Bishop Barron would not reverse Supreme Court’s decision which legalized immoral homosexual marriage
 |
| Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Los Angeles (Photo credit: Wikipedia) |
With Cardinal Dolan,
Bishop Barron spoke about: If the
only thing gay person hears from the Catholic Church is you’re “intrinsically
disordered” we have a very serious problem on our hands.
(In New York City alone
– there are several gay-affirming parishes that regularly sponsor “Pride”
masses, organized lectures and retreats given by Catholic “gay” men and women
who openly dissent from Church teachings with regards to homosexuality. How
then, could anyone possibly believe that there are “gay” people who only hear
they are “intrinsically disordered” from the Church – actually, this is
probably the one thing they will never hear. In fact, at the 2017 LA Religious
Education Congress, where Bishop Barron will also speak, “gay” Catholic Arthur
Fitzmaurice, who has spoken at this event several times, has repeatedly stated
that in terms of homosexuality, the language in the Catechism is “gravely
evil.”)
Bishop Barron: The first
thing a “gay” person, like any person should hear, you are a beloved child of
God.
(That is beautiful and
True, but the first thing “a gay person” should hear is that they are in
reality not “a gay person.” You do that by simply not calling them “gay.”)
Bishop Barron: If that’s
the way our message was coming out, we were “disordered.”
(If there has been any
predominant message coming out from the Church on this issue it has emerged
from these gay-affirmative parishes. For instance, an example from the
Archdiocese of Los Angeles – a 2013 video series for The IN [Ignatian News]
Network on “LGBT Catholics,” included an interview with Javier and Martha
Plascencia who are in charge of an officially recognized LGBT outreach in the
Archdiocese. Javier will speak at the 2017 LA Congress. When interviewed Martha
talked about their “gay” son and the Catechism; Martha said that: “The language
in the Catechism has to change.
That word ‘intrinsically disordered,’ my son is
not intrinsically disordered.” From Most Holy Redeemer Catholic Parish in San
Francisco, we hear: “Many of our parishioners are married to their same-sex
partners and have adopted children which are baptized at our parish. BTW, none
of the parishioners feel that we are “intrinsically disordered” and we have
told that to the Archbishop.” And just recently, a dissident priest spoke at a
gay-affirmative parish in New York, his main contention: “My disagreement with
the current teaching of the Roman Congregations is about what I consider to be
their fundamentally flawed premise of the objectively disordered nature of the
inclination.”
If the Church has been
“disordered” in any sense on this issue – it’s that Bishops have allowed for
this confusion and open deception to continue completely unchecked. In my 18
years as an ex-gay man, I have never once met a single person who said that a
priest, or anyone for that matter – in the Church, told them that they were in
any way “disordered.” In truth, the principle complaints are that priests and
ministries were typically overly facilitating and gay-approving. The non-issue
about language has been used by those who want to essentially change Church
teaching; for example, during an interview from 2015, Fr. Donal Godfrey, S.J.,
the former director of campus ministry at the Jesuit-run University of San
Francisco and frequent speaker at Most Holy Redeemer and various other
gay-affirming parishes in San Francisco, said: “As a church we need to accept
that family goes beyond traditional lines. I don’t expect the teachings to jump
to acceptance in one day, it will take decades. In the meantime we need to
accept people pastorally as they are and where they are. For now, this would be
sufficient. Later the teachings will catch up and evolve.”
The Catholic Ministry
with Lesbian and Gay Persons (CMLGP), which is the official LGBT outreach for
the Archdiocese of Los Angeles, is indelibly linked with this gradualist
mind-set. In addition to advocating for the inclusion of “…positive language
regarding LGBT Catholics, especially for same sex couples in long term
relationships,” CMLGP celebrated an “indelible moment” at the 2016 LA Religious
Education Congress when “…at the closing liturgy on Sunday…a gay couple and
their son helped present gifts at the altar to Archbishop Jose Gomez;” they
stated, this was a sign that: “Progress for LGBT Catholics is slow and happens
in incremental pieces, and often includes setbacks.”)
Ruben: You’re
personal feelings on this matter…I assume you felt it was the wrong decision by
the Court – is that fair to say?
Bishop Barron: Yeah, no,
I do, but I don’t think I want to press it much further, I think where we are
right now in the States, I’ll apply the Aquinas principle, I think it would
probably cause much more problem and dissension and difficulty if we kept
pressing it.
Ruben: Is this
one of the things where, I sense that your heart and your spiritual sense-self,
maybe aren’t quite matched up, because I don’t sense judgment from you sitting
here, I really don’t and I don’t sense that you want – that you would try to
legislate to reverse the decision but I also sense that you can’t fully say to
me well it’s okay.
Bishop Barron: Yeah
that’s probably right the way you just put it there is probably right. I
wouldn’t want to fully just say that’s great off you go, at the same time I
wouldn’t want to get on a crusader’s tank and try to reverse that…”
(Would Bishop Barron get
on a “crusader’s tank” in order to overturn Roe v. Wade? I assume he would. Why
are the lives of those suffering from same sex attraction worth less? Have they
not also been victimized by the culture of death?
Bishop Barron – You are
entitled to your opinion, but as someone who had made it his life-mission to
outreach to the “gay” community, I have seen the real horrors that the
legitimization of this lifestyle, which was moved decisively even a further
step forward, by the SCOTUS decision on same-sex marriage, has had on the lives
of our young people. And there has been a difference since June 26, 2015. At
the last San Francisco Pride, I met a 22 year old young man, who was raised
Catholic, and he is now embracing “gay” and fighting a third bout of gonorrhea.
Although his family is somewhat ambivalent about his homosexuality – he feels
that now: the entire country is behind him. As a nation, I feel like that is at
least partially our fault.)
On a more personal note:
…we were “disordered.”
Something Bishop Barron
said in that interview reminded me of something someone else once said:
Barron: If the
only thing gay person hears from the Catholic Church is you’re “intrinsically
disordered” we have a very serious problem on our hands. He
continued: If that’s
the way our message was coming out, we were “disordered.”
The late John J.
McNeill, SJ: The
Vatican is right, I believe, in claiming that we are dealing with an “objective
disorder”. But that objective disorder has nothing to do with homosexuality but
with the Vatican itself.
This reveals a massive
disconnect within two very different members of the clergy and what they
absolutely do not understand about the reality of homosexuality – for I cannot
comprehend how someone could make an equivalency between perhaps, because
of oversight or lack of knowledge, not being as pastorally sensitive as one
could be and the way in which the false “gay” identity can literally take
over a person.
Secondly – if a “gay”
person is going to hear anything from a priest on this topic – it would
typically swerve towards two extremes – and nothing near to what Barron is
proposing: 1.) The priest, usually at a highly gay-affirmative parish located
in one of the largely homosexual populated neighborhoods in the major cities,
will be very affirming in this matter – telling the person that the Church is
progressing on this issue and will one day catch up with the culture. 2.) If
they are lucky enough to find someone associated with Courage – they will
certainly NEVER hear any sort of condemning language.
But there is a third
reality – I have confessed all sorts of sexual sins – some heterosexual, some
homosexual – it’s been my experience that priests at your non-weird
gay-controlled parish will treat you like every other repentant sinner – he
isn’t sitting in the Confessional ready to read from the Catechism that you are
“disordered” – this somewhat reminds of the confessional as “torture chamber”
analogy from Pope Francis.
In that case, Barron’s
supposition is insulting as he singles out those who would uphold the Church’s
teachings while ignoring those who openly disregard it – Bishop Barron: you are
talking about a non-issue while the real problem remains unchecked.
He breaks down
homosexuality to something rather banal sounding: as simply an “inadequate,
incomplete integration of the sexual act.”
It’s so much more than
that – if I tried to make one thing clear in my book – it’s that abandoning
oneself to homosexuality – is to subconsciously submit to evil. Now, not
everyone who is actively gay – even those who engage in the most perverse
situations – is possessed by demons, but they have certainly opened themselves
up to evil; the world can’t see this anymore, because the rot has been glossed
over by the thin veneer of legitimacy that’s perpetuated by those who think
themselves tolerant and merciful – when in reality, their nuances render
themselves wholly irrelevant.
Since the epidemic
began, an estimated 311,087 gay men with an AIDS diagnosis have died in the US.
Did they die because of an “inadequate, incomplete integration of the sexual
act?”
In 2003, the
Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith advised that existing laws which
allow same-sex marriage – should be repealed.
Bishop Barron made this
clarification to his interview with Dave Rubin:
“What I question is the
prudence and wisdom of pursuing the opposition to gay marriage right now
through legislation. I believe that, given the present climate, it is best to
oppose it through personal witness and education.”
Considerations Regarding
Proposals to Give Legal Recognition to Unions Between Homosexual Persons:
In those situations where
homosexual unions have been legally recognized or have been given the legal
status and rights belonging to marriage, clear and emphatic opposition is a
duty….When legislation in favor of the recognition of homosexual unions is
already in force, the Catholic politician must oppose it in the ways that are
possible for him and make his opposition known; it is his duty to witness to
the truth. If it is not possible to repeal such a law completely, the Catholic
politician, recalling the indications contained in the Encyclical Letter
Evangelium vitae, “could licitly support proposals aimed at limiting the harm
done by such a law and at lessening its negative consequences at the level of
general opinion and public morality”, on condition that his “absolute personal
opposition” to such laws was clear and well known and that the danger of
scandal was avoided. This does not mean that a more restrictive law in this
area could be considered just or even acceptable; rather, it is a question of
the legitimate and dutiful attempt to obtain at least the partial repeal of an
unjust law when its total abrogation is not possible at the moment.
For further reading:
http://josephsciambra.com/the-gay-church-within-the-church-la-archdiocese-parish-promotes-a-radical-pro-gay-agenda
