHD contribution dollar in the pews has ended up in the campaign funds of EPISO supported pro-abortion candidates.

Like I said, done with the pleasantries.

 

[Dale_M]

I have sent Fr. Rodriguez a short note of support. Let’s all pray for him, the Bishop, and the whole diocese.

I think each of those things is admirable and advisable, too.

 

[Dale_M]

Are you telling me that you believe the Pope allows for the “develpment of conscience” to form one’s believe in the intrinsic evil of abortion.

I can not tell you what the Pope believes. However, I can quote to you what Cardinal Ratzinger wrote in 2006:

[N.B. A Catholic would be guilty of formal cooperation in evil, and so unworthy to present himself for Holy Communion, if he were to deliberately vote for a candidate precisely because of the candidate’s permissive stand on abortion and/or euthanasia. When a Catholic does not share a candidate’s stand in favour of abortion and/or euthanasia, but votes for that candidate for other reasons, it is considered remote material cooperation, which can be permitted in the presence of proportionate reasons.]

catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?id=6041

This goes against the very idea of a “non-negotiable”, although I recognize the appeal of the idea.

 

[marci]

Thank you for your honesty. While I am saddened to hear of the troubles Fr. Rodriguez is enduring under your Bishop, it does not surprise me. All too often, when the rare priest decides to speak up for God’s Truth, his Bishop not only doesn’t back him up, but proceeds to make life difficult for the man.

I have sent Fr. Rodriguez a short note of support. Let’s all pray for him, the Bishop, and the whole diocese.

Thanks again for your (name removed by moderator)ut, marci.

I want to be clear that Father hasn’t had any direct problems with the Bishop, because he is pastor at an extremely small parish and he has quietly followed his vocation and has been a faithful servant dedicating himself to the souls in his care. However, I am concerned that attention of this kind will focus a spotlight on his beliefs, which although aligned with Catholic teaching, aren’t necessarily embraced topics in this area.

I understand, however, that he does receive alot of financial support from the laity in his own parish and the city at large, which helps to keep him a little more secure in his position.

Having said all that, Father knew what he was doing when he started this commentary in the El Paso Times. He knows what the consequences may be and I am sure that he is prepared to deal with whatever comes at him in his defense of the faith. He is strong in spirit and in mind and he has the Holy Spirit protecting him. We should pray to St. Micheal the Archangel, defender of the Church, for this holy priest and all of the holy priests, nuns and lay faithful that suffer persecution in the name of Christ and His Church.

 

[marci]

I can not tell you what the Pope believes. However, I can quote to you what Cardinal Ratzinger wrote in 2006:

catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?id=6041

This goes against the very idea of a “non-negotiable”, although I recognize the appeal of the idea.

Tell me, what are those proportionate reasons?

 

[Dale_M]

Tell me, what are those proportionate reasons?

I don’t know. But the fact that they may exist tell me that when it comes to voting for a politician, the issue of abortion is not a non-negotiable.

 

[rlg94086]

Tell me, what are those proportionate reasons?

According to liberal theology? Just about anything they want it to be, but it usually involves taxing “the rich” (i.e. anyone who makes more than you do).

 

[1holycatholic]

I don’t know. But the fact that they exist tell me that when it comes to voting for a politician, the issue of abortion is not a non-negotiable.

They don’t exist. That’s why the issue of abortion is non-negotiable.

 

[marci]

I don’t know. But the fact that they exist tell me that when it comes to voting for a politician, the issue of abortion is not a non-negotiable.

Let me give you some info on that, also from the famous “Ratzinger Letter”

tldm.org/news7/Ratzinger.htm

Worthiness to Receive Holy Communion. General Principles

by Joseph Ratzinger

1. Presenting oneself to receive Holy Communion…

1. The Church teaches that abortion or euthanasia is a grave sin. The Encyclical Letter Evangelium vitae, with reference to judicial decisions or civil laws that authorise or promote abortion or euthanasia, states that there is a “grave and clear obligation to oppose them by conscientious objection. …] **In the case of an intrinsically unjust law, such as a law permitting abortion or euthanasia, it is therefore never licit to obey it, or to ‘take part in a propaganda campaign in favour of such a law or vote for it’” (no. 73). **Christians have a “grave obligation of conscience not to cooperate formally in practices which, even if permitted by civil legislation, are contrary to God’s law. Indeed, from the moral standpoint, it is never licit to cooperate formally in evil. …] This cooperation can never be justified either by invoking respect for the freedom of others or by appealing to the fact that civil law permits it or requires it” (no. 74).

1. Not all moral issues have the same moral weight as abortion and euthanasia. For example, if a Catholic were to be at odds with the Holy Father on the application of capital punishment or on the decision to wage war, he would not for that reason be considered unworthy to present himself to receive Holy Communion. While the Church exhorts civil authorities to seek peace, not war, and to exercise discretion and mercy in imposing punishment on criminals, it may still be permissible to take up arms to repel an aggressor or to have recourse to capital punishment. There may be a legitimate diversity of opinion even among Catholics about waging war and applying the death penalty, but not however with regard to abortion and euthanasia.

1. Apart from an individuals’s judgement about his worthiness to present himself to receive the Holy Eucharist, the minister of Holy Communion may find himself…
2. Regarding the grave sin of abortion or euthanasia, when a person’s formal cooperation becomes manifest (understood, in the case of a Catholic politician, as his consistently campaigning and voting for permissive abortion and euthanasia laws), his Pastor should meet with him, instructing him about the Church’s teaching, informing him that he is not to present himself for Holy Communion until he brings to an end the objective situation of sin, and warning him that he will otherwise be denied the Eucharist.

1. When “these precautionary measures have not had their effect or in which they were not possible,” and the person in question, with obstinate persistence, still presents himself to receive the Holy Eucharist, “the minister of Holy Communion must refuse to distribute it”…

[N.B. A Catholic would be guilty of formal cooperation in evil, and so unworthy to present himself for Holy Communion, if he were to deliberately vote for a candidate precisely because of the candidate’s permissive stand on abortion and/or euthanasia. **When a Catholic does not share a candidate’s stand in favour of abortion and/or euthanasia, but votes for that candidate for other reasons, it is considered remote material cooperation, which can be permitted in the presence of proportionate reasons.]

As stated earlier, War and the death penalty, for example are not proportionate. So what would be one that you would consider proportionate when scrutinizing candidates? Not to mention the fact that although not material cooperation, it is still remote material cooperation which still should be enough to convince any honest catholic to stay away from this.

 

[Tigg]

The only moral issue priests are encouraged to admonish their congregations on is that of imigration. Amazing how that issue remains strictly moral in this neck of the woods, while abortion and homosexuality are simply “political matters”.

Your comments ring in my ears and speak volumes regarding our current problems. Their stance is rather backwards, I’d say. Is the issue of immigration a moral one? I rather doubt that - it falls under prudential judgment. (Just ask Ender!)

I will continue to do my best to remain charitable in these matters and pray for the bishop and Father Stowe as well as Father Micheal, but I’m done tip toeing around the truth.

 

[remjsmom76]

Well the first three, I mean, really? Of course almost ANY one would tell them to stop.
But the way people live, well we treat them like the high priests treated tax collectors…“OH THEY DO THIS…scoff…THEY ARE NOT WORTHY” What our job is to do is to tell them what the action is that is wrong. We let them know with love and compassion. When the prostitute came and cleaned Jesus feet with her tears, hair and her own oils…everyone around Jesus was whispering and saying “HOW CAN HE LET THAT WOMAN TOUCH HIM…HE MUST NOT KNOW WHO SHE IS” She came to him and when she did he didnt admonish her. He simply told her “Go and sin no more” Sure we tell them its wrong, but in the end its up to them to GO TO JESUS, they have to WANT TO GO TO HIM…and it doesnt help any if we go around telling them they are going to HELL! We dont know that. We tell them what is wrong, with love, care and compassion and with the human connection. Not like they are animals or substandard humans. That is the problem our priest seems to convey with his sermons. Those of us out there who think they are all grand and special because they go to Sunday mass every Sunday, because they dont do this or do that because the church says so. Sure thats all good and dandy but when you forget to treat your brothers and sisters who are in sin with love and compassion and help them GO to Jesus by your actions…then what good is that hallabalou about? Its serves no purpose to be at Sunday Mass, turn around and point fingers at say “Your in sin, your living in sin, your this your that, you …you…you…” Remember when you point the finger there are 3 pointing right back at you. We can not expect to get people to come to Jesus when we seem like a group of people hell bent on sending everyone to hell! Thats not how Jesus worked…at least not what I come across when I read his works in the bible. He treated everyone with compassion. He loved you ESPECIALLY the sinner. Remember he CAME FOR THE SINNERS. Hes calling them yes…but they have to WANT to go to him. And the way we approach those who are in sin…well its no wonder people dont like us and call us hypocrites.

If I find out someone is cheating on their spouse, I’ll tell them to stop.

If I see someone stealing, I’ll tell them to stop.

If I see someone murdering someone, I’ll tell them to stop.

etc.

Why is engaging in homosexual activities entitled to a pass? A sin is a sin.

 

[Tigg]

To lift you up today…take a short break and watch Fr. Rodriquez. What a beautiful church…what a beautiful and holy priest!

youtube.com/watch?v=TQd4dnr3pUI

 

[MarianD]

Is gay marriage really a sin though? I’m genuinely asking, not trying to debate. I was under the impression that being gay is something you can’t help and the crime of homosexuality is gay sex (even the Church says this in the Catechism). So I thought that gays can get married and be openly gay, but they just can’t have (gay) sex in any circumstance.

 

[rlg94086]

Well the first three, I mean, really? Of course almost ANY one would tell them to stop.

That’s precisely the point. There is no difference, from a damnation standpoint, between someone cheating on their spouse or engaging in homosexual acts. There is no reason not to tell either that it is a sin. That doesn’t mean they are unworthy of Christ’s forgiveness, so the rest of your post is straw man argument.