Several priests shut church door to petitions to block gay marriage

[comrade1789]

St. James’ Cathedral’s pastor Fr. Mike Ryan in Seattle won’t support the ballot initiative, nor ultra-liberal St. Joseph parish pastor, Fr. John Whitney

Be careful with this article link though, Seattle Times is notoriously anti-Catholic and staffed with gay activists:

seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2017978133_catholics14m.html

Several priests shut church door to petitions to block gay marriage
Several Catholic parish priests are not permitting signature collection for Ref. 74 at their churches, a position that sets them apart from their archbishop.

Please pray for Archbishop Sartain and Seattle.

 

[Jaypeeto4]

If these parishes REALLY ARE refusing to do what is right, then this should
happen immediately:

The priests should be given 48 hours to comply, in no uncertain terms.

If they do not ABJECTLY obey this order, then this should happen immediately
and without dialog, debate, or anything else:

(1) the four parish priests responsible should immediately be defrocked,
excommunicated, and their excommunications and defrocked be reserved
personally to the Holy Father for any future reversal.
(2) until new, orthodox priests are assigned to the parish,
the parishes should be placed under INTERDICT (yes, revive this practice)
and ALL it’s sacraments declared invalid.
(3) dissident parishoners who “protest” and howl should be immediately
excommunicated and their excommunications reserved to the Pope himself
for future reversal and
(4) the excommunications should not, ever, be reversed, until the ones excommunicated
sign a public document declaring their abject submission and obedience to
the moral laws of God as described in the Bible and the Catechism of the
Catholic Church.

It is way past high time to put an end to this dissent garbage.
WAY PAST high time. This is absolutely disgusting and gives fuel
to the antiCatholic fundamentalists who attack our church as allegedly “apostate.”
And frankly, the fact that the Church HAS allowed this kind of behavior to go on for so
long in other parishes, is disgusting and inexcusable.

Jaypeeto4

 

[Jn2027]

note: to Jaypeeto - The Seattle Archbishop did not mandate that all parishes had to support the petition, it was up to each pastor to make that decision for his parish, there was no dissent or disobedience, the news article is trying to create drama where it does not exist.

That said: The Governor of Wash. State who signed the gay marriage bill into law is Catholic. Also, polls show that about 60% of lay Catholics support same-sex marriage, so it’s not really a surprise that there are parishes that don’t want to pass around an anti-gay petition. In my own opinion, the attack on marriage began during the Protestant Deformation when Protestants denounced marriage as a sacrament, legalized divorce, and removed the term “indissoluble” from their definition of marriage. It seems to me that if Catholics and Protestants can live peacefully with each other then those Christians who oppose same-sex marriage and those Christians who accept same-sex marriage should also one day be able to co-exist peacefully.

 

[Lujack]

If these parishes REALLY ARE refusing to do what is right, then this should
happen immediately:

The priests should be given 48 hours to comply, in no uncertain terms.

If they do not ABJECTLY obey this order, then this should happen immediately
and without dialog, debate, or anything else:

(1) the four parish priests responsible should immediately be defrocked,
excommunicated, and their excommunications and defrocked be reserved
personally to the Holy Father for any future reversal.
(2) until new, orthodox priests are assigned to the parish,
the parishes should be placed under INTERDICT (yes, revive this practice)
and ALL it’s sacraments declared invalid.
(3) dissident parishoners who “protest” and howl should be immediately
excommunicated and their excommunications reserved to the Pope himself
for future reversal and
(4) the excommunications should not, ever, be reversed, until the ones excommunicated
sign a public document declaring their abject submission and obedience to
the moral laws of God as described in the Bible and the Catechism of the
Catholic Church.

It is way past high time to put an end to this dissent garbage.
WAY PAST high time. This is absolutely disgusting and gives fuel
to the antiCatholic fundamentalists who attack our church as allegedly “apostate.”
And frankly, the fact that the Church HAS allowed this kind of behavior to go on for so
long in other parishes, is disgusting and inexcusable.

Jaypeeto4

I would like to imagine that the hierarchy of the Catholic Church deals with things in a more restrained and rational manner.

 

[Leegal]

Now that Pandora’s Box has been opened, the Church is between the rock and the hard place. The law was signed on Feb. 13th and goes into effect in June, so it’s not in effect yet – yet it’s not pending either. .

“Churches risk losing their tax-exempt status if they become involved in political campaigning, but the restriction doesn’t apply to initiative and referendum campaigns, which are considered legislation. Churches are permitted to lobby on pending laws.”

It’s proper for the Church to have opposed the law when it was first under consideration. Now that it’s passed, the Church could find itself losing its tax exempt status if it made any showing on repeal of existing law – even one that is waiting to go into effect on June 7.

The Church has another option. There’s consideration being given to put on the ballot that marriage is defined as one man and one woman in Washington. The Church can get on board with this because it’s not yet law.

The Archbishop is walking a fine line here with the tax exempt status of the Church by pressing for the repeal petition. The parishes are right not to put the Church in jeopardy.

 

[revert_jen]

If these parishes REALLY ARE refusing to do what is right, then this should
happen immediately:
…]

I think this reaction might be counter-productive in the long run. However, I do believe that these men should be removed from their positions as pastors of churches in the diocese.

Is the reason that these pastors won’t send around the petition because a majority of Washington Catholics dissent from the Church teaching on gay marriage? Or do a majority of Washington Catholics dissent from Church teaching on gay marriage because they have been taught to do so by disobedient priests? These priests should be removed from positions where their disobedience and dissent can harm the faith of others.

–Jen

 

[fms]

I would like to imagine that the hierarchy of the Catholic Church deals with things in a more restrained and rational manner.

So as to give an ambiguous direction to the faithful, I would hope that our pastors and elders and we did this: (Cf. 1Cor5:1-13)

You must drive out this evil-doer from among you

Worrying about losing tax-exempt status should be a concern for the Church rather than fidelity to the gospel?

 

[Leegal]

Worrying about losing tax-exempt status should be a concern for the Church rather than fidelity to the gospel?

Yes, they need to worry about losing tax exempt status but …

the Church is still being faithful to the gospel and to the encyclicals. The Church is not going to perform any gay marriages and they can get on board with the new initiative for November – the marriage definition. .

 

[Ohana]

If these parishes REALLY ARE refusing to do what is right, then this should
happen immediately:

The priests should be given 48 hours to comply, in no uncertain terms.

If they do not ABJECTLY obey this order, then this should happen immediately
and without dialog, debate, or anything else:

(1) the four parish priests responsible should immediately be defrocked,
excommunicated, and their excommunications and defrocked be reserved
personally to the Holy Father for any future reversal.
(2) until new, orthodox priests are assigned to the parish,
the parishes should be placed under INTERDICT (yes, revive this practice)
and ALL it’s sacraments declared invalid.
(3) dissident parishoners who “protest” and howl should be immediately
excommunicated and their excommunications reserved to the Pope himself
for future reversal and
(4) the excommunications should not, ever, be reversed, until the ones excommunicated
sign a public document declaring their abject submission and obedience to
the moral laws of God as described in the Bible and the Catechism of the
Catholic Church.

It is way past high time to put an end to this dissent garbage.
WAY PAST high time. This is absolutely disgusting and gives fuel
to the antiCatholic fundamentalists who attack our church as allegedly “apostate.”
And frankly, the fact that the Church HAS allowed this kind of behavior to go on for so
long in other parishes, is disgusting and inexcusable.

Jaypeeto4

Hey, why don’t they just re-institute the inquisition and burning at the stake while they are at it. I agree with the other poster, that the Church leaders have grown since then. There are serious concerns about further marginalizing gay people in our culture. I too would like to see them have a couple bond ratified in some way, but to not call that union a marriage. Go watch Philadelphia again some time. Same issues arose in our family (not Aids but another illness) and the well partner would never have been asked his wishes if our family had not insisted on consulting him.

 

[mab23]

If these parishes REALLY ARE refusing to do what is right, then this should
happen immediately:

The priests should be given 48 hours to comply, in no uncertain terms.

If they do not ABJECTLY obey this order, then this should happen immediately
and without dialog, debate, or anything else:

(1) the four parish priests responsible should immediately be defrocked,
excommunicated, and their excommunications and defrocked be reserved
personally to the Holy Father for any future reversal.
(2) until new, orthodox priests are assigned to the parish,
the parishes should be placed under INTERDICT (yes, revive this practice)
and ALL it’s sacraments declared invalid.
(3) dissident parishoners who “protest” and howl should be immediately
excommunicated and their excommunications reserved to the Pope himself
for future reversal and
(4) the excommunications should not, ever, be reversed, until the ones excommunicated
sign a public document declaring their abject submission and obedience to
the moral laws of God as described in the Bible and the Catechism of the
Catholic Church.

It is way past high time to put an end to this dissent garbage.
WAY PAST high time. This is absolutely disgusting and gives fuel
to the antiCatholic fundamentalists who attack our church as allegedly “apostate.”
And frankly, the fact that the Church HAS allowed this kind of behavior to go on for so
long in other parishes, is disgusting and inexcusable.

Jaypeeto4

ha ha ha A little extreme don’t you think… this is over people getting married ( not through the catholic church… thus not affecting catholics… also no hurting catholics…)

now if this were over abortion I would be more concerned…

 

[Julia_Mae]

Hey, why don’t they just re-institute the inquisition and burning at the stake while they are at it. I agree with the other poster, that the Church leaders have grown since then. There are serious concerns about further marginalizing gay people in our culture. I too would like to see them have a couple bond ratified in some way, but to not call that union a marriage. Go watch Philadelphia again some time. Same issues arose in our family (not Aids but another illness) and the well partner would never have been asked his wishes if our family had not insisted on consulting him.

I agree. (What a lovely family you must have, BTW.)

Our job is not to force Catholicism on the world, but to be Christ to it. If we did that, we wouldn’t be able to build churches fast enough to hold the converts.

 

[Corki]

ha ha ha A little extreme don’t you think… this is over people getting married ( not through the catholic church… thus not affecting catholics… also no hurting catholics…)

Of course it affects Catholics and all people who live in the state. Do you think these couples are going to get “married” and then go live in caves? No, they are going to continue to push for overall acceptance of thier unions by Catholics and everyone else. It most specifically affects Catholics who are employers, business owners, parents and who are themselves married.

 

[mab23]

Now that Pandora’s Box has been opened, the Church is between the rock and the hard place. The law was signed on Feb. 13th and goes into effect in June, so it’s not in effect yet – yet it’s not pending either. .

"Churches risk losing their tax-exempt status if they become involved in political campaigning, but the restriction doesn’t apply to initiative and referendum campaigns, which are considered legislation. Churches are permitted to lobby on pending laws."

It’s proper for the Church to have opposed the law when it was first under consideration. Now that it’s passed, the Church could find itself losing its tax exempt status if it made any showing on repeal of existing law – even one that is waiting to go into effect on June 7.

The Church has another option. There’s consideration being given to put on the ballot that marriage is defined as one man and one woman in Washington. The Church can get on board with this because it’s not yet law.

The Archbishop is walking a fine line here with the tax exempt status of the Church by pressing for the repeal petition. The parishes are right not to put the Church in jeopardy.

if my being married civily does not mean 2 poops to the catholic church, and thus im committing a sin of cohabiting with my civil wife (not yet married through the catholic church)

what does it matter what the state recognizes as marriage since the state is not the catholic church… the State cannot force the catholic church to recognize gay marriage as a sacrament… and even if they tried. which they won’t, we all know darn right the Catholic church would Never do it

don’t we have more Serious matters to worry about

 

[mab23]

Of course it affects Catholics and all people who live in the state. Do you think these couples are going to get “married” and then go live in caves? No, they are going to continue to push for overall acceptance of thier unions by Catholics and everyone else. It most specifically affects Catholics who are employers, business owners, parents and who are themselves married.

how does it affect Catholics who are employers… give me an example…

business owners, parents … what special rights do married people get that non married gays dont - if they already get the same rights from a civil union or whatever - it seems they just want the same “title” give em the stupid title -

if they try to infiltrate the church then we shall battle , but until then who cares

I happen to know a few gay people… they are not Catholic and don’t care to ever be apart of the christian religion ,

i just don’t know what you mean by pushing their acceptance!

by us saying - ok the state recognizes that you are married to someone of the same sex and you have married rights of health insurance to your spouse, and some tax breaks… so what

 

[Corki]

how does it affect Catholics who are employers… give me an example…

Employers would be required to include these partners in all benefits reserved for spouses such as health care and sick days. They would be expected to include these partners in activities for employees and their family members such as company picnics or Christmas parties.

business owners, parents … what special rights do married people get that non married gays dont - if they already get the same rights from a civil union or whatever - it seems they just want the same “title” give em the stupid title -

A civil union only gives someone rights from the state. But the problem with business owners is that they would be expected or even required to extend services to same-sex “marriages”. This has already happened in other states with wedding photographers, bakers and caterers, bed and breakfast owners and receptiion venues.

if they try to infiltrate the church then we shall battle , but until then who cares

I care.

I happen to know a few gay people… they are not Catholic and don’t care to ever be apart of the christian religion ,

So? This isn’t an issue about religion. It’s about the institution of marriage and about morality.

i just don’t know what you mean by pushing their acceptance!

If you look at what has happened in other states, you will see what I mean. Such things as requiring that parents be listed as “parent 1 and parent 2” on birth certificates instead of “mother and father” or “spouse 1 and spouse 2” on marriage certifcicates instead of “husband and wife”. Forcing businesses to cater to them. Forcing recognition in the schools.

by us saying - ok the state recognizes that you are married to someone of the same sex and you have married rights of health insurance to your spouse, and some tax breaks… so what

see all of the above.

 

[fms]

John Paul II, Apostolic Exhortation, Reconciliato et Paenitentia, 2 December 1984, 16

This is the other aspect of that solidarity which, on the religious level, is developed in the profound and magnificent mystery of the ‘Communion of Saints’, thanks to which it has been possible to say that ‘every soul that rises above itself raises the world’. To this ‘law of ascent’ there unfortunately corresponds the ‘law of descent’. Consequently one can speak of a ‘communion of sin’, whereby a soul that lowers itself through sin drags down with itself the Church and, in some way, the whole world. In other words there is no sin, not even the most intimate and secret one, that exclusively concerns the person committing it. With greater or lesser violence, with greater or lesser harm, every sin has repercussions on the entire ecclesial body and on the whole human family.

 

[mab23]

Employers would be required to include these partners in all benefits reserved for spouses such as health care and sick days. They would be expected to include these partners in activities for employees and their family members such as company picnics or Christmas parties.

A civil union only gives someone rights from the state. But the problem with business owners is that they would be expected or even required to extend services to same-sex “marriages”. This has already happened in other states with wedding photographers, bakers and caterers, bed and breakfast owners and receptiion venues.

I care.

So? This isn’t an issue about religion. It’s about the institution of marriage and about morality.

If you look at what has happened in other states, you will see what I mean. Such things as requiring that parents be listed as “parent 1 and parent 2” on birth certificates instead of “mother and father” or “spouse 1 and spouse 2” on marriage certifcicates instead of “husband and wife”. Forcing businesses to cater to them. Forcing recognition in the schools.

see all of the above.

valid points you have

some of it I agree with you and other parts not so much

I honestly believe that gay marriage being recognized by the state is an inevitable fact… at least in most states in America

so what if they can come to picnics and parties - as long as they are civil and not being disruptive and shoving any gay right propaganda in peoples face! and as for sick days and health care - they are people too - they should get that stuff

to me i see the wedding photographers , bakery’s and bed and breakfast places getting more business,

gays being recognized in schools… already happened - at least in liberal California it definitely has -

It’s about the institution of marriage

• as you stated!

---

the institution of marriage defined by the Catholic church shall always stand between one man and one woman… no matter what

---

 

[pnewton]

Hey, why don’t they just re-institute the inquisition and burning at the stake while they are at it.

Standing one’s ground against a depraved and sinful generation is not the same thing as burning at the stake. What a ginormous strawman!

 

[pnewton]

It’s proper for the Church to have opposed the law when it was first under consideration. Now that it’s passed, the Church could find itself losing its tax exempt status if it made any showing on repeal of existing law – even one that is waiting to go into effect on June 7.

I don’t know about this. I think pretty much there is no danger in losing the status for supporting moral referendums. It is politicians and political parties that they are barred from supporting. I will see if I can find anything that substantiates the idea that they can not support moral referendums.

 

[zab]

So the good news is, as reported in the Seattle Times, that "The majority of parishes in Western Washington are expected to make the petitions available "
And our parish was among the majority. Our pastor has also given a wonderful homily on the topic which can be listened to from the link provided here. The pastor’s homily begins after the Deacon’s reading of the Gospel at 2:19 into the audio of Sunday March 25, 2012.:
starofthesea.net/index.php/parish-media/audio/homilies