Comments on: Cardinal Mahony’s Fishy Fish Lure http://www.intellectualconservative.com/2007/01/23/cardinal-mahony%e2%80%99s-fishy-fish-lure/ Conservative and Libertarian Intellectual Philosophy and Politics Wed, 08 Feb 2012 23:00:53 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: sedonaman http://www.intellectualconservative.com/2007/01/23/cardinal-mahony%e2%80%99s-fishy-fish-lure/comment-page-1/#comment-36547 sedonaman Sat, 27 Jan 2007 21:13:21 +0000 http://www.intellectualconservative.com/2007/cardinal-mahony%e2%80%99s-fishy-fish-lure/#comment-36547 Some thoughts: As a Eucharistic minister, I was told never to give communion to someone wearing a pentagram, the sign of the Devil. Those sporting such a symbol while receiving communion are engaging in "in-your-face" defiance. So what's different here? Cardinal Mahony seems to be making a basic error. The Church in general, and the bishops in particular, are charged with the holy task of molding consciences, saving souls, and <b><i>transforming culture</i></b> through the propagation of Christian truths, <i><b>not to be changed BY the culture</b></i>. “Ralph McInerny once offered a brilliant definition of the gay rights movement: self-deception as a group effort. Nevertheless, deception of the general public is also vital to the success of the cause. And nowhere are the forms of deception more egregious, or more startlingly successful, than in the campaign to persuade Christians that, to paraphrase the title of a recent book, <i>Jesus Was Queer, </i> and churches should open their doors to same-sex lovers. The gay Christian movement relies on a stratagem that is as daring as it is dishonest. I know, because I was taken in by it for a long time.” “The Truth About the Homosexual Rights Movement” By Ronald G. Lee <i>New Oxford Review</i> February 2006 http://www.virtueonline.org/portal/modules/news/article.php?storyid=3650 If these people are sincere, why don’t they just find a religion that more closely aligns with their beliefs instead of agitating for Catholicism to validate their lifestyle? It would be a lot easier and quicker. The only explanation is they are agents of Satan trying to destroy Christ’s church from within. Over a century ago, Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch anticipated apostates with prophetic precision: <i>It is now no longer enough for the apostate to be able to live undisturbed according to his convictions, as he calls them; to him there is no well-being and no peace as long as his convictions have not become the only ones recognized as right and valid. He sees in the Law an intellectual slavery from which it is the godly task of a second Moses to redeem his unfortunate brothers. In Torah-loyalty he sees superstition, backwardness, and at the same time a calamity which is to blame for all the miseries of the past. He sees in “liberation” from the yoke of the Law a goal so high and so humanitarian that every means which seems capable of bringing about progress toward this great goal must be employed. He has reached the stage of waging fanatical campaigns of persecution against those loyal to the Law. If the Church were to change its teaching on homosexuality, what of those who still believe the traditional teaching? Are THEY the ones who are now going to have to find another church? </i> Some thoughts:
As a Eucharistic minister, I was told never to give communion to someone wearing a pentagram, the sign of the Devil. Those sporting such a symbol while receiving communion are engaging in “in-your-face” defiance. So what’s different here?
Cardinal Mahony seems to be making a basic error. The Church in general, and the bishops in particular, are charged with the holy task of molding consciences, saving souls, and transforming culture through the propagation of Christian truths, not to be changed BY the culture.
“Ralph McInerny once offered a brilliant definition of the gay rights movement: self-deception as a group effort. Nevertheless, deception of the general public is also vital to the success of the cause. And nowhere are the forms of deception more egregious, or more startlingly successful, than in the campaign to persuade Christians that, to paraphrase the title of a recent book, Jesus Was Queer, and churches should open their doors to same-sex lovers. The gay Christian movement relies on a stratagem that is as daring as it is dishonest. I know, because I was taken in by it for a long time.”
“The Truth About the Homosexual Rights Movement”
By Ronald G. Lee
New Oxford Review
February 2006
http://www.virtueonline.org/portal/modules/news/article.php?storyid=3650

If these people are sincere, why don’t they just find a religion that more closely aligns with their beliefs instead of agitating for Catholicism to validate their lifestyle? It would be a lot easier and quicker. The only explanation is they are agents of Satan trying to destroy Christ’s church from within.
Over a century ago, Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch anticipated apostates with prophetic precision:

It is now no longer enough for the apostate to be able to live undisturbed according to his convictions, as he calls them; to him there is no well-being and no peace as long as his convictions have not become the only ones recognized as right and valid.

He sees in the Law an intellectual slavery from which it is the godly task of a second Moses to redeem his unfortunate brothers. In Torah-loyalty he sees superstition, backwardness, and at the same time a calamity which is to blame for all the miseries of the past.

He sees in “liberation” from the yoke of the Law a goal so high and so humanitarian that every means which seems capable of bringing about progress toward this great goal must be employed.

He has reached the stage of waging fanatical campaigns of persecution against those loyal to the Law. If the Church were to change its teaching on homosexuality, what of those who still believe the traditional teaching? Are THEY the ones who are now going to have to find another church?

]]> By: Brooklyn Dave http://www.intellectualconservative.com/2007/01/23/cardinal-mahony%e2%80%99s-fishy-fish-lure/comment-page-1/#comment-36466 Brooklyn Dave Fri, 26 Jan 2007 18:07:23 +0000 http://www.intellectualconservative.com/2007/cardinal-mahony%e2%80%99s-fishy-fish-lure/#comment-36466 Actually my criticism was directed more at the author of the article than at the Catholic Church itself. Sounds as if she's be ready to personally give 40 lashes to the offending party. Actually my criticism was directed more at the author of the article than at the Catholic Church itself. Sounds as if she’s be ready to personally give 40 lashes to the offending party.

]]> By: Patrick Mulligan http://www.intellectualconservative.com/2007/01/23/cardinal-mahony%e2%80%99s-fishy-fish-lure/comment-page-1/#comment-36331 Patrick Mulligan Thu, 25 Jan 2007 08:26:33 +0000 http://www.intellectualconservative.com/2007/cardinal-mahony%e2%80%99s-fishy-fish-lure/#comment-36331 "The question is how can the Catholic Church be merciful and true to its teachings at the same time. Giving an imprimatur to the gay agenda is obviously not the answer, but showing kindness and mercy to gay people as individuals has to be part of the mix." As evidenced by this statement: "Cardinal Francis Arinze, said when asked if people wearing homosexual ‘Rainbow Sashes’ could receive Holy Communion: No, no. You see, let us get it clear. These rainbow sash people are really saying we are homosexuals, we intend to remain so, and we want to receive Holy Communion. The question arises; take the Catechism of the Catholic Church. It says it is not condemning a person for having homosexual tendency. We do not condemn anybody for that. But a person stands condemned for acting on it . . . The Catholic Church has never accepted homosexuality as normal. You read the scripture. It is very clear. What exactly are we examining? Are we going to change Divine Law, how God made us . . . Quite another matter if a person had just the tendencies and is making (an) effort to live the Divine Law, then that is fine. So, we respect persons but be clear on the truth." Helps if you actually read the entire article before you go criticizing the church for being homophobic. For one thing, the church should be homophobic - it's expressly forbidden in their Bible and all of their holy literature People who are practicing homosexuals don't get to receive communion and enjoy a full relationship with Christ, according to Christian doctrine, anymore than a person practicing idolatry, or murder, or theft would. As the Cardinal above said, if the person is a homosexual, but does not act sinfully on his/her impulses, then they are free to receive communion. When they walk into the church with a "gay pride" sash on, they are flaunting their sin before the church. If a guy walked in with a stolen TV, he wouldn't get to take communion either. How egregious. “The question is how can the Catholic Church be merciful and true to its teachings at the same time. Giving an imprimatur to the gay agenda is obviously not the answer, but showing kindness and mercy to gay people as individuals has to be part of the mix.”

As evidenced by this statement:

“Cardinal Francis Arinze, said when asked if people wearing homosexual ‘Rainbow Sashes’ could receive Holy Communion:

No, no. You see, let us get it clear. These rainbow sash people are really saying we are homosexuals, we intend to remain so, and we want to receive Holy Communion. The question arises; take the Catechism of the Catholic Church. It says it is not condemning a person for having homosexual tendency. We do not condemn anybody for that. But a person stands condemned for acting on it . . . The Catholic Church has never accepted homosexuality as normal. You read the scripture. It is very clear. What exactly are we examining? Are we going to change Divine Law, how God made us . . . Quite another matter if a person had just the tendencies and is making (an) effort to live the Divine Law, then that is fine. So, we respect persons but be clear on the truth.”

Helps if you actually read the entire article before you go criticizing the church for being homophobic. For one thing, the church should be homophobic – it’s expressly forbidden in their Bible and all of their holy literature People who are practicing homosexuals don’t get to receive communion and enjoy a full relationship with Christ, according to Christian doctrine, anymore than a person practicing idolatry, or murder, or theft would. As the Cardinal above said, if the person is a homosexual, but does not act sinfully on his/her impulses, then they are free to receive communion. When they walk into the church with a “gay pride” sash on, they are flaunting their sin before the church. If a guy walked in with a stolen TV, he wouldn’t get to take communion either. How egregious.

]]> By: Brooklyn Dave http://www.intellectualconservative.com/2007/01/23/cardinal-mahony%e2%80%99s-fishy-fish-lure/comment-page-1/#comment-36230 Brooklyn Dave Tue, 23 Jan 2007 19:19:11 +0000 http://www.intellectualconservative.com/2007/cardinal-mahony%e2%80%99s-fishy-fish-lure/#comment-36230 As far as Cardinal Mahony's actions are concerned, I am in total agreement with your argument. People are already confused with the mixed message many priests and bishops have given the laity. He is adding to the confusion. But, the tone of your article comes across much harsher than than the actual teaching of the Catholic Church. The question is how can the Catholic Church be merciful and true to its teachings at the same time. Giving an imprimatur to the gay agenda is obviously not the answer, but showing kindness and mercy to gay people as individuals has to be part of the mix. I don't get any sense, again by the tone of your article, that this should be part of how the Catholic Church's ministry to gays and straights alike should function. As far as Cardinal Mahony’s actions are concerned, I am in total agreement with your argument. People are already confused with the mixed message many priests and bishops have given the laity. He is adding to the confusion. But, the tone of your article comes across much harsher than than the actual teaching of the Catholic Church. The question is how can the Catholic Church be merciful and true to its teachings at the same time. Giving an imprimatur to the gay agenda is obviously not the answer, but showing kindness and mercy to gay people as individuals has to be part of the mix. I don’t get any sense, again by the tone of your article, that this should be part of how the Catholic Church’s ministry to gays and straights alike should function.

]]>