They might be leading the way, but for extremely ironic reasons:
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/cosmostheinlost/2015/05/26/ireland-legitima...
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/cosmostheinlost/2015/05/26/ireland-legitima...
4
It's possible that this reflects a strong pro-marriage bias within Catholic culture -- and that this bias now is extending, among rank-and-file Catholics, to a larger population of people who want to get married.
26
The Catholic Church is made up of many rules, laws, customs, sacraments. As someone who's spent some time studying the history of the Church, my feeling is that one is free to call oneself whatever they choose BUT to be a ROMAN CATHOLIC means to adhere to the principles laid down by the hierarchy and follow the practices they teach which would allow one to obtain communion and thereby be IN COMMUNION with the church and the lord, as they see it. For practicing homosexuals, this is not possible. I consider those Roman Catholic gays who strive so hard to be accepted as very similar to Log Cabin Republicans. There's NO PLACE for us in EITHER group and no amount of soul-searching or hand wrenching is going to change that! To say the RC Church is in any way enabling or fostering same-sex marriage or the rights of homosexuals is utterly ridiculous.
33
Frank, same sex marriage and similar issues of the gay community may be of paramount interest to you, but they are not to most readers of the NY Times. I have often enjoyed your writing, but you have become almost a single issue spokesperson in this topic and you are loosing me, and a lot of other readers I would think. You need to move on.
18
The Irish, ignoring women's rights, are just being fashionable with the vote.
In the end, though, in the US, this is about the continuing deconstruction of post-Modern America and, it seems, Americans, save for the older generations, are buying into it. Whether that’s positive or negative, too soon to tell–though one indisputable negative is the artful "manhandling" of the word "gay."
I don't much care how "homosexuals" live their lives, as long, of course, as it doesn’t affect my civil liberties, or whether they're "married" to each other or not at all, for business reasons or merely blissful companionship: I just want the word back so that the felicity of "a gay occasion" is not so ambiguous, requiring further details or apologies for the use of the word as once was common usage, and besides that, there’s too much modern English and American literature to be footnoted now.
Perhaps, "jocund" would be a better choice, anyway.
In the end, though, in the US, this is about the continuing deconstruction of post-Modern America and, it seems, Americans, save for the older generations, are buying into it. Whether that’s positive or negative, too soon to tell–though one indisputable negative is the artful "manhandling" of the word "gay."
I don't much care how "homosexuals" live their lives, as long, of course, as it doesn’t affect my civil liberties, or whether they're "married" to each other or not at all, for business reasons or merely blissful companionship: I just want the word back so that the felicity of "a gay occasion" is not so ambiguous, requiring further details or apologies for the use of the word as once was common usage, and besides that, there’s too much modern English and American literature to be footnoted now.
Perhaps, "jocund" would be a better choice, anyway.
8
Catholic in name only.
10
So many GOP contenders are Catholic- it's amusing to remember the horrible rumors spread in 1960 by the GOP about Kennedy and his Catholic faith, how he would be controlled by the Pope, etc.
25
Mr. Bruni,
I am glad that you brought this up. I had been noticing it myself, but hadn't kept track. It is an interesting trend. Did you also notice that none of these countries are currently involved in a war?
I am glad that you brought this up. I had been noticing it myself, but hadn't kept track. It is an interesting trend. Did you also notice that none of these countries are currently involved in a war?
15
Interesting thesis, but I have some trouble with the concept of Catholics who don't follow the Vatican's rules -- doesn't that automatically make them Not-Catholics? The One, Holy and Apostolic Church is pretty clear on the definition of Catholic. So really you're saying change is being brought about by ex-Catholics.
10
If you define Catholic loosely, this premise is true. I was "raised" Catholic by a Mother who loved Jesus and believed in his Devine Mercy. She never went to Church. She defied the Church on multiple issues. She married a Protestant. She believed in the right to birth control and reproductive rights, etc. Some would say she was not a "Catholic" at all. But, whatever she was, her "progressive" views were clearly not Catholic, they were just hers. They had nothing to do with the Church. The point is, very few people are Catholic to the point of denying people their human rights, regardless of what the Vatican thinks, says, or does. Thank Jesus for that.
35
Frank Bruni(and everyone else) is praising the Irish vote. Yet when the people of North Carolina voted by a 70% margin to approve a constitutional amendment to ban same sex marriage liberals were horrified--How can you possibly VOTE on peoples rights?
10
I obviously can't speak for all Catholics, but I was raised Catholic, and the most important things I learned from that upbringing was the value of all people, that everyone is deserving of love and respect even if we disagree with what they do or how they behave, and that family comes first. I also learned to seek knowledge and change by questioning and challenging. It was for these reasons, that I went to a Catholic university, got married to a Catholic in a church, taught in an (independent) Catholic school, and take my baby daughter to church.
What I don't understand is why the institution of the Church has been training priests, nuns, teachers, and others for at least a generation who are telling us to live this way - like Jesus did - and then turning around and trying to maintain its repressive, detached ways. I've run into some conservative Catholics along the way, but none who speak about people with such disdain that representatives of the Vatican do. It's basically like they're intentionally raising us to turn our backs on the Church itself. I feel like maybe the saying, "practice what you preach," is pretty on the nose here. There are lots of things that probably make a lot of sense in the Middle Ages that have become irrelevant and obsolete, and even seem backwards at this point. It would really be a shame if Catholic Church was added to this list out of sheer blind stubbornness.
What I don't understand is why the institution of the Church has been training priests, nuns, teachers, and others for at least a generation who are telling us to live this way - like Jesus did - and then turning around and trying to maintain its repressive, detached ways. I've run into some conservative Catholics along the way, but none who speak about people with such disdain that representatives of the Vatican do. It's basically like they're intentionally raising us to turn our backs on the Church itself. I feel like maybe the saying, "practice what you preach," is pretty on the nose here. There are lots of things that probably make a lot of sense in the Middle Ages that have become irrelevant and obsolete, and even seem backwards at this point. It would really be a shame if Catholic Church was added to this list out of sheer blind stubbornness.
26
The Constitution of the Irish Republic, passed in 1937, recognized "the special position" of the Roman Catholic Church. It forbade divorce. It claimed authority over Northern Ireland. It was divorced from reality.
The special position of the RCC is continued in that most of the primary schools are under the control of the local parish priest, in partnership with government. Some remain in control of Protestant ministers, and a very few are non-sectarian. Being born in Ireland, for most children, means being Catholic. There is no easy practicable way to resign that membership.
To declare, on that basis, that Ireland is Catholic is farcical. I went through that system. I have grandchildren still in that system. Lay teachers are required to teach Catholic doctrine and to support the Catholic ethos. It is a failed, repressive system that contributes to formalism, cynicism, hypocrisy, and a contorted sense of morality, which is focused on sex.
There are indeed good Christians in the Irish Catholic Church, as my parents were. But they were exceptional.
The special position of the RCC is continued in that most of the primary schools are under the control of the local parish priest, in partnership with government. Some remain in control of Protestant ministers, and a very few are non-sectarian. Being born in Ireland, for most children, means being Catholic. There is no easy practicable way to resign that membership.
To declare, on that basis, that Ireland is Catholic is farcical. I went through that system. I have grandchildren still in that system. Lay teachers are required to teach Catholic doctrine and to support the Catholic ethos. It is a failed, repressive system that contributes to formalism, cynicism, hypocrisy, and a contorted sense of morality, which is focused on sex.
There are indeed good Christians in the Irish Catholic Church, as my parents were. But they were exceptional.
8
This article has it backwards. The supporters in these Catholic countries are mainly those who have rejected their Catholic faith. Ireland and most of Western Europe, and in certain regions of South America, the majority has rejected their faith, and secularism and hedonism. This is the lesson of the success in Ireland. Spain and, Argentina and other places where the church has been rejected. In Christian Africa (excluding South Africa) there has been universal condemnation of this gay marriage movement. In the Christian far east (Phillipines, Taiwan, Singapore, Taiwan and South Korea) there is been universal condemnation of this movement. And in religious parts of central and South America, Catholics who follow the church reject this movement.
This author seems to imply a liberalizing of religious catholics, such a concept is itself an oxymoron. This is merely secularism winning out in Europe and a few places in South America. With the conquest of Islam in Europe in the near future, it is likely this trend will reverse.
This author seems to imply a liberalizing of religious catholics, such a concept is itself an oxymoron. This is merely secularism winning out in Europe and a few places in South America. With the conquest of Islam in Europe in the near future, it is likely this trend will reverse.
8
Once again, the Catholic Church finds itself unable to enforce a dictum that is repugnant to its parishioners. Have Ireland and the other 19 countries nailed the first thesis to the church door?
4
@tom-
I think what Bruni is pointing out is not that all Catholics are liberal, but rather that the leadership represents a minority. In the US, 60% of Catholics support same sex marriage, for example, but the Knights of Columbus, which is indicative of prob 20% of Catholics, spent 10's of millions of dollars in California trying to pass proposition 8. If France would have passed same sex marriage, then that means most Catholics support it, since they make up a huge percentage of the population.
The reality is that the church went backwards with JPII and then Benedict, and made the leadership totally out of synch with common Catholics. More importantly, if you looked at the crowds who marched in France,among the Catholics it was a march of the gray haired, the young among the Catholics were a minority. In the US, among young Catholics, the rate of approval of same sex marriage is probably closer to 80%.
I think what Bruni is pointing out is not that all Catholics are liberal, but rather that the leadership represents a minority. In the US, 60% of Catholics support same sex marriage, for example, but the Knights of Columbus, which is indicative of prob 20% of Catholics, spent 10's of millions of dollars in California trying to pass proposition 8. If France would have passed same sex marriage, then that means most Catholics support it, since they make up a huge percentage of the population.
The reality is that the church went backwards with JPII and then Benedict, and made the leadership totally out of synch with common Catholics. More importantly, if you looked at the crowds who marched in France,among the Catholics it was a march of the gray haired, the young among the Catholics were a minority. In the US, among young Catholics, the rate of approval of same sex marriage is probably closer to 80%.
12
I'm a gay man raised as a cultural (though not religious) Jew, and many of my closest friends are Catholic. I have Christmas dinner, each year, with my almost-lifelong-friends, one of whom is now the director of Catholic Charities in our region. My friends are, without a doubt, some of the best people I've ever known. They are compassionate, inclusive, believe strongly in social justice, charitable and caring. They could not even consider discriminating. It's not in their lexicon. Yet they remain committed Catholics.
Is it possible to believe in a Church and yet not believe in the same Church? Apparently so. They have chosen the parts that matter to them - justice, charity and Christ's mission of love and non-judgment. They also just plain ignore the awful fire-and-brimstone, other-people-not-equal-to-us crap coming down from the pulpit, and attend mass rarely, in order to evade the undeniable hate emanating from the old men in collars and slippers.
I think they're rather typical of European and American Catholics. They have a strong bond to the tradition and the ritual, and simply walk away from the offensive stuff. Catholics, apparently, are much better than the church they belong to, as Ireland just proved.
Is it possible to believe in a Church and yet not believe in the same Church? Apparently so. They have chosen the parts that matter to them - justice, charity and Christ's mission of love and non-judgment. They also just plain ignore the awful fire-and-brimstone, other-people-not-equal-to-us crap coming down from the pulpit, and attend mass rarely, in order to evade the undeniable hate emanating from the old men in collars and slippers.
I think they're rather typical of European and American Catholics. They have a strong bond to the tradition and the ritual, and simply walk away from the offensive stuff. Catholics, apparently, are much better than the church they belong to, as Ireland just proved.
37
What this highlights is that the leadership of the church no longer really speaks for many common Catholics, despite what politicians believe. In the US, something like 80% of Catholics are cafeteria Catholics, and when the church elected JPII and then Benedict, who were caught up in the rigid dogma being the church, it further widened the gulf. The fact that those two popes appointed men ideologically like themselves, who did everything they could to reverse Vatican II, then turned out to have feet of lead when it came to abuse and showed themselves to be uncaring, rigid ideologues without a heart, drove the gulf even wider. Those same Bishops in the US, driven by their rigid ideology that seemed to focus on matters of sex and reproduction only, aligned themselves with the religous right and the politicians that support them, and as a result, the US Bishops stayed silent as the conservatives started preaching the gospel of Ayn Rand (anyone recall a Bishop telling a conservative Catholic, like Paul Ryan, that promoting the idea the poor were lazy and underserving of help, or were parasites, that they shouldn't take communion? The same bishops screaming about same sex marriage, have said nothing about the demonization of the poor or the incredible inequity in income between the very rich and everyone else. Catholic countries are leading the way in large part because Catholics have decided the faith for themselves, and ignore what they think is plainly stupid or archaic.
16
Hurrah, someone in the media finally got the story behind the story!
It was a nation of 95% Catholic people who took the measure of an issue, voted their conscience as informed by their tradition's teachings and good sense, and approved marriage-equality for same sex couples.
Not all this folderol about the demise of the archaic and encrusted backwards Catholic Church, and it's murky future.
Baloney, balderdash and malarkey!
Catholics were the first one, in the first nation, to approve gay marriage, as in formed BY THEIR FAITH, not despite it or the Church. That is the real story.
It was a nation of 95% Catholic people who took the measure of an issue, voted their conscience as informed by their tradition's teachings and good sense, and approved marriage-equality for same sex couples.
Not all this folderol about the demise of the archaic and encrusted backwards Catholic Church, and it's murky future.
Baloney, balderdash and malarkey!
Catholics were the first one, in the first nation, to approve gay marriage, as in formed BY THEIR FAITH, not despite it or the Church. That is the real story.
15
Absolutely worn, unless you consider "nominal" to be real.
2
I think it humorous that people portray the church as archaic. A church that believes that creationism is evolution & vice versa. The church places a nebula disdain on wasting seed & egg on anything but love & procreation within marriage, evenly deriding masturbation , sex with a condom or homosexual sex. So all those Who waste their potential are on equal footing. Gay or straight. Not a mortal sin. Otherwise 95% of all humans are on the same footing with the church condemning the wasting of seed. So Catholics such as Senator Rick Santorumn are in the same category of sin in regards to sex as Congressman Barney Frank. I would truly like to hear Senator Santorum deny birth control use or masturbation , after spawning 7 children. The issue of same sex marriage in rational religious religious communities will soon be a moot subject. People like Mr. Putin will still live in a closet ,shirtless on horseback,being persecuted by his demons.
'...On Same-Sex Marriage, Catholics Are Leading the Way...'
Now if only the Catholic Church would treat women as other than chattel, whose only purpose in life is to make more followers to fill the pews.
Now if only the Catholic Church would treat women as other than chattel, whose only purpose in life is to make more followers to fill the pews.
18
So the Catholic Church treats women like property NM?
2
Some years ago, serial Harris polls demonstrated that Catholics were one of the few groups that continued to be more politically liberal as they climbed the socioeconomic ladder in the US. The reason: this set of beliefs in social justice that Bruni describes. That, more than the sexual politics that right-wing Catholic politicians cite, is the "core of the Catholic faith" that rank and file Catholics hold.
21
Basic human rights should not be conferred by popular vote - that is what a constitution is for. In the U.S. the Constitution is pretty clear on granting equality before the law to everyone, unless, of course, a particular class of individuals can be shown to be damaging. in some real way, to the majority. The proper venue for change is neither with the vote nor the legislature. Those who condemn same sex unions have been trying desperately for years to find some way that such unions adversely affect heterosexual unions. Their arguments have all been specious paper tigers.
I, of course, would feel much better about this if the quality of conservative minds on SCOTUS have not proved to be more concerned with institutionalizing rightwing ideology than fairly interpreting the Constitution. Nonetheless, thank you, Ireland.
I, of course, would feel much better about this if the quality of conservative minds on SCOTUS have not proved to be more concerned with institutionalizing rightwing ideology than fairly interpreting the Constitution. Nonetheless, thank you, Ireland.
4
The liberal Catholicism is the precise reason that Cardinal Ratzinger (a German theologian) was directed by Pope John Paul II (a Pole) to lead the office that evolved from the Holy Office of the Inquisition -- the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. Somewhat like an Inspector General in secular government. Ratzinger became Pope Benedict XVI. America alone sorely tried the Vatican's patience with its consumerism and liberality enervating its Catholic congregations, and high schools, esp, in the Bay Area. Which is why the notion of an American Pope is centuries off. European Catholics, tho they attend mass infrequently, have a deeper sense of Catholicism in their daily lives owing partly to the profusion of Catholic churches in its cities and its smallest towns.
In my experience, with 8 aunts and 5 uncles and cousins and 7 siblings who were all cradle Catholics, the youngest born in 1962, they were far more liberal than the Protestants, but not the Jews. Many grew up to be holiday Catholics only, disappointingly, esp, the ones who went thru the austere Catholic school system. The 3 R's of Catholicism: Raised, Rebelled, Returned. (For some it takes cancer to prompt their prodigal return.) Their boozy cheeriness, Notre Dame football, and a loosening after Vatican II was seen in Catholic clans like the Kennedy's, the Kelly's, the Daley's, et al., along with Hollywood Catholics like Spencer Tracy, Loretta Young, Pat O'Brien, Grace Kelly, and even Sinatra.
In my experience, with 8 aunts and 5 uncles and cousins and 7 siblings who were all cradle Catholics, the youngest born in 1962, they were far more liberal than the Protestants, but not the Jews. Many grew up to be holiday Catholics only, disappointingly, esp, the ones who went thru the austere Catholic school system. The 3 R's of Catholicism: Raised, Rebelled, Returned. (For some it takes cancer to prompt their prodigal return.) Their boozy cheeriness, Notre Dame football, and a loosening after Vatican II was seen in Catholic clans like the Kennedy's, the Kelly's, the Daley's, et al., along with Hollywood Catholics like Spencer Tracy, Loretta Young, Pat O'Brien, Grace Kelly, and even Sinatra.
2
@charles-
I doubt European Catholics have that great a sense of Catholicism, for a lot of reasons. Besides the fact that only about 15% of people even bother going to mass, countries in Europe have rejected the church leader's view of things. Countries like Spain and Portugal legalized same sex marriage, supposedly hotbeds of the faith, and in Italy they legalized abortion and divorce many years ago, in huge numbers. My grandfather was from southern Italy, and there there always was a skepticism about the church, in large part because of the repressive regime that was the papal states. In other countries, the young people ignore the church on issues of birth control, and in terms of gays and other issues the young think the church leadership is out to lunch.
I doubt European Catholics have that great a sense of Catholicism, for a lot of reasons. Besides the fact that only about 15% of people even bother going to mass, countries in Europe have rejected the church leader's view of things. Countries like Spain and Portugal legalized same sex marriage, supposedly hotbeds of the faith, and in Italy they legalized abortion and divorce many years ago, in huge numbers. My grandfather was from southern Italy, and there there always was a skepticism about the church, in large part because of the repressive regime that was the papal states. In other countries, the young people ignore the church on issues of birth control, and in terms of gays and other issues the young think the church leadership is out to lunch.
10
And only 46 years since Stonewall! My, My, My, My, My.
2
But then again, the publicity the RCC has generated of late in Ireland has not been the most positive or edifying for the Church...
I find it wonderfully amazing that "THE" first Nation in the world to VOTE to allow same sex marriage is Catholic Ireland. I am now a firm believer, "The Lord, does indeed, work in mysterious and wonderous ways!
9
Mr. Bruni;
A clarification; nobody is demanding that the Catholic Church marry lesbian and gay couples. So the Church is actually opposing civil rights for lesbian and gay people, interjecting their religious dogma into what should be a wholly secular discussion.
A clarification; nobody is demanding that the Catholic Church marry lesbian and gay couples. So the Church is actually opposing civil rights for lesbian and gay people, interjecting their religious dogma into what should be a wholly secular discussion.
14
Thank you for pointing that out!!! Why does that faith organization even take a stand on something so simply civil.
Catholics leading on SSM? Not in Ireland. Many of the voters there who said YES are not practicing Catholics. Many votes were cast in relief at having, at last, a clear issue on which to express their disapproval of the Catholic Church in Ireland. Significantly, a Vatican spokesman has said the result was a disaster for humanity.
Canada is a Catholic country? And US Catholics are progressive? Relatively, possibly, but that's not a great measure here. So may the outward shows be least themselves...
Thing about the RCC is that it promotes reliance on external authority. Protestantism promotes individual conscience and responsibility. Consider the countries of Europe known for their financial difficulties, the PIIGS--they all have a long history of Catholic domination, including Greece. Most look to the Pope, Greece to the Patriarch, but all were required to place their faith in one man,
Canada is a Catholic country? And US Catholics are progressive? Relatively, possibly, but that's not a great measure here. So may the outward shows be least themselves...
Thing about the RCC is that it promotes reliance on external authority. Protestantism promotes individual conscience and responsibility. Consider the countries of Europe known for their financial difficulties, the PIIGS--they all have a long history of Catholic domination, including Greece. Most look to the Pope, Greece to the Patriarch, but all were required to place their faith in one man,
3
V o x populi v o x D e i. The Church is the People of God, and the teaching authority generally resists change. Nevertheless, the process of history unfolds and doctrine develops as the culture adapts and evolves. Ireland forever!
5
I wonder why Catholics have a rough time with personal issues. Only in the West have these issues taken over the Church. India has a 10% Catholic population who are very devout. And they have steadfastly remained at 10% considering the billion population and still growing. Now this could'nt be a miracle. It has to do with contraception and abortion. Anti-Gay is not a Church tenet but a regressive government one that cannot be enforced. So people go about their lives without much upheaval or being ostracized by the Church. In fact, the Catholics in India are the most progressive and that too, by keeping their faith.
2
The referendum in Ireland was not really about same sex marriage, but rather an emphatic repudiation of the Catholic Church as a moral authority. My Irish Catholic friends are all quite different in their attitudes towards the Catholic Church hierarchy compared to my American Catholic friends.
There are two primary differences:
1. The overwhelming evidence of aggressive pedophilia among the Irish Catholic priesthood--including evidence of pedophilia at the very top has destroyed moral authority from the church. Many of my retirement age Irish friends were warned as children (by priests in their own families) to never be alone with a priest--yet nothing was done for at least two generations.
2. In the US, the "us vs. them" feeling of many Catholics makes them far less willing to acknowledge that "them" (i.e. non-Catholics) might actually be right. In Ireland, the "us" finally became the non-priesthood, perhaps because there is no non-Catholic "them".
There are two primary differences:
1. The overwhelming evidence of aggressive pedophilia among the Irish Catholic priesthood--including evidence of pedophilia at the very top has destroyed moral authority from the church. Many of my retirement age Irish friends were warned as children (by priests in their own families) to never be alone with a priest--yet nothing was done for at least two generations.
2. In the US, the "us vs. them" feeling of many Catholics makes them far less willing to acknowledge that "them" (i.e. non-Catholics) might actually be right. In Ireland, the "us" finally became the non-priesthood, perhaps because there is no non-Catholic "them".
7
The principal message of Jesus - "love one another" - isn't twisted into one of hate for most Catholics... unlike their Evangelical brethren.
21
Of all the serious issues in the world, the media is continuously hammering the public on this and the GLB subject. Why make this an issue, your not going to change these people or the middle east. I'm seeing crazies running this country that are obsessed with power. Maybe a UFO landing in Washington and telling them there are more serious subjects and they are they are crazy?
4
For somewhere between 8 and 12% of the human population, discrimination nd persecution are still serious subjects.
1
"We journalists too often use “the Catholic Church” as a synonym for the pope, the cardinals and teachings that have the Vatican’s stamp of approval.
But in Europe and the Americas in particular, the church is much more fluid than that. "
Is there really a discoonect? If Catholics are in complete disagreement with their leadership (contraception, gay marriage, anti-war, gender inequality etc) why haven't they rebelled against their leadership? Why the Catholic leaders are the most powerful religious authority of any religion in the world?
But in Europe and the Americas in particular, the church is much more fluid than that. "
Is there really a discoonect? If Catholics are in complete disagreement with their leadership (contraception, gay marriage, anti-war, gender inequality etc) why haven't they rebelled against their leadership? Why the Catholic leaders are the most powerful religious authority of any religion in the world?
3
In which direction????
2
Lay Catholics gave up worrying about civil marriages in City Hall basements 100 years ago. As a Catholic couple [not SS] who were working 50 years in marriage ministry, we never once heard a bishop or priest ever complain about non Catholic heterosexuals getting married in city hall basements. St. Some of these couples for the 5Th time by an Elvis impersonators and even Catholic judges. Believing lay Catholics believe in sacramental marriages for Catholics and know enough to not try to regulate or object to civil marriages for SS couples in basements or beaches or wherever. .Hierarchical complaints about SSM are based on the stupid idea that Catholic marriages which are in sharp decline will be further exasperated by lay confusion about sacramental and civil marriages.
4
All the comments have left the African continent out of the Catholic equation.The church there has tripled in size in the last 30 years....the Catholic Church survives in Africa on massive funding from U.S. parishes........and yet the African bishops are most vehement in their homophobic hatred. The Vatican needs to deal with that issue amongst many others & funding to the African church needs to be reassessed .
14
Well really this is part of a larger trend in Catholicism that's been going on for centuries. The problem is that the Bible and its translations and interpretations are demonstrably not literally true. Noah's Ark couldn't have existed in the real world, thanks to genetics (and how did he save all the plant life? And insects?). Adam and Eve couldn't have produced more than five generations or so before all the offspring were sterile from inbreeding. Right at the start of the Bible there's a contradiction: in the beginning, there was void. And then God said "let there be light", or words to that effect. But if there was void, where did God come from?
So yeah, the Bible is chock full of things that modern humans can't accept as literal truth. The sanctions against same-sex marriage (not that there actually are any except crazy old Leviticus who abhors shellfish too), contraception, abortion, the world being round, the earth orbiting the sun, and so forth, just aren't rational or tolerable.
So what's going on in Catholicism is people are leaving ancient and unfounded traditions behind. What's going on with Evangelism is people are clapping their hands over eyes and ears and intentionally deluding themselves so as not to be troubled by reality. But that too will not hold for long, eventually reality must be accepted and dealt with.
Anyway good column and I'm sure that as Catholicism changes it'll improve. If it can't change, it'll vanish, and that's fine too.
So yeah, the Bible is chock full of things that modern humans can't accept as literal truth. The sanctions against same-sex marriage (not that there actually are any except crazy old Leviticus who abhors shellfish too), contraception, abortion, the world being round, the earth orbiting the sun, and so forth, just aren't rational or tolerable.
So what's going on in Catholicism is people are leaving ancient and unfounded traditions behind. What's going on with Evangelism is people are clapping their hands over eyes and ears and intentionally deluding themselves so as not to be troubled by reality. But that too will not hold for long, eventually reality must be accepted and dealt with.
Anyway good column and I'm sure that as Catholicism changes it'll improve. If it can't change, it'll vanish, and that's fine too.
6
Since "Same-Sex Marriage is a non existent entity for people to lazy to define different relationships differently, you can trumpet the success of sloth and political correctness to the sky.
When the purveyors grow up and codify that all loving relationships have the same legal rights and obligations and give them appropriate names we will be far ahead as societies. Until evolution makes humans one gender, not likely anytime soon. Man+Man, Woman+Woman does not = Man+Woman and Woman+Man no mater what the vote or hype.
When the purveyors grow up and codify that all loving relationships have the same legal rights and obligations and give them appropriate names we will be far ahead as societies. Until evolution makes humans one gender, not likely anytime soon. Man+Man, Woman+Woman does not = Man+Woman and Woman+Man no mater what the vote or hype.
2
You for got three words, important words, words that would show that you're not an arrogant religious oppressor: "in my opinion".
The vast majority of us, fortunately, do not agree.
The vast majority of us, fortunately, do not agree.
1
"at least nominally", the author mentions right from the beginning. That is exactly what leads to misperceptions. If you take into account the % of people who are baptised, then yes, Portugal or Ireland, etc, are very Catholic. But how many of those people ACTUALLY are believers, go to church, follow the church's doctrines, and so on? Almost none. Most people in those countries will identify as Catholics simply out of tradition (and have a religious wedding or funeral for the same reason). They are not Catholic in the strict sense of the word. So yes, they might divorce, marry the same sex, use condoms, do an abortion, go for in vitro fertilisation or request euthanasia, without thinking even for a second about the Pope's opinion on the matter.
1
I really don't understand gay Catholics. Honey, what are you doing? They don't want you. Yes, Francis is on the surface being more tolerant by saying let's not focus so much on it, but the official party line is still you are living in sin if you choose to express your sexuality. Sin. Hell. Damnation. Why are you still trying to get approval from disapproving daddy?
As many commentators have pointed out, Catholicism is at its core a patriarchal, dogmatic religion. Dogma literally means "that which has been received." The church is there to give you the truth. You are there to take it - lock, stock, and barrel. And patriarchy - well that part is obvious - women are less than men and to be controlled. The history of the church is about maintaining hierarchy (patriarchy) and dogma. Their brand is the only gate to heaven.
If a deeper experience of the spiritual is your quest, there are traditions that are not dogmatic, that are not faith based, that pursue direct spiritual experience, that welcome change as the culture changes, that include women in the top tiers of their organizations. The vibrant American Buddhist tradition comes to mind.
Yes, there are lots of pretty, artistic, shiny things to appreciate about the Catholic church's history (and wouldn't it be nice if daddy loved us just for who we are), but the core of the Catholic church has always been about male, corporate control. Read you history, man. There is way too much blood on those altars. Wake up.
As many commentators have pointed out, Catholicism is at its core a patriarchal, dogmatic religion. Dogma literally means "that which has been received." The church is there to give you the truth. You are there to take it - lock, stock, and barrel. And patriarchy - well that part is obvious - women are less than men and to be controlled. The history of the church is about maintaining hierarchy (patriarchy) and dogma. Their brand is the only gate to heaven.
If a deeper experience of the spiritual is your quest, there are traditions that are not dogmatic, that are not faith based, that pursue direct spiritual experience, that welcome change as the culture changes, that include women in the top tiers of their organizations. The vibrant American Buddhist tradition comes to mind.
Yes, there are lots of pretty, artistic, shiny things to appreciate about the Catholic church's history (and wouldn't it be nice if daddy loved us just for who we are), but the core of the Catholic church has always been about male, corporate control. Read you history, man. There is way too much blood on those altars. Wake up.
5
The Catholic church has been on the wrong side of history so many times that the Catholics look upon their Church as being out of touch with the times. The Catholics have learnt to ignore the opinions of the Church leaders when they make decisions.
3
Actually, American Jews led the way with the vast majority endorsing equal marriage opportunity some years ago before the majority of countries cited legalized equal marriage opportunity. Although I don't believe in God, I am a proud gay Jew. Now almost 68, I have lived long enough to see my fellow Jews change their views - ahead of most. I am, however, appreciative of the great change among western Catholics and applaud that change, let alone the changes among other communities. Ireland gets first prize though for being the FIRST country to vote for equal opportunity for their gay citizens.
2
It is indeed amazing that our dear Evangelicals behave become popier than the pope, the new one that is far, far too liberal for them in any respect.
And a few Pentacostals as well, e.g. the oh so religious owners of Hobby Lobby.
And a few Pentacostals as well, e.g. the oh so religious owners of Hobby Lobby.
2
Mr. Bruni makes a statement about Germany which re-kindles confusion I've had for quite some time about the issue of gay marriage. He writes that Germans can "enter into same-sex civil unions" and then he notes "(same-sex marriage isn’t yet legal there),"
So, yes, I'm confused. What exactly are the legal benefits offered to one who has entered into "marriage" in Germany which are not offered to one who has entered into a "civil union"?
So, yes, I'm confused. What exactly are the legal benefits offered to one who has entered into "marriage" in Germany which are not offered to one who has entered into a "civil union"?
2
You have to have a "Civil Union cake" at your Civil Union signing ceremony, rather than a "wedding cake" at your wedding.
" The Church needs to take a reality check.”
Don't hold your breath! They've had more than enough time to figure things out, but their incessantly "immoral" or "un-Christian" behaviour continues apace. When kids ask for Gay/Straight Alliances in the Schools, it is the higher-ups in the Church who try and block them... even though such GSA's help lower the rate of teenage suicide. So here we have a Church which is against suicide but does nothing to realistically stop it. Their dogma is more important to them than children's lives - exactly the same as with the child-abuse scandals, which lost them much of their credibility as well as parishioners; they have learned nothing from their mistakes, but just continue as before. Einstein said this is the definition of insanity. I think he was right...
Don't hold your breath! They've had more than enough time to figure things out, but their incessantly "immoral" or "un-Christian" behaviour continues apace. When kids ask for Gay/Straight Alliances in the Schools, it is the higher-ups in the Church who try and block them... even though such GSA's help lower the rate of teenage suicide. So here we have a Church which is against suicide but does nothing to realistically stop it. Their dogma is more important to them than children's lives - exactly the same as with the child-abuse scandals, which lost them much of their credibility as well as parishioners; they have learned nothing from their mistakes, but just continue as before. Einstein said this is the definition of insanity. I think he was right...
5
So the Church (or any religious organization) needs to take a "reality check"? Quite amazing, considering the very foundation of religion is "faith" - sincere, overwhelming belief in something that is fantastic on its face and also unprovable in any conventional way; the very opposite of reality.
So, what is reality in this context: how a couple of people you do not know and will never meet, possibly in a place you will never even visit, choose to conduct their personal lives, which you think is somehow your business... or exactly how many angels can dance on the head of a pin?
So, what is reality in this context: how a couple of people you do not know and will never meet, possibly in a place you will never even visit, choose to conduct their personal lives, which you think is somehow your business... or exactly how many angels can dance on the head of a pin?
3
Evangelicals have been wagging their fingers at the rest of us for several decades now and this approach has been taken up by the present day Republican party. Maybe, just maybe, people have grown tired of being kicked in the shins by these very non-chridstian people.
18
You are right. I am in my 70's and except or one incident no Catholic has tried to convert me or frowned at me for drinking a beer. Catholics are simply more fun to be around.
Mr. Bruni doesn't offer any reasons WHY Catholic countries might be leading the way to acceptance of same-sex marriage. This would be a more interesting column if he could do so. Is there an impulse to compassion that is congruent with Roman Catholic tradition? Is there a care for the disadvantaged, related to histories of working class, immigrant, or underdog status of Catholics in many countries? Perhaps the celibate clergy provides examples of single men, some of them homosexual, in lonely lives of service. It is well known to scientists of human development that later-born sons in families of several brothers are more likely to be gay, perhaps because of a differing hormonal/uterine environment in later pregnancies. Catholics, with their larger families of later-born children, and longtime experience of unmarried clergy, may well have more intimate and empathic understanding of gay lives.
3
Catholics are used to being the underdogs, and discriminated against, and in America today usually the objects of ridicule. So they empathize with other groups who have been beat down in history, including the Jews. Partly that is why they dominated the urban police and fire departments in the late 19th century -- to protect the vulnerable immigrant poor.
2
Many Western Catholics today grew up with a Catholicism that was more focused on social justice than on confession. While the official teachings of the church (on abortion, same-sex marriage, etc.) didn't and haven't changed, there has been a generational shift in emphasis. Catholic schoolkids who are constantly told to "see God in everybody" but never instructed on Rome's official stance re birth control or divorce are more likely to embrace gay marriage as adults, and not to perceive as big a contradiction between that stance and their Catholic upbringing as some might expect.
10
You posit American conditions as a reason for Irish votes. Not applicable. In Irish primary schools, Rome Rules, OK?
There continues to be a bipolar, if not schizophrenic character, to the Catholic Church and its adherents throughout history. Its public persona diffuse, yet its doctrines austere and only this side of lock down; this perplexing religion attempts to be both an anachronism and progressive. It has a dark and light history responsible for both the destruction of ancient new world civilizations and eradication and brutality for many while concurrently inspiring generosity and kindness for multitudes.
Perhaps it is only reflective of the folly of mankind and its irrational behaviors and is more earthbound than realized. Unfortunately its flexibility remained tied to tithing and money matters to this supposedly spiritual juggernaut. That alone will determine its redrawing of sexual license as survival trumps doctrine on any Sunday.
Perhaps it is only reflective of the folly of mankind and its irrational behaviors and is more earthbound than realized. Unfortunately its flexibility remained tied to tithing and money matters to this supposedly spiritual juggernaut. That alone will determine its redrawing of sexual license as survival trumps doctrine on any Sunday.
2
Interestingly, in the Episcopal Church some dioceses in states where there's marriage equality have bishops who have allowed the blessing of same sex unions. (Although, these are the more liberal dioceses.)
Again, our "leaders" are actually laggards in figuring out how to be inclusive and govern for the majority.
Good article Mr.Bruni. As Asian Catholic, I am hoping that we will have the same opportunity in our countries. Who will be the first. In Asia, the barrier is not only religion but also cultural. But with the advance of social media, it is just a matter of time, hope not very long, that Asian countries will follow Western and US.
1
Catholics are certainly leading us in regard to same-sex marriage. In particular, we will soon see where the Catholic majority on the Supreme Court leads us.
3
What about the women? This is great Mr. Bruni that the Catholic Church hierarchy is being beaten back on marriage equality but it was a lot of women who voted for that referendum in Ireland. I hope that the payback will be more and more men standing up to the Catholic Church for women's rights. Until women have full and equal rights in the Catholic Church everyone needs a reality check.
3
One of the higher ups in the catholic church called the vote in Ireland a "defeat for humanity". So much for "who am I to judge".
4
Because the Life, Death and Resurrection of Christ will forever be the single most important event to occur on earth, the forces of evil will always attack the Catholic Church and anyone associated with that vital organization. God came to earth as a man, a paradox so immense that most people can't even imagine it, and yet it is a fact.
Mr. Bruni writes for a pro-homosexual and atheist newspaper, and writes exactly what one should expect. The day will arrive soon enough when the world sees for itself the blessing the only church founded and built by Jesus Himself is to mankind. But for now it is as Jesus said, the world did not recognize Him, and Persecuted Him, so we who are His should expect the same treatment. This column and most of the postings here prove the truth of what Christ said. I am a proud member of the one, holy, Catholic & Apostolic church founded by Jesus in 33 AD on Peter whom Jesus called 'the rock'. May Almighty God through His only begotten son Jesus grant His unfathomable Peace to all people of good will.
Mr. Bruni writes for a pro-homosexual and atheist newspaper, and writes exactly what one should expect. The day will arrive soon enough when the world sees for itself the blessing the only church founded and built by Jesus Himself is to mankind. But for now it is as Jesus said, the world did not recognize Him, and Persecuted Him, so we who are His should expect the same treatment. This column and most of the postings here prove the truth of what Christ said. I am a proud member of the one, holy, Catholic & Apostolic church founded by Jesus in 33 AD on Peter whom Jesus called 'the rock'. May Almighty God through His only begotten son Jesus grant His unfathomable Peace to all people of good will.
4
Your idea of good will seems to be very different from the ideas that Jesus put forth.
1
Show me one Catholic who doesn't have about 12 hours of daylight between Vatican dogma and the way they conduct their lives when they think no one is looking.
6
Bravo to Ireland for providing equal rights for gays. However I am still wounded by the rigidity of the the church and its priests whose every word was to be taken as the TRUTH. This applies not only to the Catholic church but to the variety of Protestant sects and the Rabbis whose authority was never to be questioned. Excommunication and the auto de fe are but a moment ago and the bitter taste lingers.
1
I watched the vote closely after the Pew Report that put the 'non-affiliated' in the US as more populous than the Catholics. That the Irish vote was on 'same-sex' was secondary to me. 'Same-sex' marriage is of vital concern to a small minority of the population, 3%?, 5%? Certainly less than 10%, so the turnout should have been tiny and the vote overwhelmingly going to the 'no's'.
But that's not what happened, was it?
The voter turnout was HUGE and it went overwhelmingly to "YES!"
Reading the 'Comments' sections from the BBC News and the Guardian, yes, there was joy that same-sex had passed but almost everyone of them then went on to list the abuses and crimes of the Irish Catholic Church.
It was a vote FOR same-sex marriage... and a vote AGAINST the Church.
That vote was not simply a 'youth vote', it was across the board, right up to people in their eighties and older, the ones who have suffered a lifetime of Church rule over every aspect of their lives. They finally got a chance to tell the Church where to go.
The Archbishop says that the Church needs a "reality check", but the prior Archbishop has it clearer. He said, " The Church could be extinct within 20 years."
A final note: I am a co-mother-in-law. Patricia was born and raised in Dublin.
"How did you like the vote?" I asked her on Sunday, and then laughed as her hands flew, her joy blasted out and her accent got thicker as she raged. "Serves them right!" she snarled.
She saw it as a vote on the Church, too.
But that's not what happened, was it?
The voter turnout was HUGE and it went overwhelmingly to "YES!"
Reading the 'Comments' sections from the BBC News and the Guardian, yes, there was joy that same-sex had passed but almost everyone of them then went on to list the abuses and crimes of the Irish Catholic Church.
It was a vote FOR same-sex marriage... and a vote AGAINST the Church.
That vote was not simply a 'youth vote', it was across the board, right up to people in their eighties and older, the ones who have suffered a lifetime of Church rule over every aspect of their lives. They finally got a chance to tell the Church where to go.
The Archbishop says that the Church needs a "reality check", but the prior Archbishop has it clearer. He said, " The Church could be extinct within 20 years."
A final note: I am a co-mother-in-law. Patricia was born and raised in Dublin.
"How did you like the vote?" I asked her on Sunday, and then laughed as her hands flew, her joy blasted out and her accent got thicker as she raged. "Serves them right!" she snarled.
She saw it as a vote on the Church, too.
6
The Church is to Catholics on same-sex marriage as conservatives are to polled Americans on many issues--gun control, climate change, immigration, minimum wage, etc.--out of touch. What explains the Church's and the conservatives' detachment from these realities and their persistence in lost causes?
1
Catholics are the true Christians: Protestants are made up of those who believe that faith alone will save you; so why not get a llittle nasty.
1
Spring will always follow winter, the sun will always rise in the east, and NYT readers will always fulminate about Catholicism, regardless of the point of the article.
2
There is no such concept as "anticlericalism" in American discourse; all opposition to Church policies is framed as "anti-Catholic," precisely because Catholics are a minority. This produces the political distortion noted here.
Correction to my first submission: If the Pope does NOT counter the remarks of Cardinal Parolin...
So marriage between a man and a woman is at the core of Roman Catholicism, Rick Santorum? And here I thought it was papal infallibility and transubstantiation. Well, Mr. Santorum, do you advocate for reinstating married priests if heterosexual marriage is so intrinsic to Roman Catholicism?
3
Ireland's vote amazed me. Next thing you know it will consider a pregnant woman worthy of life-saving medical attention.
7
The only thing I think of when the Catholic Church is mentioned is : What is the Church doing about the thousands of child rapping Priests and Bishops it has been protecting all these years?
2
Finally, insight with an ah-ha in it. Can you send a copy to the Archbishop of San Francisco? He seems to be stuck in the 18th century.
2
Mr. Bruni is smoking some holy "smoke" if he thinks the Roman Catholic Church will ever officially have gay weddings in its churches.
It's not just a gay marriage issue. The Irish Marriage Equality Referendum simply states "marriage may be contracted in accordance with law by two persons without distinction as to their sex.” This does not limit same-sex marriage to gay and lesbian couples. Heterosexuals could marry other heterosexuals of the same gender. As same-sex marriage advocates point out, “civil partnership falls short of full Constitutional equality; only civil marriage can deliver that.” I’m not sure what the benefits would be in Ireland, but in the United States the benefits are obvious. For example, same-sex widows or widowers can draw surviving spouse social security payments. I’m not being facetious. Why would any single person die without passing their survivor benefits on to someone they care about, even if that person happens to be of the same sex? Nearly 50 million school teachers never qualify for social security because they draw state pensions and pay no social security withholding taxes. A monthly $1,200 social security check would come in handy.
1
Marriage also comes with a lot of responsibilities. Anyone marrying someone in the hope of sharing their income also takes on the debts of their spouse and then there are issues like home ownership, custody etc.
Well said! Mr. Bruni! Same-sex couples can be God fearing people, even Catholic (!!) and believe in God, and in a sort of relaxed brand of Catholicism... without all the pomp and strictures. ( I grew up Catholic, so trust me - I know what I'm saying!)
Well said!
Thanks.
Well said!
Thanks.
1
Some years ago, a Catholic remarked to me that the laity was usually about "fifty years ahead" of the prelates of the church. "If that's the case, what do you need them for? How can you consider them 'leaders,' if they're following you?" I asked.
I didn't get an answer.
I didn't get an answer.
2
The Irish are a remarkable people having struggled for hundreds of years to protect their Catholic faith from British religious persecution. Hostility & negative stereotyping was based on the Irish refusal to renounce their faith & convert to Protestantism. The endless social conflict resulted in dehumanization & oppression. The anti-Irish sentiment spread across Europe & was reinforced by writers like Voltaire, who depicted the Catholic Irish as savage & backwards. Even when the English forced the Irish to give up their Gaelic language & speak only in English, they still held on to their religion as a cohesive glue.
Of all the people in the world, the Irish are distinctly aware of prejudice & discrimination. When Irish immigrants fled to America during the potato famine, they were subjected to misrepresentations of their religious & cultural beliefs. They were labelled as Pagans & not being a "Christian" in a traditional British sense was deemed "immoral" & "demonic." Irish Catholics were particularly singled out, and Irish mythology, folklore, & customs were ridiculed. Even now, the country is still divided along religious lines as Northern Ireland is predominately Protestant & tied to the UK. Therefore, it is particularly meaningful that this majority vote to support gay marriage happened to reflect the union of their cherished religion & respect for diversity. The whole world is smiling with them for their courage & leadership on this import human rights issue.
Of all the people in the world, the Irish are distinctly aware of prejudice & discrimination. When Irish immigrants fled to America during the potato famine, they were subjected to misrepresentations of their religious & cultural beliefs. They were labelled as Pagans & not being a "Christian" in a traditional British sense was deemed "immoral" & "demonic." Irish Catholics were particularly singled out, and Irish mythology, folklore, & customs were ridiculed. Even now, the country is still divided along religious lines as Northern Ireland is predominately Protestant & tied to the UK. Therefore, it is particularly meaningful that this majority vote to support gay marriage happened to reflect the union of their cherished religion & respect for diversity. The whole world is smiling with them for their courage & leadership on this import human rights issue.
8
Is religion really the source of the heterosexual "ideal"?
Not really.
“Traditional marriage” is actually *unnatural*.
In order to overcome the strong male evolutionary tendency to philander, monogamous marriage needed to be made attractive enough (economically and socially) by governments such that these natural male tendencies to “play the field” (and their economic consequences) might be mitigated.
Religion comes into play only to help reinforce that model. It’s not the real source or ground for the heterosexual “ideal”.
Religion is only a side actor, and a minor one at that.
Not really.
“Traditional marriage” is actually *unnatural*.
In order to overcome the strong male evolutionary tendency to philander, monogamous marriage needed to be made attractive enough (economically and socially) by governments such that these natural male tendencies to “play the field” (and their economic consequences) might be mitigated.
Religion comes into play only to help reinforce that model. It’s not the real source or ground for the heterosexual “ideal”.
Religion is only a side actor, and a minor one at that.
6
As a long-time ex-Catholic (now atheist) who received a heavy dose of the Church’s heavy-handed indoctrination and propaganda as a child (I would call it nothing less than child abuse), I doubt that any statistical indication of Catholics’ acceptance of gays is anything other than a cultural coincidence. The widening acceptance of gays in developed countries is more likely a generalized (indeed “catholic”) recognition of our collective humanity rather than an indication of the mindset of any religion. I love Frank Bruni’s columns. However, the pernicious suggestion here is that the Catholic Church is stepping out of the Middle Ages and into the 21st century when in fact the church is still deeply mired in its tradition of male power and obsession with controlling rather than nurturing human life in all its forms. If the Church was really serious about opening its doors it would allow women to be priests, priests to marry, and most importantly, it would melt down all of its gold chalices, liquidate its vast wealth and valuable properties, and serve the poor as Jesus supposedly said. Individuals cannot claim the Catholic mantle without accepting personal responsibility for all of the Church’s policies and behaviors. It’s simply too easy to claim, as most Catholics do, that those policies and behaviors have nothing to do with them. If Catholics really want to practice their religion they would take Lenny Bruce’s suggestion and leave the church and go back to God.
4
"However, the pernicious suggestion here is that the Catholic Church is stepping out of the Middle Ages and into the 21st century when in fact the church is still deeply mired in its tradition of male power and obsession with controlling rather than nurturing human life in all its forms."
____________________
I don't think Mr. Bruni is suggesting anything of the sort. What he is showing, however, is that "ordinary" Catholics are deciding for themselves what constitutes authentic practice of their faith. Most people think of the hierarchy as being THE Church, but the fact of the matter is that it is only a part of it.
But there is evidence that parts of the hierarchy are beginning to see things differently. From the National Catholic Reporter: http://ncronline.org/news/global/cardinal-kasper-francis-wants-hierarchy...
____________________
I don't think Mr. Bruni is suggesting anything of the sort. What he is showing, however, is that "ordinary" Catholics are deciding for themselves what constitutes authentic practice of their faith. Most people think of the hierarchy as being THE Church, but the fact of the matter is that it is only a part of it.
But there is evidence that parts of the hierarchy are beginning to see things differently. From the National Catholic Reporter: http://ncronline.org/news/global/cardinal-kasper-francis-wants-hierarchy...
2
Nonsense. If you are a believing and practicing Catholic you can not be for anything other then a marriage that is between a man and women. So, stop throwing the 'Catholic' word around, its dishonest.
2
The thing is, nearly all of the people listed as Catholic are not actually "practicing" Catholics. Sex outside of marriage, abortion, contraception, not going to church every day at dawn and dusk, eating shellfish, wearing clothing made from more than one material, shaving their beards, basically nearly all Catholics break some of these rules.
In the last couple of decades, the Roman Catholic hierarchy in the United States has made a conscious decision to affiliate themselves with the right wing of the Republican Party, while ignoring the clear teachings of the Gospel. Fortunately, the vst majority of American Catholics have shown far more moral clarity and christian compassion, and have chosen to simply ignore the distorted teachings of their Bishops and Cardinals. This current crop of authoritarian opportunists will soon be gone, and a vibrant American Catholic church will survive them
4
Excellent. Finally someone has written a nuanced account of the "Catholic Church," not simply identifying Catholicism with the hierarchy, but with, in the favored metaphor of Vatican II, "The People of God."
2
Actually, you can add the Netherlands to that list. Whilst it is not traditionally considered a Roman Catholic country, Roman Catholicism is actually the single biggest religion in the Netherlands.
Jeb Bush's opposition is readily understandable. Adult converts embrace Catholicism because they accept its tenets, not because it's part of their ancestral window dressing.
It's a shame he didn't embrace the concepts of peace making and being kind to the poor.
1
News flash: Jesus was a liberal.
9
This opinion is completely false and inaccurate. I am Brazilian and the fact that gay marriage is legal here is because of the supreme court, not Catholics. The same is true to the list of other countries mentioned in your article.
If we lived under the Catholic rules in Brazil, my Country would be living through medieval times. Gay activists from ALL religions helped to legalize Gay marriage in Brazil
If we lived under the Catholic rules in Brazil, my Country would be living through medieval times. Gay activists from ALL religions helped to legalize Gay marriage in Brazil
4
Thank you for recognizing that Catholicism can be as much a cultural identity as a religious one. Brought up in an entirely Catholic home and community, forced to go to church every week (and holy days!) I nonetheless, since my earliest memories, have never believed. Though a lifelong atheist (for lack of a better term...humanist?), I still feel deeply, culturally, Catholic, and have been so happy to see the charitable and progressive shift in the church. You are always informed by the way you were raised, in deep-seeded psychological ways. It's a difficult thing to explain to folks. Thank you for acknowledging us.
1
Unfortunately this column was written before the second highest official in the Vatican denounced the irish vote as a "defeat for humanity." If the Pope does counter this horribly ignorant remark soon the damage to the official Church will be severe because the rift between hierarchy and lay people will be, and be seen to be, as nearly unbridgeable.
1
I find it strange at the stance these predominately Catholic countries have taken a stance for Gay Marriage, & yet it may not be strange at all if one considers the problem the church is having in acquiring new Priests & Nuns.For centuries the Catholic Church was a haven for Gay Men & Women, until the sex scandals were brought out into the open.Today Priests & Nuns are looked upon with suspicion rather than with respect.In order to take this stigma away from the Catholic Clergy, Pope Francis proclaimed that people who are gay are to be welcomed with open arms into the church, which opened the way for the recent Irish vote in favor of Gay Marriage.The more things change the more they remain the same .
It helps to also have a Pope that seems to be pushing back on Dogma and orthodoxy. Leadership sets the tone for any church, and Francis' message has been one of humility and inclusion. The hope is that there has a ripple effect toward official change in Catholic Dogma--not just for gays, but for women's rights too.
2
This seems like a fairy tale account to me. Irish Catholics expressing their "inner Catholicism". That's not how I see it at all. I'd say, instead, it's mostly about anger and payback. The sex abuse scandal in Ireland had an enormous effect. It tainted not only the church, but schools and other church-run institutions, which are pervasive throughout the country. Amidst the scandal, the church centered blame on gay Irishmen. If this isn't payback, I don't know what is.
2
The Vatican doesn't have a problem with gays. Privately they have no problem at all, as there are so many priests who are gay. This is what prompted the Pope's "who am I to judge" comment which was aimed at fellow priests. Publicly the Vatican has a huge problem with gays and this inconsistency between their private views and their public views is very calculated and ultimately damaging for the future of the Catholic Church.
4
Accepting people for who they are, as their creator made them, provided they treat others fairly, is in harmony with much of Catholic teaching in terms of new testament scripture and ethics.
The official Catholic Church's teaching against same-sex marriage is rooted in an outdated and flawed understanding of who gay people are, how they were born with their sexual orientation, and how many of them want to live their lives. This particular teaching is inconsistent with the broader principles of Catholicism.
Many Catholics know this and have no problem accepting gay people for who they are and how they want to live their lives. We're waiting on the "official Catholic Church" to catch up.
The official Catholic Church's teaching against same-sex marriage is rooted in an outdated and flawed understanding of who gay people are, how they were born with their sexual orientation, and how many of them want to live their lives. This particular teaching is inconsistent with the broader principles of Catholicism.
Many Catholics know this and have no problem accepting gay people for who they are and how they want to live their lives. We're waiting on the "official Catholic Church" to catch up.
1
Considering that just today the Vatican press secretary, Cardinal Pietro Parolin, called the Irish vote to legalize gay marriage a "defeat for humanity," it's fair to say that while Catholic individuals may be leading the way, the Catholic hierarchy is still doing what it has always done: heading for the hills.
Ironically, it is this refusal of the Church to drop its anti-sex, anti-birth control, anti-woman positions that has led its parishioners to take up the cause of human rights without it. Catholics are sick of being told they'll go to hell if they use a condom or need to divorce an abusive spouse. (The Irish couple whose pro-gay marriage video went viral have a gay son. Ask them if the vote in Ireland was a defeat for the humanity of their family.)
The faithful are recreating the Church in a humanist image: pluralistic, compassionate and grounded in reality. Meanwhile, the Vatican's irrelevance increases daily. It is atrophying within its own walls and one day its beautiful buildings will make a very nice tourist attraction.
Ironically, it is this refusal of the Church to drop its anti-sex, anti-birth control, anti-woman positions that has led its parishioners to take up the cause of human rights without it. Catholics are sick of being told they'll go to hell if they use a condom or need to divorce an abusive spouse. (The Irish couple whose pro-gay marriage video went viral have a gay son. Ask them if the vote in Ireland was a defeat for the humanity of their family.)
The faithful are recreating the Church in a humanist image: pluralistic, compassionate and grounded in reality. Meanwhile, the Vatican's irrelevance increases daily. It is atrophying within its own walls and one day its beautiful buildings will make a very nice tourist attraction.
3
Well said Frank! Between the Irish referendum on gay marriage and Pope Francis's push to get Catholics focused on helping the poor, I have never felt prouder of my Catholic faith. Finally a return to the core messages of the gospel -- compassion for the oppressed, generosity to those in need, and a longing for basic social justice. Suddenly I'm not feeling like I live on the outer fringes of the faith anymore.
1
As for the Republican politicians who point to their Catholic faith as a reason for opposing marriage equality, that is an insincere excuse, since they embrace the death penalty which the Church points to as a right-to-life violation. If these figures can justify a change in belief for one topic, they can rethink gay marriage, too.
2
For decades, liberal priests have quietly helped young unmarried people gain access to birth control information. Divorced parishoners often get welcomes that are not Vatican-approved, and the laity seems more democratic in regard to gay marriages than the leadership understands. Good, let the news ring out: The wicked witch is dead.
And it is time the Orthodox rabbis and evangelical preachers surrendered the whips of guilt over natural functions. Pierre Trudeau told Canada 4 decades ago, "The government of Canada has no place in the bedrooms of Canadians." Neither does the pulpit. It's time religious leaders left the bedroom for good.
And it is time the Orthodox rabbis and evangelical preachers surrendered the whips of guilt over natural functions. Pierre Trudeau told Canada 4 decades ago, "The government of Canada has no place in the bedrooms of Canadians." Neither does the pulpit. It's time religious leaders left the bedroom for good.
2
Catholics, by and large, have always been supportive of people in need. The Church has always helped the poor and those in need, and it teaches compassion and love. Just look at the charity care that still goes on, and the number of people treated at St Vincent's Hospital during the AIDS crisis.
These countries are proving that regular Catholics can want the Church and gay people to co-exist.
In the end, the Church may disagree with redefining marriage but it supports people, but the gay rights movement treats the Church as an enemy wishes to destroy their existence. Ironic that Catholics are showing the "tolerance" and "compassion" while the gay rights movement is preaching "censorship" and "condemnation."
to quote Andrew Sullivan:
"If this is the gay rights movement today – hounding our opponents with a fanaticism more like the religious right than anyone else – then count me out. If we are about intimidating the free speech of others, we are no better than the anti-gay bullies who came before us."
http://dish.andrewsullivan.com/2014/04/03/the-hounding-of-brendan-eich/
http://www.forbes.com/sites/tonybradley/2014/04/05/backlash-against-bren...
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/04/04/mozilla-ceo-resigna...
These countries are proving that regular Catholics can want the Church and gay people to co-exist.
In the end, the Church may disagree with redefining marriage but it supports people, but the gay rights movement treats the Church as an enemy wishes to destroy their existence. Ironic that Catholics are showing the "tolerance" and "compassion" while the gay rights movement is preaching "censorship" and "condemnation."
to quote Andrew Sullivan:
"If this is the gay rights movement today – hounding our opponents with a fanaticism more like the religious right than anyone else – then count me out. If we are about intimidating the free speech of others, we are no better than the anti-gay bullies who came before us."
http://dish.andrewsullivan.com/2014/04/03/the-hounding-of-brendan-eich/
http://www.forbes.com/sites/tonybradley/2014/04/05/backlash-against-bren...
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/04/04/mozilla-ceo-resigna...
1
I think the media often ignores the complexity of religious institutions, and simply accepts that religious means politically conservative. While it is true that the fundamentalist Protestant churches tend to mostly line up with the political right on social and economic issues, that has not been true of Catholicism even before Francis. The economic and foreign policy views of the church, along with its stance on capital punishment, have been to the left of the mainstream of the Democratic party for decades. I also think that because Catholicism is, as Frank says, cultural as well as theological it contains more adherents who are comfortable accepting some but not all of the church's doctrines, particularly on issues like gay marriage and birth control.
This is a puzzling piece. What would count as evidence that people who call themselves Catholic aren't? Literally millions of people call themselves Catholic but have little or nothing to do with the Church or it's stated doctrines. The same is true of people who call themselves Christians. If not the acceptance of gay marriage, what would count as evidence that people who call themselves religious have actually become quite comfortable with a secular ethic? What is the difference between an inclusive religion in social acceptance and an inclusive secularism?
1
I lived in Ireland at the turn of the century. The country has changed dramatically over the last 20 years. Ireland used to "export" priests and nuns, but now most new priests and nuns that serve in Ireland are from either Africa or Asia. Many parishes have Nigerians as priests. What a change.
Most "Catholics" in Ireland are "nominal" Catholics. Many do not attend church except for funerals and the occasional wedding. Modern Ireland is very much post modern in terms of faith and religion. And the abuses by the Roman Catholic Church in Ireland and elsewhere are well established. The Roman Catholic Church seems to have lost a generation or two.
I do believe that the equality vote was, for many, a vote for gay marriage. I also believe that many voted because they see this as a vote against institutions (the Roman Catholic Church in particular) that establish traditions and rules that they do not agree with. This generation does not want to be told what to do or what is right or wrong. They want to define moral absolutes.
The challenge for the Roman Catholic Church and orthodox Christianity and Judaism (Judaism is the first faith to address homosexuality as a sin) is to remain relevant and true to their biblical foundations. This is no easy task. These faiths have sacred texts that establish a framework of thinking and living and a relationship with God. A small fraction of the texts deal with the popular issues and unfortunately are defining the faith.
Most "Catholics" in Ireland are "nominal" Catholics. Many do not attend church except for funerals and the occasional wedding. Modern Ireland is very much post modern in terms of faith and religion. And the abuses by the Roman Catholic Church in Ireland and elsewhere are well established. The Roman Catholic Church seems to have lost a generation or two.
I do believe that the equality vote was, for many, a vote for gay marriage. I also believe that many voted because they see this as a vote against institutions (the Roman Catholic Church in particular) that establish traditions and rules that they do not agree with. This generation does not want to be told what to do or what is right or wrong. They want to define moral absolutes.
The challenge for the Roman Catholic Church and orthodox Christianity and Judaism (Judaism is the first faith to address homosexuality as a sin) is to remain relevant and true to their biblical foundations. This is no easy task. These faiths have sacred texts that establish a framework of thinking and living and a relationship with God. A small fraction of the texts deal with the popular issues and unfortunately are defining the faith.
1
A lot of these comments misunderstand the Roman Church. The Church can't just 'get with the times' and accept an institution like gay 'marriage' that's predicated on the secular Enlightenment, Romantic, and 1960s view of love. Individual freedom and equality are very subordinate in the hierarchy of ethical and political standards valued by the church, whose teachings are rooted in the natural law and Thomistic conceptions of objective order based in the nature of things independent of human will. According to this marriage is always and can only be a union between one man and woman, ordered towards the rearing of children. No 'discrimination' or 'bigotry' is involved here because the distinctions are rooted in the natural moral order and the unchangeable truths derived from Scripture and Tradition, not in anyone's ill will. The Church never changes or 'progresses' because truth never changes.
1
I wonder if part of the reason for "Catholic" countries approving gay marriage is that the Vatican is training the Catholic laity to ignore them. Opposition to birth control, which most Catholics use and recognize as a necessity and even a blessing, teaches in a very visceral way that the church can be and IS wrong on some issues. It's the ultimate and obvious demonstration that papal infallibility isn't infallible. Once you recognize the error on one issue, it's easy to start questioning the rest.
The Irish birth rate in 2009 was 2.1 children per woman, which means either there was a lot of marital celibacy or a lot of contraception. Off hand I know which I think is more likely.
The Irish birth rate in 2009 was 2.1 children per woman, which means either there was a lot of marital celibacy or a lot of contraception. Off hand I know which I think is more likely.
3
Nine years ago, I spent a delightful afternoon in Barcelona with the man who had been my Spanish teacher there when I was 16. Gay marriage had been legalized the year before. As we walked to lunch through a lovely small square where people were practicing ballroom dancing, he explained that for forty years, dictator Francisco Franco had convinced the Spanish people that they were conservative. "But," he exclaimed," it turned out not to be true!" He recounted a conversation he had had with an elderly woman that made him laugh but also made him proud to be a Spaniard. Asked her thoughts about gay marriage, she shrugged her shoulders and said that if two people loved each other and wanted to be together and married, why not? That story encapsulated for me how far Spain had come from the repressive regime in place when I was 16, when police with guns and tanks on street corners were a common sight. In legalizing gay marriage, Spain had leapt far ahead of where the American people were in 2006.
7
The messages I hear at Mass concern very rarely, if ever, anything about who you should marry, divorce, etc. Instead tolerance, social justice, forgiveness, love your neighbor, is what we hear. So acceptance and support for loving relationships between adults is a natural choice among most of my Catholic peers. That has been my experience in several parishes in large cities in both the U.S. and Canada. In one Church I attended about one quarter of the members were gay men and they were among the most active members.
4
If their faith precludes these men from supporting equal civil rights for gays and lesbians - marriage for all - because of Catholicism, then why aren't these same men drafting legislation to overturn the right to divorce? Why aren't their laws to punish pre marital sex? Meat should be outlawed throughout the land on Fridays. And perhaps these men should take a very long look at reproductive assisted pregnancies. Should IVF be allowed? Clomid?
The problem is that these men cherry pick their objections to suit their political needs and not their religious obligations or beliefs.
The problem is that these men cherry pick their objections to suit their political needs and not their religious obligations or beliefs.
3
Couple of thoughts:
1). Unless you attend Mass regularly you really aren't Catholic. This is neither good nor bad, just a statement
2). My opinion of the legality of gay marriageis that by the Constitution it should be legal
3). I don't believe it is bigotry to have a moral/religous issue with gay sex. Loving the sinner but hating the sin is a valid point.
4). Children- This is too early to call. We have embarked in the greatest social experiments in hundreds, perhaps thousands of years and we are in about 25 years. It is too early to tell.
5). Bullying- I suspect if the truth be known that at least trending that anti-Christian bullying will someday outpace anti-gay bullying. Gay bullies? Look at those who want to destroy someone because they wont participate in their weddings.
1). Unless you attend Mass regularly you really aren't Catholic. This is neither good nor bad, just a statement
2). My opinion of the legality of gay marriageis that by the Constitution it should be legal
3). I don't believe it is bigotry to have a moral/religous issue with gay sex. Loving the sinner but hating the sin is a valid point.
4). Children- This is too early to call. We have embarked in the greatest social experiments in hundreds, perhaps thousands of years and we are in about 25 years. It is too early to tell.
5). Bullying- I suspect if the truth be known that at least trending that anti-Christian bullying will someday outpace anti-gay bullying. Gay bullies? Look at those who want to destroy someone because they wont participate in their weddings.
2
Baking a cake isn't participating in a wedding. Time to get a clue.
While Ted Cruz warns of Democrat's desire for "mandatory" same-sex marriage and Marco Rubio claims that the teachings of the Catholic Church are being labeled as "hate speech" by liberals, Catholics - and entire nations - around the world are going about their business. The sky that's falling appears, strangely, to be directly above the United States.
4
Supporting gay marriage necessarily also demands support for the commercialization of human reproduction and cruelty against innocent children. Despite the cute orwellian language used by gay marriage proponents a same sex "marriage" is objectively different than real marriage (what civilization knew to be marriage 5 minutes ago). Two men committing a sex act or two women committing a sex act will never result in human reproduction (demonstrating the sexual organs used in these acts are being used in an inherently disordered way because no purpose is served, discussion for another day though). How will they get their children? Synthetically manufacture them by way of commercial transaction of course! Gay marriage will make normative commercialized human reproduction and children as commodities. Sperm & eggs from a catalog , renting out wombs for cash (poor third world wombs?) - all part of the brave new world of gay marriage! Do you believe human beings are nothing but inert matter to be manipulated at will? Does sex only have an arbitrary relationship to human reproduction? Are you just an artifact, a utility to be manufactured? Step right up you may be a liberal gay marriage supporter!!!
Support for gay marriage affirms mothers and fathers to be irrelevant and arbitrary to human life and identity. Is it not cruel to intentionally deny an innocent child the mother who created them? Does an innocent child not deserve that most fundamental piece of humanity, a mother's love?
Support for gay marriage affirms mothers and fathers to be irrelevant and arbitrary to human life and identity. Is it not cruel to intentionally deny an innocent child the mother who created them? Does an innocent child not deserve that most fundamental piece of humanity, a mother's love?
3
The depth and depravity of your distorted world view is nothing short of dumbfounding.
"How will they get their children?"
Assuming that two men or women in a marriage desire children—which, although common, is not the norm for gay people—projects an unqualified goal upon the actors. Most gay people, myself included, and—I might add, many straight people—do not desire children. There is no requirement that a marriage produce children.
"Gay marriage will make normative commercialized human reproduction and children as commodities."
Actually, you can credit the straight community with not only inventing this activity, but promoting it and supporting it through their own selfishness, under the guise of solution for infertility's though that is a problem to be solved.
"Is it not cruel to intentionally deny an innocent child the mother who created them?"
If you refer specifically to the notion of adoption re: "children without mothers or parents", again this situation is the responsibility of heterosexuals. Gay people offer loving, nurturing parenthood to those you self-righteous heteros have left behind or neglected through your own irresponsibility—gay people deny these children nothing, but rather provide for them what they should have had.
If, as I suspect, your proclamations derive from a religious mindset, I suggest you closely reinvestigate the teachings of your Savior, be sure you understand them, and then repent.
"How will they get their children?"
Assuming that two men or women in a marriage desire children—which, although common, is not the norm for gay people—projects an unqualified goal upon the actors. Most gay people, myself included, and—I might add, many straight people—do not desire children. There is no requirement that a marriage produce children.
"Gay marriage will make normative commercialized human reproduction and children as commodities."
Actually, you can credit the straight community with not only inventing this activity, but promoting it and supporting it through their own selfishness, under the guise of solution for infertility's though that is a problem to be solved.
"Is it not cruel to intentionally deny an innocent child the mother who created them?"
If you refer specifically to the notion of adoption re: "children without mothers or parents", again this situation is the responsibility of heterosexuals. Gay people offer loving, nurturing parenthood to those you self-righteous heteros have left behind or neglected through your own irresponsibility—gay people deny these children nothing, but rather provide for them what they should have had.
If, as I suspect, your proclamations derive from a religious mindset, I suggest you closely reinvestigate the teachings of your Savior, be sure you understand them, and then repent.
1
If I may, As an Irish Catholic (and gay man) I read your article with interest. Looking to my own experience and from discussions with others I think there are a number of reasons for the result and the current position of the church.
It was noticeable during the campaign how few Roman Catholic Bishops actually spoke out. Indeed when the Archbishop of Dublin spoke he was at pains not to come across as being anti-gay (which in and of itself is a good thing). The real "Catholic" attitude came from conservative lay Catholic organisations who preached the old fashioned fire and brimstone Catholicism.
I say "old-fashioned" because I like many others have a Catholic faith based on Love for our common brothers and sisters. From discussions, the high vote does not necessarily reflect a turning away from the Church but different emphasis on what it means to be Catholic. For us at least it seems we hold on to a faith which is more community than hierarchy based, more based on "love thy neigbhour" rather than "thou shalt...or burn in Hell".
Not so much a rejection of Catholicism, but a new look at it. One which is, I believe, just as valid, if not more so. Many who voted yes did so with the feeling we were reflecting the Christian message of Love for one another...
It was noticeable during the campaign how few Roman Catholic Bishops actually spoke out. Indeed when the Archbishop of Dublin spoke he was at pains not to come across as being anti-gay (which in and of itself is a good thing). The real "Catholic" attitude came from conservative lay Catholic organisations who preached the old fashioned fire and brimstone Catholicism.
I say "old-fashioned" because I like many others have a Catholic faith based on Love for our common brothers and sisters. From discussions, the high vote does not necessarily reflect a turning away from the Church but different emphasis on what it means to be Catholic. For us at least it seems we hold on to a faith which is more community than hierarchy based, more based on "love thy neigbhour" rather than "thou shalt...or burn in Hell".
Not so much a rejection of Catholicism, but a new look at it. One which is, I believe, just as valid, if not more so. Many who voted yes did so with the feeling we were reflecting the Christian message of Love for one another...
5
Just more self serving pro gay marriage propaganda with a strong undercurrent of anti-Catholic bias.
Next we'll be feeding Christians to the lions.
Or putting Catholics in "reeducation camps".
Learn to be politically correct or else.
No matter who votes on what the Catholic faith will never see gay marriage as anything but wrong---unnatural, abnormal and immoral.
And the article is merely Mr. Bruni's obviously biased and seriously skewed opinion undoubtedly based upon the "emerging truth" of "gay" science, history and law. What a bunch of pure horse manure.
I guess that gay marriage supporters will do anything to advance their godless, totalitarian and hedonistic agenda---even twist and warp the truth in a manner that would make Vladimir Putin proud.
Gay marriage is nothing more than trendiness and political correctness run amok---privileged treatment for a small, select special interest group with a lot of money and political influence who can't simply mind their own business and get on with life but must force the rest of us to accept their self serving and excessively permissive view of the world. Anything goes in other words and if it feels good it must be a human right. "Freedom" and "equality" have nothing to do with it at all.
Next we'll be feeding Christians to the lions.
Or putting Catholics in "reeducation camps".
Learn to be politically correct or else.
No matter who votes on what the Catholic faith will never see gay marriage as anything but wrong---unnatural, abnormal and immoral.
And the article is merely Mr. Bruni's obviously biased and seriously skewed opinion undoubtedly based upon the "emerging truth" of "gay" science, history and law. What a bunch of pure horse manure.
I guess that gay marriage supporters will do anything to advance their godless, totalitarian and hedonistic agenda---even twist and warp the truth in a manner that would make Vladimir Putin proud.
Gay marriage is nothing more than trendiness and political correctness run amok---privileged treatment for a small, select special interest group with a lot of money and political influence who can't simply mind their own business and get on with life but must force the rest of us to accept their self serving and excessively permissive view of the world. Anything goes in other words and if it feels good it must be a human right. "Freedom" and "equality" have nothing to do with it at all.
3
Just refutation:
"self serving pro gay marriage propaganda": but Catholics or other religious who advocate for themselves—at the expense of others—are not self-serving?
"Learn to be politically correct or else.": A minority achieving equality previously denied is not a punishment for those who are already so privileged—they lose nothing.
"gay marriage supporters will do anything…" : Yes, of course we will—to correct a gross injustice, as have others in our history.
"Gay marriage is nothing more than trendiness and political correctness run amok---privileged treatment for a small, select special interest group…" : Trendy? No, 1000 years in the making and only recently acknowledged. Privileged? No: Equal means equal, nothing more. Small and select? No: 3-5% of the total human population if you believe surveys that underreport the occurrence of homosexualty; 8-12% of the population if you're being realistic. That's just under the percentage of Catholics relative to total world population—not so small or select.
"who can't simply mind their own business" : Being able to live fully open, dignified lives without fear is very much our own business. On the other hand, I don't see you straight people minding YOUR OWN business all that much.
Life, love, the pursuit of happiness—and equal protection under the law—have everything to do with this issue. The last time I checked, I was ALSO a citizen of this country and, therefore, your equal.
"self serving pro gay marriage propaganda": but Catholics or other religious who advocate for themselves—at the expense of others—are not self-serving?
"Learn to be politically correct or else.": A minority achieving equality previously denied is not a punishment for those who are already so privileged—they lose nothing.
"gay marriage supporters will do anything…" : Yes, of course we will—to correct a gross injustice, as have others in our history.
"Gay marriage is nothing more than trendiness and political correctness run amok---privileged treatment for a small, select special interest group…" : Trendy? No, 1000 years in the making and only recently acknowledged. Privileged? No: Equal means equal, nothing more. Small and select? No: 3-5% of the total human population if you believe surveys that underreport the occurrence of homosexualty; 8-12% of the population if you're being realistic. That's just under the percentage of Catholics relative to total world population—not so small or select.
"who can't simply mind their own business" : Being able to live fully open, dignified lives without fear is very much our own business. On the other hand, I don't see you straight people minding YOUR OWN business all that much.
Life, love, the pursuit of happiness—and equal protection under the law—have everything to do with this issue. The last time I checked, I was ALSO a citizen of this country and, therefore, your equal.
1
God's Word makes it very clear that marriage is meant to be between one man and one woman and that homosexual behaviour is a sin.
The Church is not in a popularity contest. As God's children we are expected to pursue obedience to God over adherence to the latest misguided populist notion.
The Church is not in a popularity contest. As God's children we are expected to pursue obedience to God over adherence to the latest misguided populist notion.
1
No, you are wrong.
I have long wondered why so much of religious discussion nowadays is centered around human sexuality - what you do and with whom. Abortion, birth control, homosexuality all hot button topics especially in conservative religious circles. Why the fixation? Is that all these people ever think about? What about war, hunger, and income inequality?
While Catholics in some predominantly Catholic countries may be leading the way when it comes to approving Gay marriage, the Church remains staunchly rooted in old dogma when it comes to homosexuality and reproductive rights. Why on earth would anyone want to be associated with a Church that looked the other way when children were clearly being abused? How does that square with being a Christian?
While Catholics in some predominantly Catholic countries may be leading the way when it comes to approving Gay marriage, the Church remains staunchly rooted in old dogma when it comes to homosexuality and reproductive rights. Why on earth would anyone want to be associated with a Church that looked the other way when children were clearly being abused? How does that square with being a Christian?
4
Roman Catholic teaching has always held an 'Informed Conscience' to be the guide for Believers, and that of the "Sensus Fidelium" -"The natural law is written and engraved in the soul of each and every man (person)," Catechism of the Catholic Church (Leo XIII, Libertas praestantissimum, 597). I would like to believe that these 'Catholic Countries' mentioned in your article would also be acting out of Love for their brothers and sisters, nieces and nephews, uncles and aunts, sons and daughters -their very own family who are gay; and this true Family Value compels us to act in a sense of justice and respect.
Once the Emancipation Proclamation became law, thousands of former slaves in this country went to the courthouses in their communities to 'validate' their marriages by Civil Law; for they too were once denied the Human Right to be recognized as being validly married. As Roman Catholics we are also taught that there is the 'Gospel Ideal,' the Holy Scriptures teach us and that all believers seek to follow, but usually evolve towards in spiritual maturity. What Love cannot accomplish, laws alone will never do so.
Once the Emancipation Proclamation became law, thousands of former slaves in this country went to the courthouses in their communities to 'validate' their marriages by Civil Law; for they too were once denied the Human Right to be recognized as being validly married. As Roman Catholics we are also taught that there is the 'Gospel Ideal,' the Holy Scriptures teach us and that all believers seek to follow, but usually evolve towards in spiritual maturity. What Love cannot accomplish, laws alone will never do so.
3
As law is a human construct, I neither understand nor accept appeals to "natural law."
I've spent close to 60 years studiously not giving a damn what the Baptists, Jews, Catholics or any other self righteous cult thought of or had to say about my sexuality. Just because the tide is now turning does not lend these institutions anymore credibility. It certainly does not indicate that they are "leading the way" on any matter of relevance.
I think the bigger story is that people are beginning to recognize that morality, faith and spirituality have exactly nothing to do with religion or the politics of the church. Now if we can only get our elected officials to understand that.
I think the bigger story is that people are beginning to recognize that morality, faith and spirituality have exactly nothing to do with religion or the politics of the church. Now if we can only get our elected officials to understand that.
5
It's interesting that when John F. Kennedy ran for president, there was concern that he would take orders from the pope rather than uphold the U.S. constitution. We now have politicians who openly use their "Catholicism" as a way restrain the rights of others. As for the specific politicians mentioned in the article, were the clock turned back 2000 years, these men would would probably be Pharisees, the class of people Jesus called hypocrites for their behaviors toward others, especially the poor and downtrodden.
2
In a few years, the Vatican will find some text in the Bible that seem to allow same-sex unions. And it won't be long before a film be done about the love of King David for Jonathan.
1
Try Romans 7:4.
How much of this wave can be attributed to revelations of child abuse by priests?
1
Mr. Bruni, I will continue to write this as long as you hold these positions in your op-eds -- these people in these countries, and you as well, ARE NOT CATHOLIC.
Catholicism isn't cultural, it is religious. In nations that were once completely Catholic (Italy, Spain, Ireland, most of Latin America), the Faith becomes cultural because of the outward expressions. But if people don't believe in the Trinity, in the Real Presence, in the Sacraments, then they are not Catholic.
There is no ground where Catholics can support gay "marriage", which by the way is incredibly insulting to those who hold the real definition of marriage. Come up with another word for these unions, but they aren't and will never be marriage.
The Irish have decided to return to their pagan past and the persecution of the Irish Catholic Church has only just begun. And that persecution will spread throughout the world because there are millions that want payback on the Church and they will have the political power to do it.
Frank, call yourself anything you want. But you are not Catholic.
Catholicism isn't cultural, it is religious. In nations that were once completely Catholic (Italy, Spain, Ireland, most of Latin America), the Faith becomes cultural because of the outward expressions. But if people don't believe in the Trinity, in the Real Presence, in the Sacraments, then they are not Catholic.
There is no ground where Catholics can support gay "marriage", which by the way is incredibly insulting to those who hold the real definition of marriage. Come up with another word for these unions, but they aren't and will never be marriage.
The Irish have decided to return to their pagan past and the persecution of the Irish Catholic Church has only just begun. And that persecution will spread throughout the world because there are millions that want payback on the Church and they will have the political power to do it.
Frank, call yourself anything you want. But you are not Catholic.
2
The Vatican ttoday called the Irish vote a "defeat for humanity." It was, instead, a victory for humanity over the remnants of a medieval morality.
6
You sure they didn't call it a "slippery slope"? Because that's the "reason" I hear cited most often.
While I certainly agree with many of my fellow Catholics, both in the U.S. and abroad, in calling for the right of same-sex marriage, I also have no qualms in a Catholic Church that does not allow those marriages to take place within the confines of the Church. There is no reason why the Catholic Church can’t accept same-sex married couples as fully practicing Catholics like any other individual or couple, but maintain their religious doctrine (and right) to not perform same-sex marriages as a sacrament within the Church.
Catholics are open to the idea of same sex marriage in spite of their church, not because of it.
4
This is not surprising from Catholic countries, because Jesus Christ said that gay people (known as eunuchs at that time) were born that way from their mother's womb. Matthew 19:12. This explains why Jesus never spoke out against homosexuality, but He did speak out against adultery hundreds of times. Many people, including clergy, either seem to be ignorant of this, or they conveniently ignore this important fact.
The shameful injustice against gay people has been defeated in Ireland. The Irish people have so much to be proud of right now. They have made history. They have shown a level of maturity and kindness towards their fellow human beings that is unseen in many countries. The scare campaigns have failed and love and acceptance have triumphed. Spain was the first Catholic country to legalise same-sex marriage, back in 2005, and the sky did not fall down. In years to come, we will look back and wonder what all the fuss was about.
The shameful injustice against gay people has been defeated in Ireland. The Irish people have so much to be proud of right now. They have made history. They have shown a level of maturity and kindness towards their fellow human beings that is unseen in many countries. The scare campaigns have failed and love and acceptance have triumphed. Spain was the first Catholic country to legalise same-sex marriage, back in 2005, and the sky did not fall down. In years to come, we will look back and wonder what all the fuss was about.
2
"Spain was the first Catholic country to legalise same-sex marriage, back in 2005". No, in fact Belgium was. The bill was promulgated on Feb 13 2003 and came into effect on June 1 2003.
Presidential candidates who cite religions doctrine as a basis for political positions do not respect the U.S. Constitution and cannot be trusted to defend it.
4
That’s because “Catholics” includes ... those for whom Catholicism is as much an ethnic as a religious identity."
And a great many of those have, for one reason or another, an enormous hostility towards the church.
And a great many of those have, for one reason or another, an enormous hostility towards the church.
1
You missed Malta off the list- the most Catholic and the most advanced in terms of homosexual and transgender rights.
4
When you join an organization and you want to be one of their standard bearers you also sign up to follow their rules and doctrine. As an American you may or may not agree with or support homosexual marriage, divorce and remarriage (addressed explicitly by Jesus as a sin in his admonishment of the woman at the well), and even abortion rights. Many Americans in public positions confuse their rights as Americans with Catholicism because they group up as both. The fact is when you or the group of people you associate with actively promote an ideology in direct conflict with Catholic doctrine you may call yourselves Catholic but you are not. I understand the media no longer considers accuracy as fundamental to their professional ethics and responsibility. Still I wish you would refrain from calling people and populations, who are neither, Catholics or "good Catholics". They are neither, they do not qualify as such. It is just as asinine as calling a Red Sox fan a great Yankees supporter. By definition those people don't exist. Please try a little harder to get it right.
1
There is more to being a part of an organization than being a standard bearer. Standards have to be set. Who does that? A "book" that doesn't distinguish between reality and metaphor?
More and more, people are simply what they choose to identify as.
Your swipe at the media aside, this is an opinion piece; as such, it's more opinion-based than fact-based.
So what happens years down the road when the Vatican makes a pronouncement you disagree with? Are you instantly non-Catholic?
I've attended Catholic masses scores of times. Doesn't make me any less of an atheist.
More and more, people are simply what they choose to identify as.
Your swipe at the media aside, this is an opinion piece; as such, it's more opinion-based than fact-based.
So what happens years down the road when the Vatican makes a pronouncement you disagree with? Are you instantly non-Catholic?
I've attended Catholic masses scores of times. Doesn't make me any less of an atheist.
You will be pleased to know that I did get it right. I left the Church. Do *not* call me a "lapsed Catholic" either. I'm not a life insurance policy.
You act as if church rules and doctrine cannot be altered or questioned. I believe that Jesus was himself a reformer. Just because the church has a position on something does not mean that all of the church's adherents have to agree with it. The Catholic church has changed dramatically over its 2000 year history and it will continue to change because their are people who will reform it like Jesus once reformed Judaism.
“We need to be stalwart supporters of traditional marriage,” Jeb Bush, who converted to Catholicism as an adult, said during a recent TV interview. “It’s at the core of the Catholic faith.”
I am a stalwart supporter of fudge ripple ice cream, Jeb, yet I don't propose banning every other flavor of ice cream, or marginalizing people who like other flavors. It's not a zero-sum game.
I would also point out that enshrining Catholic doctrine in law seems to run perilously close to establishment of religion, but I'm not a Constitutional scholar.
I am a stalwart supporter of fudge ripple ice cream, Jeb, yet I don't propose banning every other flavor of ice cream, or marginalizing people who like other flavors. It's not a zero-sum game.
I would also point out that enshrining Catholic doctrine in law seems to run perilously close to establishment of religion, but I'm not a Constitutional scholar.
3
Frank, the first thing I noticed about the list of countries in your opening paragraph is that it doesn't include the United States.
Not to overgeneralize, but members of the European Catholic laity have often struck me as somewhat to the left of American Catholics. The liberal seem more liberal; the conservative, less so. They usually, also, seem more detached from their religion and its hierarchy when making both personal moral decisions and public policy choices.
I think it's great that the Irish have been as supportive of same-sex marriage as demonstrated at the polls, but would hesitate to attribute such to the Church.
Ireland still has repressive laws constraining reproductive freedom, women still cannot be ordained as Catholic priests, and male priests are still not allowed to marry.
Regarding the latter point, I recently spotted the following bumper sticker suggesting a connection between religiously imposed celibacy and the Church's child molestation scandals:
ABSTINENCE MAKES THE CHURCH GROW FONDLERS
Not to overgeneralize, but members of the European Catholic laity have often struck me as somewhat to the left of American Catholics. The liberal seem more liberal; the conservative, less so. They usually, also, seem more detached from their religion and its hierarchy when making both personal moral decisions and public policy choices.
I think it's great that the Irish have been as supportive of same-sex marriage as demonstrated at the polls, but would hesitate to attribute such to the Church.
Ireland still has repressive laws constraining reproductive freedom, women still cannot be ordained as Catholic priests, and male priests are still not allowed to marry.
Regarding the latter point, I recently spotted the following bumper sticker suggesting a connection between religiously imposed celibacy and the Church's child molestation scandals:
ABSTINENCE MAKES THE CHURCH GROW FONDLERS
3
The Gospel reading for Pentecost this year, from the Gospel of John, included this quote from Jesus (John 16:4), "I still have many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now. When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth; for he will not speak on his own, but will speak whatever he hears, and he will declare to you the things that are to come. He will glorify me, because he will take what is mine and declare it to you."
For those of faith, this means that he knew we needed some time to able able to assimilate all the truths about love, forgiveness and acceptance that are our birthright as children of God. We are slowly becoming able to hear and 'bear' the truths about not discriminating against those of other races and gender orientation. We may actually get to the part about real equality between men and women at some point, too.
For those of faith, this means that he knew we needed some time to able able to assimilate all the truths about love, forgiveness and acceptance that are our birthright as children of God. We are slowly becoming able to hear and 'bear' the truths about not discriminating against those of other races and gender orientation. We may actually get to the part about real equality between men and women at some point, too.
Proclaiming that bias and bigotry emanate from Jesus seems silly. I think that many sane people find Catholicism’s arbitrary man-made rules at complete odds in the 21st century. At its core the “ values” that the most orthodox continue to screech about are rooted in a social milieu which may have had some meaning when they were enacted. The celibacy of priests was needed to keep church real estate in the hands of the church. The world’s view on real estate ownership has changed, but celibacy remains. Homosexuality can be found throughout the animal kingdom, and we’ve come to realize that knowing and accepting a human being who is one, does not mean the end of life as we know it. It means making the human experience larger, not smaller. Science is starting to identify the DNA that causes some to cheat sexually. The whole undertaking of having children has changed completely as time and the social conditions have evolved. Contraception is clearly sensible, especially if one doesn’t want a child. Pregnancy is not an appropriate remedy for sexual promiscuity. There is no sexual revolution going on. We are still the same people doing the things we have always done. Only now, we are having a better understanding of human behavior and its consequences. The religious threats of hell-fire never stopped much behavior in the past so why pretend that it can or should now? I know it’s hard to be a human being in the finest sense, but it is worth trying to be.
1
Leaving the Catholic Church was my first step at being a human being in the finest sense. I'm glad that some can reconcile their belief with their efforts, but the indoctrination I was subject to angered and suffocated me. Having the pastor of our church treat my Lutheran fiance as if he were a criminal caused our relationship to end since I still had my faith and naively thought he should accept it. I have never forgiven them.
After years of angry, hostile rebellion I'm content as an agnostic using as a religion the obligation to be kind to all beings and to mitigate pain.
The folks in Rome might consider taking that as their golden rule.
After years of angry, hostile rebellion I'm content as an agnostic using as a religion the obligation to be kind to all beings and to mitigate pain.
The folks in Rome might consider taking that as their golden rule.
One problem I see is that the press let's these leading Republicans off the hook by asking just one or two questions about their position on marriage equality.
Given the sharp turn in American public sentiment, and the enormous majority of Irish who voted for marriage equality, it's way past time for any member of the press interviewing candidates ask many in-depth questions as to how they justify their positions. There's so many basic and fundamental rights at issue, and the pat answer that "they support traditional marriage as between a man and a woman" is grossly insufficient. Let's get this out in the open air. Make these politicians squirm, and give in-depth reasons that somehow justify the denying of basic human rights to a segment of the population. I'm sick of the press not doing it's job. These journalists need to show some guts, and if they can't, let someone else do the job.
Given the sharp turn in American public sentiment, and the enormous majority of Irish who voted for marriage equality, it's way past time for any member of the press interviewing candidates ask many in-depth questions as to how they justify their positions. There's so many basic and fundamental rights at issue, and the pat answer that "they support traditional marriage as between a man and a woman" is grossly insufficient. Let's get this out in the open air. Make these politicians squirm, and give in-depth reasons that somehow justify the denying of basic human rights to a segment of the population. I'm sick of the press not doing it's job. These journalists need to show some guts, and if they can't, let someone else do the job.
1
It is clear that Catholics are much ahead in "decentralizing" the church. The German bishops took action without checking in first with Rome. True reform will happen only if the papal byzantine court known as Curia decentralizes as well. The days of top-down authoritarian rule are over. The Catholics at large, and their leaders in particular, will only be a viable community of faith by persuasion. Reality goes before ideas. There are plenty of same sex couples who are perfectly suited to teach Catholic hierarchs about true Christian virtues. It would also benefit the latter, in the words of Irish priest and writer Tony Flannery, to practice abstinence in proclaiming any words on sexual mores for at least a generation. It surely would be a good step toward the church's very reason of existence: to love and live The Gospel.
3
The Church is a peculiar mix of rigidity, fatalism, adaptation, exclusivity and acceptance. It rather depends on where you are and local custom and mores. I was born into a Catholic clan in a small town. I Went to Catholic school and most of our family activities were related to Church events and milestones. However, by my early teens I realized I did not "believe" I guess I was a born atheist. I made these viewpoints known to my family and that was the end of it. I was never rejected, disowned, denounced or disavowed in any way. In fact, as I got older I learned of several breaches of Canon Law committed by current and deceased relatives which were quietly overlooked as the ties of kinship proved stronger than ideology. I guess there are 'fundamentalist Catholics' as we define the term and my own experience is that when dogma trumps kinship, gentleness, and all the other virtues tolerance carries in its wake, that is the ugliest kind of vanity.
2
I had the amazing opportunity to be a newspaper photographer for 16 years. In that time I got to see, hear, and photograph lots of religious ceremonies. I certainly no expert in religion, but it always seemed to me the Catholics spoke more of the love of God/Christ, while the fundamentalist Protestants spoke more of our sin and the anger and punishment of God/Christ. Approaching people and issues with the open hand of love instead of the clinched fist of anger makes a big difference.
9
Thank you, Mr. Bruni, for this much needed reminder that the Catholic Church is not the Vatican or the College of Bishops, nor is it truly an organization of any kind. The Church is a communion of the baptized and has always been defined as such in its own theology. To a believer, this communion includes even the deceased.
Some of bishops and clergy may try to indoctrinate us with anti-progressive, even hateful ideals. Some old church ladies may try to fill our heads with superstition and prudish lists of rules. But what most of us learn from our Church is that the equal dignity of every individual and our personal responsibility to love and care for all are made divine in Christ's sacrifice.
This is seen not just in the steps taken by those Catholic countries you list, or in the polling statistics on American Catholics, but even in divide between the States. It's no coincidence that the most Catholic states are in the progressive camp, or even that the more Catholic areas of larger states like Texas lean far more progressive than the less Catholic areas.
I hope that more people will come to see that those loud voices crying out in words that lack Christ's love are only members of the communion like all of us. They are not the Church. We are the Church.
Some of bishops and clergy may try to indoctrinate us with anti-progressive, even hateful ideals. Some old church ladies may try to fill our heads with superstition and prudish lists of rules. But what most of us learn from our Church is that the equal dignity of every individual and our personal responsibility to love and care for all are made divine in Christ's sacrifice.
This is seen not just in the steps taken by those Catholic countries you list, or in the polling statistics on American Catholics, but even in divide between the States. It's no coincidence that the most Catholic states are in the progressive camp, or even that the more Catholic areas of larger states like Texas lean far more progressive than the less Catholic areas.
I hope that more people will come to see that those loud voices crying out in words that lack Christ's love are only members of the communion like all of us. They are not the Church. We are the Church.
6
This should have been an Editorial Pick! Still time to rectify this!
When Pharaoh was god on earth religion was the sole organizing feature of man's society. Four thousand years later many of the worst aspects of religion as moral imperative has been turned over to an ever more invasive government, which in turn has become ever more secular. So yes, it is possible that the vestigial social artifacts will be able to survive the approaching adolescence of humanity.
It it unlikely, however that the same can be said if we should ever become adults.
It it unlikely, however that the same can be said if we should ever become adults.
2
While Mr. Bruni, who writes brilliantly, may have been winking as he wrote today's column, the underlying message is how out-of-step Republicans are about same-sex marriage. "In an especially ambitious survey conducted over the course of 2014 by the Public Religion Research Institute about 60 percent of Americans who call themselves Catholic said that they approved of same-sex marriage, versus about 30 percent who didn't. The spread among all respondents was 54 to 38, and the group that clearly stood in the way of same-sex marriage wasn't Catholics. It was evangelical Protestants." And that now-apparent indictment reveals how the South in particular, which had a majority of Democrats until the Civil Rights Era and LBJ's push for recognizing the rights of African-Americans, turned those Democrats--Dixiecrats?--into Republicans, who now face rising anger over continuing disinfranchisement of Blacks but require outlets for racial bigotry, have made Hispanics the new Black with oppressive immigration laws. But what percentage of evangelicals represent America? Are they not largely the foundation of the Tea Party, aging whites who loved the 50s, in spite of Eisenhower's 90% tax. and who support announced and unannounced Republican candidates who flail against the "big government" that gave us the highway system that is failing, that pushes for improving education as they press for more charter schools and religious schools so as to indoctrinate the young. Shameful.
10
Its not the Republicans that are 'out of step' with gay marriage. The people that support it are in for a rude awakening at their end of life, if not sooner.
Good luck, you're going to need it.
Good luck, you're going to need it.
It is time for the pope to address this directly. It is the time for him to show his cards and take a solid position on gay marriage. He needs to guide the church either toward a more open and liberal view of the teachings of Christ or he needs to stay on the current conservative dogmatic path that the church has taken since John Paul II. I am not a catholic, so I am not one to judge which is best for the church, but I think this is a crucial juncture for the church and the pope needs to lead.
6
Ideally deciding whether same-sex marriage is right or wrong; acceptable or unacceptable, legal or not should come from inside the minds hearts and souls of those feeling a need to make those kinds of judgments. Decisions about how one feels about others behavior that might be different from their own, should come as a result of compassion and rational critical thinking; not from flawed institutions run by restricted boxed in minds that mindlessly swallow and accept their own particular brand of dogma. Organized religion ought to take a different more democratic approach. It should offer a variety of views about gay marriage or whatever the topic then lovingly encourage their followers to make up their own minds. In other words if all organized religion suddenly became more accepting and democratic and less totalitarian the world might be an overall better safer place. Ireland may be a sign that finally "the worm has turned."
6
Jeb Bush is absolutely right as far as being stalwart supporters of traditional marriage; but that doesn't mean we can't ALSO be stalwart supporters of gay marriage too. In other words, let's support the institution of marriage.
8
You're kidding me, right? It's not that 'catholics are leading the way', it's that 'former catholics, absolutely disgusted and repelled by the excesses and hypocrisy of the church who have utterly rejected its teachings and authority are leading the way'.
I know the difference is subtle, but if you look carefully, you'll find that 'real' catholics are still bitterly opposed to marriage equality and gay rights. Catholics still regard gays as an abomination no less than evangelicals.
I know the difference is subtle, but if you look carefully, you'll find that 'real' catholics are still bitterly opposed to marriage equality and gay rights. Catholics still regard gays as an abomination no less than evangelicals.
11
There are plenty of practicing Catholics, that still go to mass and still belong to the church that favor Gay civil marriages. I know because I'm one of them.
Sure, the Catholic Church isn't perfect, but it still teaches Christianity and despite some of the contradictory stands the church hierarchy takes, many Catholics get the Christian message that doesn't just allow tolerance of others but demands it.
Sure, the Catholic Church isn't perfect, but it still teaches Christianity and despite some of the contradictory stands the church hierarchy takes, many Catholics get the Christian message that doesn't just allow tolerance of others but demands it.
If Catholics and Evengelicals say they believe what the Word(i.e.Bible) says concerning gays and the proper God ordained institution of marriage being between a man and a woman ,then they are not "bitterly"(a little dramatic,aren't you?) opposed to "marriage equality"(whatever that means today) and gay rights,whatever those supposed rights are. Gays are just like anybody else,they are afforded the same rights everyone else has,there is no "special" rights needed!. As to the "abomination" point,not one single Catholic or Evangelical who truly believes the Bible has any say on that,for your info,that is what the Bible says and we simply repeat it and believe it! It is a perversion and abomination in God's eyes,and so we believe! Go be very gay in Saudi Arabia,you have it easy here!
It's the devil in the details that vexes so many Catholics who believe in the rights of same sex commitments and contracts, but who wonder how the word "marriage" can possibly mean two things at the same time.
I'm a Catholic, practicing, who believes that marriage is between a man and a woman. I also support the gay contractual commitments to each other. The world does not have enough love in it, and more committed love is essential.
A Protestant is not a Catholic. Some who claim they are Catholics are not Catholics. A Muslim is not a Catholic. We may all believe in God, but it does not mean we all believe the same. Nor does it mean that "marriage" can be stretched to mean what it never meant.
I'm a Catholic, practicing, who believes that marriage is between a man and a woman. I also support the gay contractual commitments to each other. The world does not have enough love in it, and more committed love is essential.
A Protestant is not a Catholic. Some who claim they are Catholics are not Catholics. A Muslim is not a Catholic. We may all believe in God, but it does not mean we all believe the same. Nor does it mean that "marriage" can be stretched to mean what it never meant.
4
Unfortunately,the agenda is not really arguing the "meaning" of marriage,they are using that as an excuse to normalize behavior that is anathema to God. I'm with you and your logic, it is a semantics game they play, in order to irritate those people of faith opposed to their aberrant behavior. Mind you,we believe what God says,not us,but what God said, and for expressing what we believe, then they proceed to call us bigots,not knowing who we are and why we say what we say. They also consider themselves the "tolerant" ones among us all. Go figure!
1
The meaning of marriage has changed several times over the course of human history. Society would really benefit from a greater knowledge of history and science.
1
Yes, I agree with van Lierop ... Belgium and France certainly don't seem to be very Catholic at all anymore. And what about Italy, Frank? Isn't that a very Catholic country? And how do things stand there in regards to same-sex marriage.
1
Do we stop calling them "cafeteria" Catholics and now call them "cultural" Catholics?
1
Let's not buy into the right's branding - or should we be making up names for Catholics who refused to participate in the torture and execution of theological dissidents, Bible translators and scientists?
NO,just call them "gone with the wind" Catholics,but call them!
Hmmmm...wonder how the five Catholics on the Supreme Court will rule.
11
I believe there are six...out of nine.
I believe that is six Catholics. The other three are Jewish. Take a look at:
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/05/10/six-catholics-three-jew... –
earle
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/05/10/six-catholics-three-jew... –
earle
Six! And three Jewish, no Protestants!
1
In the US, the Catholic faith is also larger than any other denomination. Perhaps we will avoid another flare up of American "exceptionalism" in this case.
The following quote is from an article in the NYTimes from a few days ago. I believe no truer words were ever spoken.
"Father Gerry O’Connor, a priest in the Cherry Orchard area of Dublin, said that notions of the traditional heterosexual nuclear family were changing, and he saw it as a moral imperative to advocate for same-sex marriage, even if the church does not agree. “I live in a disadvantaged area where every family structure exists, and when you sit down with those families your preconceptions can be challenged,” he said. “I feel strongly for these families and I see no evidence that a vote for equal status that would help end the present stigma is to the detriment of the common good.”"
"Father Gerry O’Connor, a priest in the Cherry Orchard area of Dublin, said that notions of the traditional heterosexual nuclear family were changing, and he saw it as a moral imperative to advocate for same-sex marriage, even if the church does not agree. “I live in a disadvantaged area where every family structure exists, and when you sit down with those families your preconceptions can be challenged,” he said. “I feel strongly for these families and I see no evidence that a vote for equal status that would help end the present stigma is to the detriment of the common good.”"
10
The core of Catholic belief is not marriage, but a belief, love and relationship with Jesus. Every week we affirm the Nicene Creed, reciting the fundamental tenets. Nope marriage is not a core belief.
13
Very well said. Everything falls into place if you love one another and have a strong relationship with, and follow Jesus. Just think: no wars, no greed, no poverty. . .
A factor that I think is missing in Frank Bruni's piece and in the replies posted so far is the very common phenomenon of Catholic adults' resentment of and rebellion against the rigid codes of conduct to which they were subjected as minors. Those who attended Catholic parochial schools as children are particularly reactionary to that culture. I think the seemingly gay-tolerant views of many Catholics are actually less pro gay rights than anti Catholic authoritarianism.
4
Sorry Mr. Bruni but this time you are imitating the anti marriage equality crowd who bend themselves into pretzels trying to justify their positions. You are defending the Catholic Church, the Bishops and Cardinals and the institution when they remain deeply homophobic with the exception of a brilliantly enlightened Pope who understands that he is not GOD. Just because a large percentage of Roman Catholic followers have rejected their churches' position doesn't mean that the institution is now good. Remember, these same people could find themselves ex-communicated at the whim of the leaders, and this has been done before to keep the believers in line.
4
I disagree with Govenor Bush. I am a lifelong Catholic and I believe that the cornerstone of our church is not traditional marriage but Family. All Catholics have the right to live in one. I suppose I am like the Catholics described in that I follow my own conscience, shaped by my faith with guidance from the Vatican, not edicts. I am dismayed to see abortion compared to same sex marriage as though they are equivalent. Along with Family, the Catholics I know value human life most highly. And we are not the followers of "the Church", we ARE the Church.
14
Thanks to this article and to the Comments, I finally understand why, despite church doctrines, the Catholics (and Jews) I know are entirely more forgiving, tolerant, and flexible as people than their Protestant counterparts. My father was raised Catholic and has always been tolerant and open-minded, likewise my Catholic relatives and friends (my siblings and I were raised Protestant). It seems to come down to family life, something Catholics always seem to over-emphasize. It really does seem to boil down to how good were your family relations because when you're part of a close-knit family, the dogma and rules lose out to everyday practical common sense.
3
Mr Bruni is too sanguine about Catholicism and intolerance.
In France, if he saw the angry crowds backed by the Church marching week after week against gay marriage, even AFTER the enactment of the law, even today, he would not think Catholics in general were so open minded. In fact, how far did the hard core Catholics, the extreme right, go to oppose gay marriage? They allied with Muslims and Islamicists to oppose gay rights.
Yes politics, or in this case, public morality, made strange bedfellows, a political marriage of convenience welcomed by both Catholics and Muslims. It was a very odd sight to see Muslims marching along far right Catholics against gays, when the far right would usually be marching against Islam in France.
Yes, France would have voted for gay marriage had there been a referendum, but the unholy alliance between the far right Catholics and Islamicists speaks of an uglier truth.
In France, if he saw the angry crowds backed by the Church marching week after week against gay marriage, even AFTER the enactment of the law, even today, he would not think Catholics in general were so open minded. In fact, how far did the hard core Catholics, the extreme right, go to oppose gay marriage? They allied with Muslims and Islamicists to oppose gay rights.
Yes politics, or in this case, public morality, made strange bedfellows, a political marriage of convenience welcomed by both Catholics and Muslims. It was a very odd sight to see Muslims marching along far right Catholics against gays, when the far right would usually be marching against Islam in France.
Yes, France would have voted for gay marriage had there been a referendum, but the unholy alliance between the far right Catholics and Islamicists speaks of an uglier truth.
50
Your analogy may be appropriate for France, which has its particular culture, but Mr. Bruni was referring to the larger Catholic world.
1
What you unfortunately don't seem to understand is that there is common cause against what both religions teach concerning gays. Their respective Good Books, find that practice an abomination because that is what their Holy Books say. They are not "corrupted" by the political pressures of the day,to accommodate to the political winds of the day,that would bring inconsistency to a clearly consistent standard,a standard not set by them but by God himself. And here I thought you were supposed to be respectful and tolerant of others and their opinions! Truth is nor "ugly nor pretty",truth is truth!
I think you miss the crucial point of the article.
What Bruni says is compatible with what you say, namely that hard-core right wingers with ferocious intensity oppose equal marriage and justice, but that they are minority (at least my numbers in the US and the new referendum in Ireland), and, that the media, should be more careful in drawing a line between the conservative french you mention and their counterparts in the US (the Jindals, and Rubios, and Santorums), and the rest of catholics; and the latter ones, it seems, are now growing without defecting from the label, but that is a matter of empirical support. Although given some of the Pope's statements and the example of the German bishops, even some (surely in the minority, viz., the bishop in San Francisco) in the Church itself seem to be genuinely changing, faster than other denominations.
What Bruni says is compatible with what you say, namely that hard-core right wingers with ferocious intensity oppose equal marriage and justice, but that they are minority (at least my numbers in the US and the new referendum in Ireland), and, that the media, should be more careful in drawing a line between the conservative french you mention and their counterparts in the US (the Jindals, and Rubios, and Santorums), and the rest of catholics; and the latter ones, it seems, are now growing without defecting from the label, but that is a matter of empirical support. Although given some of the Pope's statements and the example of the German bishops, even some (surely in the minority, viz., the bishop in San Francisco) in the Church itself seem to be genuinely changing, faster than other denominations.
1
I converted to the Catholic Church when I married. Unfortunately, the marriage was a disaster from the beginning, and fell completely apart after twenty years. By the time my ex died, he had been married twice more..in Protestant ceremonies. As far as I know, he did not attend Mass or have anything to do with the Catholic Church for more than 30 years. Yet, when he died, his non-Catholic wife sought a Priest to bury him, and he was buried after a High Mass in a Catholic Church. When I questioned the Priest about the service for someone who had led anything but an exemplary life, the Priest said that whether my ex got to Heaven or not was up to God. I wonder if God took into account the very large monetary gift to that Priest and church? Most likely!
10
Wow. This sounds like a lampoon. I know all Catholics are not like this. Who told you that your vendetta against your unhappy marriage has to be satisfied by the church? Like a very special official slam because you are the wronged one.
Apropos here to recall the other meaning of the word "catholic" - "broad in sympathies, tastes or interests," according to Merriam-Webster; "of broad or liberal scope," by the American Heritage's definition.
The cloistered, pampered aristocracy of the Church may not recall the source of its name. But its congregants are proving they may.
Jury still out on this pope, unfortunately. We'll see if the course of his tenure brings any deep lasting changes, or just lip service.
The cloistered, pampered aristocracy of the Church may not recall the source of its name. But its congregants are proving they may.
Jury still out on this pope, unfortunately. We'll see if the course of his tenure brings any deep lasting changes, or just lip service.
12
The distinction between Catholics and evangelical Protestants in the US is more partisan, ethnic and sectional than religious. White evangelical Southern Republicans oppose gay rights because that is what their group identity demands, not because of theology. Catholics are mostly "immigrants", which includes such groups as Irish, Italians and Poles as well as Hispanics, and as such are traditionally liberal and Democratic, and their group identity tends to dictate the opposite, regardless of what priests may say.
6
There's nothing more refreshing than a broad generalization to go along with my coffee and bagel in the morning. The idea that American Catholics are mostly immigrants is absurd. They may be the children of immigrants, but more likely they are third and fourth generation citizens. They are not "traditionally liberal and Democrat," but rather less judgmental than the typical God-fearing American.
11
Skeptonomist said "immigrants" not immigrants. He meant first, second, third and nth generation citizens. The first newcomers were not "immigrants", they were "colonists" - and an overwhelming proportion were Protestants. And most "immigrants" are liberal, and conservatism is most represented among non-"immigrants", i.e. the Protestant newcomers. The only exception to this is, roughly, German immigrants.
We are all immigrants. Don't be absurd.
1
Western countries are beginning to realize that providing equal rights to all citizens does not cause the sky to fall and allows for a flourishing and diverse economy. The story of Ireland is astounding and makes it the first enlightened 21st century democracy.
28
As someone who was raised in and then lived in majority Catholic states, MA and RI, though not a Catholic, I never felt the church put constraints on my life. The bishops made pronouncements that were either followed or not depending on how one felt personally. (Sexual abuses are anther matter.) About 3 years ago I moved south and religion is everywhere. It makes me most uncomfortable, because down here religion informs life. I went from a liberal to a very conservative area. These church goers seem more interested in getting themselves to heaven than in helping the poor and there are plenty of poor people down south. All the church soup kitchens and food banks will not adequately feed them. But who cares about the poor really, when you vote for politicians who slap a hefty sales tax on top of expensive food prices. It is both sad and infuriating. Believe me they never heard about Roger Williams and respect for all religious beliefs. Pope Francis thank you for talking about the poor and Jesus's message. NC voted for a constitutional amendment to ban same sex marriage that was overturned by the courts. The south is no Ireland; it seems they can't change.
32
Though born in Manhattan I have lived in the South for 51 years attending school here since the eighth grade.
I've been a Reformed Protestant my entire life. A person who moves south from New York and not raised in the Reformed Church would have a difficult time understanding the Protestant South's view of the bible as set text and not a "living text" as so many more Liberal Protestants believe. A Roman Catholic even less so.
There is a strong reluctance to place a church in a superior position to the scriptures. Careful study of the words of the text as written is a hallmark of orthodox Protestantism. Who the letter was written to and what caused it to be written are important to understanding what those words are saying today to the believer. Sola Scriptura, a watch phrase of the Reformation hasn't lost its meaning to orthodox believers. Thus no matter how many "experts" make pronouncement of what the text says a 500 year old tradition will not change among them. The scriptures govern culture not the opposite and those who allow the culture to change what plain language is saying will be pitied.
I've been a Reformed Protestant my entire life. A person who moves south from New York and not raised in the Reformed Church would have a difficult time understanding the Protestant South's view of the bible as set text and not a "living text" as so many more Liberal Protestants believe. A Roman Catholic even less so.
There is a strong reluctance to place a church in a superior position to the scriptures. Careful study of the words of the text as written is a hallmark of orthodox Protestantism. Who the letter was written to and what caused it to be written are important to understanding what those words are saying today to the believer. Sola Scriptura, a watch phrase of the Reformation hasn't lost its meaning to orthodox believers. Thus no matter how many "experts" make pronouncement of what the text says a 500 year old tradition will not change among them. The scriptures govern culture not the opposite and those who allow the culture to change what plain language is saying will be pitied.
1
Sorry, Mr. Bruni, but this kind of chauvinistic boosterism is painful to listen to given the shameful treatment of women -- the disdain for their health and reproductive rights -- in Catholic Ireland. Symphysiotomy, the breaking of women's pelvic bones during difficult births, was reportedly carried out between 1944-1992 in subservience to Catholic superstitions. Catholics will best demonstrate their "conscience" when they repudiate this cruelly patriarchal institution that intrudes on decisions that should be made in conversations between doctors and women. Any institution that perpetuates torturous and ruinous superstitions at the expense of life and limb does not deserve your gleeful defence, or respect for that matter. Morality and faith do not require an institutional affiliation.
33
The Catholic Church in the US is purging lay employees, including experienced, dedicated and popular high school teachers who marry same-sex partners in violation of the Church's so-called lifestyle contracts.
In some cases, the Catholic schools where the teachers were employed knew they were in same-sex relationships, also a violation of the lifestyle clause, but looked the other way. But marriage, a right under the laws of the state, was a step too far.
The US Catholic hierarchy must follow the lead of Catholic bishops in Germany and cease and desist from conditioning something as essential as employment on surrendering one's civil rights. Educators are not priests; they are members of civil society.
This gross violation of human rights must stop.
In some cases, the Catholic schools where the teachers were employed knew they were in same-sex relationships, also a violation of the lifestyle clause, but looked the other way. But marriage, a right under the laws of the state, was a step too far.
The US Catholic hierarchy must follow the lead of Catholic bishops in Germany and cease and desist from conditioning something as essential as employment on surrendering one's civil rights. Educators are not priests; they are members of civil society.
This gross violation of human rights must stop.
51
Ireland used to be one of the most devoutly Catholic countries but not any more. They have been drifting away for quite some time now and as a Catholic of Irish heritage all I can say is that it breaks my heart. My Irish ancestors, if they were alive, would not recognize this once great country. The secularists have taken over and we are slowly seeing the decline. Ireland used to be unique and a little bit above the rest. Not any more.
The U.S. has a higher rate of Catholic Church attendance than most of Europe. I see my Church filled with a lots of young people on Sundays and they are the church of tomorrow.
Not all Catholics were happy with the yes vote in Ireland including myself. The no side was gracious in defeat and will continue to speak out regarding traditional marriage concerns. I wish I was in Ireland to give the no side my support.
The U.S. has a higher rate of Catholic Church attendance than most of Europe. I see my Church filled with a lots of young people on Sundays and they are the church of tomorrow.
Not all Catholics were happy with the yes vote in Ireland including myself. The no side was gracious in defeat and will continue to speak out regarding traditional marriage concerns. I wish I was in Ireland to give the no side my support.
5
Yeah, Ireland was really above the rest when child abusing priests were moved from parish to parish and unwed mothers were locked up and effectively treated like slave labour.
The Catholic Church has played an important role in Ireland's history and fulfilled many of the roles of the state when the state wasn't able to including healthcare and education but it also did a lot of damage and I'm glad that Ireland has become a more secular and tolerant place.
The Catholic Church has played an important role in Ireland's history and fulfilled many of the roles of the state when the state wasn't able to including healthcare and education but it also did a lot of damage and I'm glad that Ireland has become a more secular and tolerant place.
4
KMW - I think it is not that people have been drifting away, but rather have been unable to find a home in the organised Church. Some Catholics lay and religious are unhappy with the Yes vote, many more are very happy.
We should also remember we voted in relation to Civil Marriage, the Catholic sacrament will remain as is. I as with many other Catholics saw it as complimenting our religious views to vote Yes, so as to have everybody equal and able to enjoy the same rights and protections in the marriages as any other citizen.
The Irish have not turned away from Catholicism, but rather from a Church structure which is at best out of touch with their lives (and needs a "reality check" as Archbishop Martin said) and at worst has ignored them, hurt them and in more than a few cases, failed to protect them against a most evil violation of their very being
We should also remember we voted in relation to Civil Marriage, the Catholic sacrament will remain as is. I as with many other Catholics saw it as complimenting our religious views to vote Yes, so as to have everybody equal and able to enjoy the same rights and protections in the marriages as any other citizen.
The Irish have not turned away from Catholicism, but rather from a Church structure which is at best out of touch with their lives (and needs a "reality check" as Archbishop Martin said) and at worst has ignored them, hurt them and in more than a few cases, failed to protect them against a most evil violation of their very being
Certainly, you may support a losing proposition. The Catholic church has a long tradition of rearguard actions.
1
In Canada 46% of the population are baptized as Catholics. As we know from our own country nor a small portion of those baptized drift away from the church to either other denominations or throw the towel in on religion.
Frank Bruni and the Catholic Church might like to consider all those baptized as practicing but that is hardly the case particularly in the past thirty years, as former Catholics have become fed up with pedophiles infecting the church.
Frank Bruni and the Catholic Church might like to consider all those baptized as practicing but that is hardly the case particularly in the past thirty years, as former Catholics have become fed up with pedophiles infecting the church.
13
He added a caveat which addresses your point..."the Roman Catholic Church has more adherents, at least nominally...".
I just wish the US could decide the issue of same sex marriage the same way the Irish did - via a referendum. We didn't eliminate slavery or give women the vote without a constitutional amendment, which requires overwhelming popular support. Asking for a majority vote for a major change to how marriage has been defined in common law for centuries in the US (excluding the temporary acceptance of polygamy in Utah) seems to be reasonable. Certainly better than letting 9 unelected judges make the decision.
7
Today's marriage has little to do with marriage as understood in common law for centuries. Under the historical construct, the women in a marriage essentially was the property of the male. Today's notion of equality of the partners to a marriage is as much at odds with the historical definition of marriage at common law as is same-sex marriage.
53
1. The elimination of slavery and granting women equal rights was never subjected to referendum. Elected officials, at the time, did what they thought was best but it was only through them that it passed.
2. Rights are never subjected to a vote. Ireland stands apart in that any and all major policies MUST be approved by the people in the form of an amendment before becoming law.
3. The same reason we don't submit rights to vote is the same reason the president is never elected by popular vote: the majority is not always right. Rights are not subjected to the whims of a majority, especially something that does not affect you in any way.
2. Rights are never subjected to a vote. Ireland stands apart in that any and all major policies MUST be approved by the people in the form of an amendment before becoming law.
3. The same reason we don't submit rights to vote is the same reason the president is never elected by popular vote: the majority is not always right. Rights are not subjected to the whims of a majority, especially something that does not affect you in any way.
23
We have a representative rather than a direct democracy for good reason -- the average member of the public isn't sophisticated enough to make good decisions about policy specifics. Just look at ancient Athens, or modern California, or any number of state referendums in which interest-financed advertising leads the public to vote against its own interests.
I do think it's regrettable that the decision on gay marriage will likely be made in the courts -- not because I believe the courts are wrong to rule for it, but because I believe that policies adopted legislatively create less resentment. I'm thinking in particular of Roe v. Wade.
However, no constitutional amendment is necessary for gay marriage, since banning it is almost certainly unconstitutional in light of our current understanding of homosexuality, e.g., that it isn't just a personal choice. Thus there's a strong equal protection argument for allowing it. That was not unfortunately true of slavery inasmuch as the Constitution had historically recognized it. And a constitutional amendment would require a supermajority, which is itself discriminatory inasmuch as a conservative minority would block it.
Finally, the reality of gay marriage is that it's a social change that is inevitable, given that younger people already favor it and the older bigots will die.
I do think it's regrettable that the decision on gay marriage will likely be made in the courts -- not because I believe the courts are wrong to rule for it, but because I believe that policies adopted legislatively create less resentment. I'm thinking in particular of Roe v. Wade.
However, no constitutional amendment is necessary for gay marriage, since banning it is almost certainly unconstitutional in light of our current understanding of homosexuality, e.g., that it isn't just a personal choice. Thus there's a strong equal protection argument for allowing it. That was not unfortunately true of slavery inasmuch as the Constitution had historically recognized it. And a constitutional amendment would require a supermajority, which is itself discriminatory inasmuch as a conservative minority would block it.
Finally, the reality of gay marriage is that it's a social change that is inevitable, given that younger people already favor it and the older bigots will die.
16
Not really. You are confusing the faithful with their clergy. And same-sex marriage has significantly less impact on vast swaths of humanity in comparison to the endemic rampant misogyny that denies women a clerical role and diminishes them to barefoot pregnant cooking cleaning baby making machines who are not wise nor worthy enough to monitor and manage their reproductive or sexual or general health.
Brazil is the most populous Catholic and Portuguese speaking nation on Earth. Only Nigeria has more people of African descent than Brazil. Portugal has a female President. Ireland has had a female President. Argentina currently has a female President and so does Chile.
Pope Francis is the first generation white Argentine born son of Italian immigrants who reportedly speaks fluent Italian without any accent. Italy has the lowest unnatural birth rate in Europe and one of the lowest in the world. Ireland is close behind. Pope Francis is deceptively liberal in theological tenor and tone but doctrine remains firmly rigid.
Are the keys to the kingdom in the hands of someone without sin who can morally judge his brothers and sisters? Or not? Are the faithful still full of faith? Or are they faithless? What faith do the faithful follow?
Brazil is the most populous Catholic and Portuguese speaking nation on Earth. Only Nigeria has more people of African descent than Brazil. Portugal has a female President. Ireland has had a female President. Argentina currently has a female President and so does Chile.
Pope Francis is the first generation white Argentine born son of Italian immigrants who reportedly speaks fluent Italian without any accent. Italy has the lowest unnatural birth rate in Europe and one of the lowest in the world. Ireland is close behind. Pope Francis is deceptively liberal in theological tenor and tone but doctrine remains firmly rigid.
Are the keys to the kingdom in the hands of someone without sin who can morally judge his brothers and sisters? Or not? Are the faithful still full of faith? Or are they faithless? What faith do the faithful follow?
9
Brazil not Portugal has a female President. Another junior moment.
I've heard this term "unnatural birth rate" from you before, blackmamba. Would you mind explaining what it means?
Hey Bruce. They are way more likely than not using medical physical birth control techniques. Contrary to the teachings of the Catholic Church.
1
Good for the Catholic bishops of Germany!
It is about time that something other than a sex-related issue is being used to determine who can be employed by the Church. As a Catholic, and one that has done volunteer work under Catholic auspices, I have noted that the Church has had no problem providing employment to those that are lacking in mercy, the judgmental, arrogant, uncharitable, unfriendly, cruel, uncaring, and those having little or no interest in social justice -- and some of these employees have even occupied the clerical ranks.
Although I believe marriage can and has been correctly defined by the Church as a union between a man and a woman, the state can define it any way that it wants to define marriage, making it a union between those of the same sex. It is not the job of the state to enforce Catholic teaching. Why does the Church need the state to define marriage in the same way it defines marriage?
It is about time that something other than a sex-related issue is being used to determine who can be employed by the Church. As a Catholic, and one that has done volunteer work under Catholic auspices, I have noted that the Church has had no problem providing employment to those that are lacking in mercy, the judgmental, arrogant, uncharitable, unfriendly, cruel, uncaring, and those having little or no interest in social justice -- and some of these employees have even occupied the clerical ranks.
Although I believe marriage can and has been correctly defined by the Church as a union between a man and a woman, the state can define it any way that it wants to define marriage, making it a union between those of the same sex. It is not the job of the state to enforce Catholic teaching. Why does the Church need the state to define marriage in the same way it defines marriage?
72
Now if the Catholic Church could just cut women some slack.
By that, I mean back off completely from the contraceptive ban. Just stop.
And why not change the attitude of the church on abortion from one of vindictiveness to one of sadness. All we can feel now is the hate.
The only positive move I've seen for women is when the Pope decided to let the nuns' organization out of the penalty box.
By that, I mean back off completely from the contraceptive ban. Just stop.
And why not change the attitude of the church on abortion from one of vindictiveness to one of sadness. All we can feel now is the hate.
The only positive move I've seen for women is when the Pope decided to let the nuns' organization out of the penalty box.
143
This will happen a long time from now, if ever. Misogyny is the last bastion of conservatism.
It may be interesting to note that in the Catholic Church any "marriage" outside the church is not recognized as a marriage by the Church. Any secular or religious (Non-Catholic) wedding ceremony is not viewed as a true marriage in the eyes of the Church. For this reason, many Catholics may view same sex marriages as civil unions in nature and do not threaten their core values. Marriage within the Church (and only within the Church) is considered a sacrament and as long as the state does not intervene with this doctrine, the laity, for the most part, just shrug their shoulders at the concept of same sex marriages.
One could argue this rationale is the true spirit of the separation of church and state.
One could argue this rationale is the true spirit of the separation of church and state.
54
This statement misses the mark by quite a bit. The Catholic Church does not recognize a marriage between a Catholic and a non-Catholic when the wedding is performed outside the Catholic Church. It does, however, recognize marriages between non-Catholics that are performed outside the Church, as any Catholic wanting to marry a divorced Protestant would find out pretty quickly.
5
To correct: the only secular or not-Catholic religious marriages that the Catholic church considers invalid are those in which one party is a Roman Catholic who does not have permission for someone other than a priest or deacon to witness the vows. We consider all other marriages valid unless one of the parties had a previous marriage. That is why, at the present time, if a Protestant (for example) was married and now divorced and wants to marry a Catholic, we ask them to seek a church annulment of their first marriage (even though this marriage was contracted between two Protestants)
Excellent and brief explanation of the issue and how, given the Church's own doctrine, this should be looked at through the eyes of Catholics and the Church. What is at stake here is the right to enter into a civil contract, nothing more or less. It has nothing to do with the religious concept of marriage. Why don't all leaders of the Church see it that way?
1
I regard the issue of same sex marriage just about the same way as I regard remarriage after divorce -- they are basically civil issues -- that have no effect on my religious belief. The right of a same sex couple to marry has been settled law for decades. The right of a person to seek a divorce and remarry has also been settled law. Religious practice or custom or law is a personal obligation and should remain so.
74
Perhaps you could explain that to the arch- (and I use that word in multiple contexts) conservative justices on the SCOTUS as they rule on this issue.
"a champion of overpopulation"
What overpopulation? America has a birth rate of 1.86, and its on the high side for the developed world. When two parents produce fewer than two children, I shouldn't have to explain the end result. And with the continued advance of divorce, abortion, contraception, and homosexuality...there is very little reason to think the birth rate is going to go anywhere but down.
Far from being a "champion of overpopulation" (though you would probably struggle to provide even a ballpark estimate for a "right sized" population), the religious right are among the few who still understand what is necessary to preserve the human race.
The future belongs to those who show up.
What overpopulation? America has a birth rate of 1.86, and its on the high side for the developed world. When two parents produce fewer than two children, I shouldn't have to explain the end result. And with the continued advance of divorce, abortion, contraception, and homosexuality...there is very little reason to think the birth rate is going to go anywhere but down.
Far from being a "champion of overpopulation" (though you would probably struggle to provide even a ballpark estimate for a "right sized" population), the religious right are among the few who still understand what is necessary to preserve the human race.
The future belongs to those who show up.
Reduced birth rates will not lead to extinction. People will always breed. If the human population were to decline a bit and stabilize somewhere below the 7 billion of us that there are now, it would be a boon not only to our descendants but to every other living thing on the planet also.
75
Let's see; India had forced sterilization. China has a one child policy. Even with the black plague, which decimated some 35% of the world's population, the numbers bounced back. With a vengeance.
There is just so much that Mother Earth can support.
There is just so much that Mother Earth can support.
20
Homosexuals constitute approximately 5 % of the population (estimates vary between 3% up to 10%). Given that small a percentage, and considering the fact that some homosexuals also have children, it hardly seems they would have an impact on the decline in human population. Divorce also seems an unlikely cause since the vast majority of people don't marry thinking that the relationship could end, therefore, we shouldn't have children. There is also no indication that abortion rates are any higher than they have been historically, i.e., just because abortion was or is illegal in many countries doesn't stop it from happening anyway.
Most of the reasons you cite for declining population aren't valid ones. Just re-treads of the old saw about declining morals (when have they ever not been in decline?) leading to dire consequences.
Most of the reasons you cite for declining population aren't valid ones. Just re-treads of the old saw about declining morals (when have they ever not been in decline?) leading to dire consequences.
31
You mention Belgium and France as "catholic" countries. I know these countries quite well. In both these countries the RC church has virtualy lost all its power. These countries are as secular as, for instance, The Netherlands. The reason these countries are socially far more progressive tyan teh USA is that they are de facto non-religious.
79
The RCC is looking more like its Lutheran and Episcopalian sister denominations - and that is a good thing. Let's emphasize that "small 'c' catholic" church.
Priorities need to include eliminating mandatory celibacy and the ordination of women.
Priorities need to include eliminating mandatory celibacy and the ordination of women.
24
One Lutheran denomination (ELCA). The other synods remain unalterably opposed.
1
The nice thing about regular humans is that most of us are catholic with a lower case 'c'.
The word catholic means wide-ranging in tastes and interests; having sympathies with all; broad-minded; liberal.
On the other hand, the hierarchy of the Catholic Church has distinguished itself as a global center of the pederasty arts, a champion of overpopulation, institutional misogyny, a reliable friend of conservative hypocrisy, the destruction of the common good that right-wing politics causes inevitably causes humanity....and last but not last, the great allure of false religious hope to solve real world problems.
In the rich history of right-wing political causes, the Catholic Church has done little more than hijack the good word 'catholic' and turn it into a monster.
Fortunately, the world is beginning to see through the holy smokescreen that is organized religion and abandoning it for their brains.
It is reason and thought that is holy; it is reason and thought that tells us homosexuals, minorities and the oppressed ought to be lent a helping hand and given individual respect.
No one needs a religious textbook to tell them to be nice to other people.
Ironically, it is religious textbooks and religious leaders that often wind up teaching people to be spiteful to other people.
The age of increasing atheism is a gorgeous evolution of the human mind and human society.
Off with organized religion's hypocritical heads !
The word catholic means wide-ranging in tastes and interests; having sympathies with all; broad-minded; liberal.
On the other hand, the hierarchy of the Catholic Church has distinguished itself as a global center of the pederasty arts, a champion of overpopulation, institutional misogyny, a reliable friend of conservative hypocrisy, the destruction of the common good that right-wing politics causes inevitably causes humanity....and last but not last, the great allure of false religious hope to solve real world problems.
In the rich history of right-wing political causes, the Catholic Church has done little more than hijack the good word 'catholic' and turn it into a monster.
Fortunately, the world is beginning to see through the holy smokescreen that is organized religion and abandoning it for their brains.
It is reason and thought that is holy; it is reason and thought that tells us homosexuals, minorities and the oppressed ought to be lent a helping hand and given individual respect.
No one needs a religious textbook to tell them to be nice to other people.
Ironically, it is religious textbooks and religious leaders that often wind up teaching people to be spiteful to other people.
The age of increasing atheism is a gorgeous evolution of the human mind and human society.
Off with organized religion's hypocritical heads !
266
I love the attack on religion ... as it is all evil. It is clear that any organization run by people will by hypocritical and never be pure.
As for the gorgeous evolution of atheism - let's look at the 20th Century - Hitler (atheist), Stalin (went to theology school and renounced God, atheist), Mao (atheist) ... and where are the atheist orphanages, hospitals etc? Hmm. Where are the atheist food kitchens. How is that people of faith donated more of their time and money to charity than atheists. Not too sure how the gorgeous evolution of no moral absolutes will work out. Can you tell me?
As for the gorgeous evolution of atheism - let's look at the 20th Century - Hitler (atheist), Stalin (went to theology school and renounced God, atheist), Mao (atheist) ... and where are the atheist orphanages, hospitals etc? Hmm. Where are the atheist food kitchens. How is that people of faith donated more of their time and money to charity than atheists. Not too sure how the gorgeous evolution of no moral absolutes will work out. Can you tell me?
1
Socrates, for President. Very well put if only your words had an impact on the Two Billion People who are killed or kill in the name of religion.If indeed this is the demise of organized religion, what will take it's place.I suggest the length of your nose should determine what group you should join. People with long noses should live in wide open spaces to enable them to breath properly, & people with short noses should live in crowded cities where their nose would not get in the way of other people.In order to keep order, long nose people should not be allowed to marry short nosed people.This is my idea of a perfect world.
PS nudity is an option,, no mater what the size of your nose is.
PS nudity is an option,, no mater what the size of your nose is.
1
A somewhat judgmental comment. No human institution is perfect -- even the New York Times itself! If the Catholic Church was as evil as you insinuate, how has it survived these thousands of years? Is there any institution extant that is and has been totally free of child sexual abuse? If Catholic clergy are so evil, how do you explain Mother Theresa? Oscar Romero? Theodore Hesburgh?
1
Christianity teaches compassion. As a rebel himself, Jesus defied the narrow Hebrew traditions and focused more on a liberal interpretation, on the "spirit of the law". It makes sense that countries with a strong Catholic base reflect this part of their identity. They show compassion that stands above "the law".
20
Despite the official anti-gay rhetoric of the Catholic church, there is a humanism to Catholicism that is missing in much Protestantism (see: https://mgpiety.files.wordpress.com/2012/10/the-long-term.pdf ). It's that humanism, I believe, that accounts for this openness toward homosexuality.
26
You must be a man. This church has relegated women to a second class status and the new pope doesn't seem to really want to change that.
As Frank Bruni points out, we Catholics are a pretty diverse bunch. The word "catholic" itself means universal - by name we do not think in lockstep with each other.
Some Catholics in the political sphere have been trading on their conservative views to make themselves palatable to the most conservative of the religious right. But they are no more and no less Catholic than I am and I would never cast a vote for any of them.
Everyone knows that the Bishops emphasize Catholic teaching that regards homosexual behavior as a sin. But teaching also requires us to treat each other as brothers and sisters, and tells us to leave the judging to God. AND it tells us that we not only may but must use our consciences as the foundation of our actions. When we find an action unconscionable, like openly discriminating against and marginalizing another human being, we are required to act accordingly, and shun that action. Catholic support of gay marriage makes all kinds of sense.
Which is how we can all be Catholics, active engaged CAtholics, and disagree with the Bishops.
Some Catholics in the political sphere have been trading on their conservative views to make themselves palatable to the most conservative of the religious right. But they are no more and no less Catholic than I am and I would never cast a vote for any of them.
Everyone knows that the Bishops emphasize Catholic teaching that regards homosexual behavior as a sin. But teaching also requires us to treat each other as brothers and sisters, and tells us to leave the judging to God. AND it tells us that we not only may but must use our consciences as the foundation of our actions. When we find an action unconscionable, like openly discriminating against and marginalizing another human being, we are required to act accordingly, and shun that action. Catholic support of gay marriage makes all kinds of sense.
Which is how we can all be Catholics, active engaged CAtholics, and disagree with the Bishops.
37
Thanks, Frank. I think Catholics have finally figured out that one can challenge Vatican orthodoxy on important social-sexual issues like gay marriage and not "go to hell." And I think they have figured out that so many of the things they find wanting in the official conservative Church--celibacy, the role of women, and the like--are artificial constructs laid down by clergy over the centuries for economic or political reasons. Not based on teachings of Jesus and the Apostles.
What non-practicing and practicing Catholics want from Mother Vatican is a greater emphasis on the redeeming power of love. Nobody is challenging sacred theology regarding Christ's passion or the transformative experience of the Eucharist. They are challenging the hypocrisy of Mother Vatican on sexual expression of love, particularly among the clergy.
But let's not omit the influence of education and social media. Countries like Ireland no longer live in the dark ages of religious mandates. As more US priests display liberal leanings (trust me, there are many!), Catholics are awakening to the idea that they can still love a church when it's wrong.
Not so US Republican candidates, who are pulling the Catholic card to appeal to the evangelical base of Biblical literalists. And perhaps appeal a bit to the moralistic judgment and bigotry of this same base who feels it's fine and dandy to promote religious beliefs in a secular society.
What non-practicing and practicing Catholics want from Mother Vatican is a greater emphasis on the redeeming power of love. Nobody is challenging sacred theology regarding Christ's passion or the transformative experience of the Eucharist. They are challenging the hypocrisy of Mother Vatican on sexual expression of love, particularly among the clergy.
But let's not omit the influence of education and social media. Countries like Ireland no longer live in the dark ages of religious mandates. As more US priests display liberal leanings (trust me, there are many!), Catholics are awakening to the idea that they can still love a church when it's wrong.
Not so US Republican candidates, who are pulling the Catholic card to appeal to the evangelical base of Biblical literalists. And perhaps appeal a bit to the moralistic judgment and bigotry of this same base who feels it's fine and dandy to promote religious beliefs in a secular society.
142
you must know mostly older priests. The younger, newly ordained, are rapidly advancing into the 16th century while many of the older (so-called Vatican II priests) are chaffing at the bit to move forward on a number of issues: some internal to the church such as the ordination of women; optional celibacy, new ways of selecting bishops with greater "say so" for the local church (laity, religious, clergy); others on broader issues such as a re-evaluation of sexual morality, more emphatic action for justice and peace.
This column presents good evidence for why the relativists among lay Catholics are wiser than the church hierarchy who are forever clinging to "absolutes" with an expiration date of 1000 AD.
31
Too bad about women's health and reproductive rights. Not a trade off here (marriage equality is a good thing) but half the population seems to get no respect.
64
Yes, the Church still has the women to knock about....
Mr. Bruni's article is an interesting analysis of changes in the Catholic Church, but he forgets to mention that all the sex abuse cases and cover-ups over the years have lost the Church the high ground for any moral judgments they make about sexual conduct. How does an organization that methodically condoned and covered up the rape of little children, stand up now and have the temerity to judge anyone for divorcing, loving a same-sex partner or using contraception to avoid pregnancies that lead to abortions?
101
The Irish are widely viewed as one of the most racist of European countries, with widespread harassment of African and Muslim immigrants. And the history of Irish racism is strong, with Irish Americans having led the way in Boston's violent opposition to busing. The Irish have a shameful history of racial hatred. Why they champion gay rights I can't say. But to view the Irish as champions of human rights couldn't be more wrong.
6
Interestingly, you categorize a whole large group of people based on the actions of a few and stereotypes . Isn't that racist?
3
Maybe things and they have changed. Maybe you could do that to.
3
By whom, I would have to ask. In fact, Ireland is generally viewed in Europe as liberal with respect to its support of human rights and not as Michjas suggests the most racist of European countries. I would suggest he/she try living in Europe, perhaps even attending a football game in Italy, or some of the other southern countries, to hear the fans make gorilla noises when a black player enters the field. This happens quite frequently even despite heavy fines by FIFA. As far as I am aware this has not happened in Ireland and one hopes it never does. Ireland, like all countries, has its fair share of racists, but it could never compete with the United States in that respect and certainly not the "fair" state of Arizona.
3
I am tremendously heartened by the recent overwhelming vote by the Irish to embrace gay marriage. Unfortunately, the Catholic Church continues its relentless and deeply misogynist, patriarchal history in refusing to offer any such embrace or support to women around the globe, when it comes to reproductive healthcare access and ability to make their own decisions. The U.S. is horribly repugnant and medieval in this regard, albeit acknowledging the reality that it is not only the Catholic Church but other right wing Christian denominations as well, fomenting this reactionary and backwards policy. Let us not overlook the fact that Ireland recently allowed a woman to die, due to catastrophic medical complications during a pregnancy, rather than to permit her to obtain a lifesaving abortion. Far too many right wing states in this nation openly espouse that same view. We have a very long way to go when it comes to equal rights for all women.
61
"It is not only the Catholic Church but other right wing Christian denominations as well, fomenting this"...
It is the politicians who gained by fomenting the right wing in order to get votes.
It is the politicians who gained by fomenting the right wing in order to get votes.
There is no salvation in making other people unhappy.
54
As evidenced by the comments from the Vatican on the referendum in Ireland, Catholics on the ground may be ready for a new dawn, but those in power are as regressive as ever. So much for this new kinder, gentler Pope.
9
The commonality of Catholic's views on gay marriage has been heavily tilted by the words of Pope Francis that he loves all God's creatures including gays, divorced couples etc. For those Catholics on the fence on gay marriage, it enabled them to think differently and positively for those who are different than themselves. What this commonality really suggests, is that broader and much faster changes are now necessary in the Church itself, Catholic parishioners demand it and some of the changes are easily achieved unlike the concept of gay marriage. For gays especially those who are Catholic, it means broader acceptance and for those non-gay parishioners a means of accepting gay marriage. We are all God's creatures after all, let us all be respected.
6
There are many devout, committed Catholics who have searched their hearts and prayed for direction and have come to the conclusion that God does not want them to choose between beloved family member and their beloved faith. I would say the same things probably very true for many faith filled folks of all denominations. As a result, like the contraception issue, the authority speaks, while the majority of the faithful silently disagree. And make their choice that just like there are aspects of parents and siblings and cousins etc that they strongly disagree with, they are still family and just cannot be walked away from. The Church is a big part of who I am. Along with my family, it has had a presence in every momentous moments of my life. And just like with my parents and siblings, we have had our fights, some of them very big and painful, but in the end I always have to know that all that I am, they are a part of. And I want to be a part of whatever this current incarnation the Living Church grows to become.
12
In this country, I suppose I would be counted as a Jew, but only as an accident of birth and a kind of cultural legacy passed on to me by my parents. There's no getting away from the designation, even though I haven't set foot in a synagogue, lit a candle or refrained from adding bacon to everything in decades. Catholics are not leading the way. Catholicism is falling away. Santorum and Jindal are the real Catholics leading a race to the bottom. If you're for gay marriage, you're not a Catholic anymore, at least not in the religious sense. The Pope, despite nice statements and an attempt to be humble, is Catholic, and the Vatican's reaction to the vote in Ireland tells you all you need to know about whether Catholics are leading the way. They're not. Jews aren't either. Muslims? Nope. People are leading the way. Free thinking people. And the way, which might be called "enlightenment," has nothing to do with religion or religious affiliation. It's in direct opposition to religion.
26
I was at my family picnic Memorial Day. It's a big multigenerational affair. We're now also multi-ethnic and multi-racial. And of course Catholic. For years Lesbian and gay family members and often their partners have attended and felt the same love and acceptance as we all feel during that annual gathering.
It's what the cultural warriors, Catholics included, fear most: that, uncloseted, our LGBT loved ones will come to be known, welcomed, and loved. You see, they know that's what Catholics tend to do. Family comes first. Family is often our gateway to tolerance and then the embrace that says come here, kid, tell me what's new.
It's what the cultural warriors, Catholics included, fear most: that, uncloseted, our LGBT loved ones will come to be known, welcomed, and loved. You see, they know that's what Catholics tend to do. Family comes first. Family is often our gateway to tolerance and then the embrace that says come here, kid, tell me what's new.
89
This is also the reason for something I and others have noticed with astonishment: extremely Republican and Mormon Utah is surprisingly liberal on gay rights. When young people there realize they are gay, they don't go into the closet until they can move to San Francisco or New York. They continue to stay close to their families geographically and emotionally, and their families continue to love and accept them.
The Catholic population is more enlightened than their leadership, dusty old men who have been sequestered with other dusty old men for decades. This Pope is a refreshing breath of fresh air. As for the politicians cited, they are pandering fools catering to the religious right.
21
WHAT IS SACRED? Those who view themselves as involved with the Catholic Church have, according to Frank Bruni's article, demonstrated a freedom of conscience indicative of a high degree of spirituality and flexibility. To many Catholics, the church's mishandling of the decades-long crimes of pedophile priests was reason enough for many to turn from the dictates of the hierarchy to their own consciences, to find what is sacred. It is powerful to witness changes where people turn toward the sacred and away from evil based on independent personal convictions as a leap of faith, as opposed to depending on the dictates of others. Indeed, in a number of cases, it is possible that had the priests been in a same-sex marriage, some of them would have been satisfied sexually and not have a need to engage in furtive, illegal and damaging behaviors. Some, but clearly not all. It is time to research and accept the history of same sex relationships that received recognition in the past, especially those that the historical record shows involved the Catholic Church.
4
What may be happening is that the authentic spiritual, loving, Christianity of Jesus and Pope Francis is asserting itself against institutionalized, dogmatic Catholic church hierarchy. The Catholicism of the Vatican has managed over the centuries to divorce itself from its core, which (contra Jeb Bush) is not traditional marriage, but Christian love. In the contest of Catholicism vs. Christianity the deeper, more personally spiritual, side will win.
47
Thanks for this and a lot of clarifications.
I wish to add what I think are needed corrections to the (truly excellent!) reporting by the NYT on the Irish referendum.
This was a vote for human rights, for civil rights, this was a vote for sons, daughters, cousins, mothers, fathers, this was a vote for family.
If there were people who voted YES because they wanted to take swipe at the RCC and nothing else, well maybe someday social researchers will prove me wrong but I opine you could count then on the fingers of one hand.
You quoted the Dublin Archbishop; he conducted himself with dignity. Many prominent priests and nuns said they were voting YES.
The Dublin Archbishop voted NO; his post-election comments were sane.
Not so, the Vatican's Cardinal Parolin who described the result as a "defeat for humanity". Deeply insulting to the Irish people in an incredible exercise of democracy, deeply depressing that such Churchillian flourishes were absent in response to 70 years of rape and torture in Ireland.
I wish to add what I think are needed corrections to the (truly excellent!) reporting by the NYT on the Irish referendum.
This was a vote for human rights, for civil rights, this was a vote for sons, daughters, cousins, mothers, fathers, this was a vote for family.
If there were people who voted YES because they wanted to take swipe at the RCC and nothing else, well maybe someday social researchers will prove me wrong but I opine you could count then on the fingers of one hand.
You quoted the Dublin Archbishop; he conducted himself with dignity. Many prominent priests and nuns said they were voting YES.
The Dublin Archbishop voted NO; his post-election comments were sane.
Not so, the Vatican's Cardinal Parolin who described the result as a "defeat for humanity". Deeply insulting to the Irish people in an incredible exercise of democracy, deeply depressing that such Churchillian flourishes were absent in response to 70 years of rape and torture in Ireland.
27
Unfortunately, the Catholic church won't change it's message. They will not say the simple truth that their interpretation of scripture has been simply wrong. It will require hundreds of years, so that it will not appear to be a mere reaction to current social trends. Also, it will have to manufacture a plausible rationale that says the Church has always supported same-sex marriage, but that the people in the past were misunderstood. So it was for Galileo (the lie that the Church never said that the sun wasn't the center of the solar system, but Galileo was only convicted of usurping the power of the church to interpret scripture), and the Inquisition (the lie that local government officials were acting on their own when they tortured, well, just about anyone). Meanwhile, millions will suffer.
8
Perhaps the Irish, along with many other humans of all ethnicities and nationalities, have finally realised that the concept of divinity is simply too large to be contained in one book, one entity, one gender, one church and its dogma.
23
As a gay Catholic I love my Faith deeply. I have never made a choice of personal conscience without reflection, and sometimes agony, over whether it is the right decision. In fact I have often sought the counsel of a priest or other in organizing my thoughts and reasoning. The teachings of the Church are important to me.
Nevertheless, I must agree with the majority of American Catholics that civil gay marriage is a most important civil right for the LGBT community. There is no other way that really works to protect gay families from discrimination, whether at the child's crib, the hospital bedside, or at the reading of the will. These everyday issues are at least as important as proclaiming each other's love publicly, so I must support marriage equality. I pray that SCOTA will act wisely to broaden equal marriage rights to the whole of the country.
I can hear the roar of the opposition now, but I cannot read Scripture as a fundamentalist. The texts that are used to cite God's hatred of homosexuality were written for very specific groups and have been translated so many times from the original Hebrew and Greek, that even Biblical scholars seem unsure of the exact meaning. None of the texts, however, were or are directed at today's loving same-sex couples; who need and deserve equal footing in the civil arena.
So, here is my reality check. Do we continue to try and impose personal religious beliefs in civil law or do we make the jump to inclusivity? " I vote for the latter.
Nevertheless, I must agree with the majority of American Catholics that civil gay marriage is a most important civil right for the LGBT community. There is no other way that really works to protect gay families from discrimination, whether at the child's crib, the hospital bedside, or at the reading of the will. These everyday issues are at least as important as proclaiming each other's love publicly, so I must support marriage equality. I pray that SCOTA will act wisely to broaden equal marriage rights to the whole of the country.
I can hear the roar of the opposition now, but I cannot read Scripture as a fundamentalist. The texts that are used to cite God's hatred of homosexuality were written for very specific groups and have been translated so many times from the original Hebrew and Greek, that even Biblical scholars seem unsure of the exact meaning. None of the texts, however, were or are directed at today's loving same-sex couples; who need and deserve equal footing in the civil arena.
So, here is my reality check. Do we continue to try and impose personal religious beliefs in civil law or do we make the jump to inclusivity? " I vote for the latter.
25
Gay marriage seems now to have become the accepted norm for our times, and as Bruni avers, with the support of many Catholics. One wonders about the ramifications, cannot help but wonder; it's a pretty historic change in accepted mores among cultures influence by the Judaeo-Christian traditions. It would be interesting, and informative, to have studies of how influential have been the scandals within the Catholic Church, e.g. pedophilia among the clergy, upon the change in mores and other studies of early trends in the impact of the "progressivism" on gay rights upon the institution of marriage in Western civilization. In what sense will the "new" marriage definition affect the institution as a whole? Will it ever again be one of the "rocks" of civilization as historically understood?
2
Marriage hasn't been the historically monolithic institution you seem to believe it was. Polygamy was common in Judeo-Christian tradition (read the Bible...) and recently continued to be so for Mormons and Muslims in the past 200 years. Marriage was not an institution of love -- it was one of property rights, abetted by the dowry -- from ancient Roman times until the 20th century. And it was that change -- of marriage-as-property to marriage-as-love -- that paved the way for same-sex marriage. If you can marry the consenting adult whom you love, why would it matter if that person is of the same sex? Marriage changed a lot more *prior* to same-sex marriage than it will as a result of it.
The "institution" of marriage involved multiple forms. You need to read some history. How many mistresses did Louis XIV have? He was king of the "oldest daughter of the Church."
I simply would appreciate it if more of the world turned to more reason and less "religion."
20
This may well be true, but an important fact is missing: the fate of gay marriage is in the hands of SCOTUS, six of whose members are Catholics. Three will definitely argue their faith to deny this basc right (Scalia, Alito, Thomas,). One may not (Kennedy). Another, the chief justice, is the big question. Sotomayor is the exception. In this event it does not matter what the majority of Catholics in the United Sattes believes, but rather only those with the power.
10
I think you are wrong. In this case what the SCOTUS decides will be irrelevant. The dam has broken, or there's no putting the genie back in the jar (to hash some metaphors). Even if SCOTUS decides against (I don't think they will), they will end up looking like complete idiots in a couple of years when their successors reverse the decision. Never has a SCOTUS decision been less defining. I don't think any of the justices want that written in the history books. Look for a 9-0 decision (just kidding, there's always Thomas and Scalia).
the Church sure isn't what it used to be. Here's a good book that succinctly illustrates its liberal stance -- "Be Revolutionary: Some Thoughts from Pope Francis."
1
The question that has much of the religious world interested is how historically viable does Catholicism remain? After all, these putatively Catholic societies have rejected the teachings of the Church pretty basically by acknowledging the simple humanity inherent in same-sex inclusion, the rejection of an absolutism with very real human consequences. Many of us believe that this says a lot that's good about these societies, but it can't say anything good about the future of Catholicism.
One might respond that Catholicism is evolving, but that misses the point. Catholicism isn't about evolution, it's about permanency, it's about immutability: the keys to heaven don't change shape with time. The Church, in order to survive, will need to evangelize a far more effective message that its views of the requirements of salvation remain not merely relevant but true. And they give every appearance of failing at that challenge. It may be that the Church eventually "evolves" into something more inclusive merely to survive, but it will no longer be "Catholic" in other than name.
Frank claims that putatively Catholic societies are leading the way in inclusion, but I'd suggest that it's really the same sense of basic humanity at work that one sees increasingly here and in other societies. The reality that must be acknowledged isn't that these societies are Catholic, but that they're increasingly becoming far less so.
One might respond that Catholicism is evolving, but that misses the point. Catholicism isn't about evolution, it's about permanency, it's about immutability: the keys to heaven don't change shape with time. The Church, in order to survive, will need to evangelize a far more effective message that its views of the requirements of salvation remain not merely relevant but true. And they give every appearance of failing at that challenge. It may be that the Church eventually "evolves" into something more inclusive merely to survive, but it will no longer be "Catholic" in other than name.
Frank claims that putatively Catholic societies are leading the way in inclusion, but I'd suggest that it's really the same sense of basic humanity at work that one sees increasingly here and in other societies. The reality that must be acknowledged isn't that these societies are Catholic, but that they're increasingly becoming far less so.
6
You're operating on the assumption that 'Catholic' is coequal with the authority of the Pope (who himself is going in interesting directions) or the power structure of the Vatican.
Frank is suggesting that 'Catholic' is clearly coming to mean following conscience — particularly the type of conscience taught by Jesus, who never spoke against homosexuality in any way, but for inclusion and compassion, and the recognition of shared humanity. Catholic countries — evidenced by choices such as the one clearly made in Ireland — are aligning with that understanding of their Christianity and Catholicism.
You assume that if 'Catholic' is not aligned with the permanence of the authority structure and the permanence of rules established by that structure, it is not 'Catholic' or "Catholic in name only."
Well, I never bought that institutionally imposed definition of 'Catholic,' at least as far as Christianity is involved, and Frank is suggesting that christians in countries that are Catholic are not buying it, or moving away from it.
You presume to stand in judgement of their Christianity based on your adherence to that definition. You want to call it 'basic humanity' rather than Christian conscience (quite a statement!) You might want to take a look at that, because that judgement is proving to be wrong. The Christians following their conscience, on the other hand, are remaining true to their Catholicism, as is (in many ways) the new Pope.
You're on the wrong side of history.
Frank is suggesting that 'Catholic' is clearly coming to mean following conscience — particularly the type of conscience taught by Jesus, who never spoke against homosexuality in any way, but for inclusion and compassion, and the recognition of shared humanity. Catholic countries — evidenced by choices such as the one clearly made in Ireland — are aligning with that understanding of their Christianity and Catholicism.
You assume that if 'Catholic' is not aligned with the permanence of the authority structure and the permanence of rules established by that structure, it is not 'Catholic' or "Catholic in name only."
Well, I never bought that institutionally imposed definition of 'Catholic,' at least as far as Christianity is involved, and Frank is suggesting that christians in countries that are Catholic are not buying it, or moving away from it.
You presume to stand in judgement of their Christianity based on your adherence to that definition. You want to call it 'basic humanity' rather than Christian conscience (quite a statement!) You might want to take a look at that, because that judgement is proving to be wrong. The Christians following their conscience, on the other hand, are remaining true to their Catholicism, as is (in many ways) the new Pope.
You're on the wrong side of history.
4
The Catholic Church has evolved whenever it suited them. Married priests (in the early days of the church) is a good example of this.
2
Roman Catholic leaders have been expected to do reality checks for decades. But they simply won´t do it, they never have (or only after centuries like with modern astronomy and burning scientists). And as long as "Catholics" prefer to remain within a church whose rules they mostly ignore there is no need to change.
1
From the perspective of an outsider (being Jewish), Mr. Bruni and his Catholics sound a lot like Protestants or at least certain kinds of Protestants, shades of Martin Luther.
1
Good essay. As a Catholic, I find it amusing to hear conservative talk about marriage in any form as at the center of their beliefs. It shouldn't be. Jesus spoke of love and mercy. As far as marriage was concerned, it was not a sacrament until the middle ages.
40
And He was not married.
2
My question is: If the Bible was wrong on homosexuality then what else did the Bible get wrong?
Many churches now welcome gays in the pulpit but language offensive to gays is still in the Bible.
Isn't it time to make a few revisions to the Bible?
Many churches now welcome gays in the pulpit but language offensive to gays is still in the Bible.
Isn't it time to make a few revisions to the Bible?
6
Now if the Catholics would just accept women are capable of making decisions about their own bodies.
80
Now if the Catholic women would just accept that they are part of the problem, as there is no religion without followers, yet the pews are filled with women?
1
All well and good, but as Catholicism has a top-to-down hierarchical structure, it will take a strong and resolute (not to mention decent) Pope to bring his church's dogma into comportment with evidence-based reality in matters concerning human sexuality. Hopefully it won't take nearly as long as it did for them to remove Galileo from their Index.
8
Thank you so much, Frank, for pointing out that the Catholic Church is its members and their tradition, anther than its self-appointed leaders.
9
The key word in your essay is "nominally", which, of course means "existing in name only". To be a Catholic is not necessarily to be a Christian, just as to be a Baptist or Lutheran or Methodist, etc. does not always mean that one is a Christian. In many cases whatever faith we profess is just part of our heritage. Until I was thirty years old, I considered myself a Baptist, a Christian, although I never attended church and knew little about the Bible, but my family had always been Baptists, therefore so was I. But thanks to some very learned people who were well versed in the Scriptures and who encouraged me to begin studying the Bible seriously, I was eventually baptized and received the Holy Spirit, which is a life changing event. My point is that it may appear that more Catholics in Ireland are becoming more tolerant and open to activities which the Catholic Church still consider sins, but many are Catholic in name only, knowing little about the faith which they claim to be a part of.
The problem seems to be Republican Catholics, those who write laws, those who sit on the Supreme Court, and those who opine on TV. They seem to think they are supposed to judge and condemn their neighbors, while Christ taught no such thing.
Democratic Catholics honor the compassion they find in their religion's teachings, hopefully compassionate to themselves, and to their possibly non- doctrine adherent neighbors, and to those materially less fortunate than themselves.
Democratic Catholics honor the compassion they find in their religion's teachings, hopefully compassionate to themselves, and to their possibly non- doctrine adherent neighbors, and to those materially less fortunate than themselves.
66
You left out Sweden and the Netherlands from your list, which are Protestant countries. Why? This is all simply a sign of secularism. in Catholic countries, the Catholic church is the single dominant public institution, and hence boring. Same situation in majority Lutheran countries such as Sweden. When there is a state church or a dominant church, its sheer dominance paradoxically allows everyone to ignore it. That is not the case with evangelical Protestant churches, which actively engage on these issues and market and advertise themselves. That's what this is about.
And by the way, Ireland is not one of the most "remarkable" countries to allow same sex marriage. It is one of the most developed countries in the world and Dublin is a major business centre with a multicultural population. You need to get rid of these old American notions of the country.
And by the way, Ireland is not one of the most "remarkable" countries to allow same sex marriage. It is one of the most developed countries in the world and Dublin is a major business centre with a multicultural population. You need to get rid of these old American notions of the country.
10
You've misunderstand the writer in a couple of respects. He listed only Catholic countries because he chose to limit his observations to those. And he called Ireland "remarkable" only in that it is (so far) the only country in the world to legalize same-sex marriage through popular referendum rather than parliamentary procedure or judicial edict. No "old American notions" should be inferred.
7
I fully understood that he only listed Catholic countries. My question is why did he do this. My assertion is the key factor is the dominance of a single established church, rather than whether it is Catholic or protestant.
1
The Netherlands is definitely NOT a protestant country. The most recent surveys on religion show that at least 56 % of the population consider themselves to be atheists or agnostics.
Only 16 % identify as protestant.
The Roman Catholic bishops have virtually zero infuence on the people who identify as catholics.
It is fair to say that The Netherlands has become a non-religious cuntry. The country is not hampered by religion in making decisions on same-sex marriage, abortion, euthanasia, etc. Religious dogma is simply ignored.
Only 16 % identify as protestant.
The Roman Catholic bishops have virtually zero infuence on the people who identify as catholics.
It is fair to say that The Netherlands has become a non-religious cuntry. The country is not hampered by religion in making decisions on same-sex marriage, abortion, euthanasia, etc. Religious dogma is simply ignored.
2
Individual faith and personal decisions about personal matters.
Let every American support religion as he/she wishes.
But keep organized religion out of our schools, our statehouses, and our judiciary.
And keep organized religion out of our pockets: stop allowing income tax deductions for donations to any church whatsoever. I am ok with income tax deductions for donations to charitable agencies sponsored by churches as long as there is complete financial separation and as long as the charities do not benefit mostly church members.
Some big churches are like country clubs with tax deductible "donations" that are more like club memberships.
Let every American support religion as he/she wishes.
But keep organized religion out of our schools, our statehouses, and our judiciary.
And keep organized religion out of our pockets: stop allowing income tax deductions for donations to any church whatsoever. I am ok with income tax deductions for donations to charitable agencies sponsored by churches as long as there is complete financial separation and as long as the charities do not benefit mostly church members.
Some big churches are like country clubs with tax deductible "donations" that are more like club memberships.
116
The problem you face is the Constitution. The churches are not taxed to protect them from government control. The Constitution protects the state from church control and the church from state control.
4
And, speaking for women, keep religion away from our bodies.
3
All charitable contributions should not be tax deductible.
Why should those wishing to contribute to a charity not pay the full cost of that choice?
Why should the taxpayers be forced to make up the difference, which for religious institutions, comes to $80B a year?
Why should any charitable institution make free use of public services while contributing nothing?
Why should those wishing to contribute to a charity not pay the full cost of that choice?
Why should the taxpayers be forced to make up the difference, which for religious institutions, comes to $80B a year?
Why should any charitable institution make free use of public services while contributing nothing?
3
The fatal flaw in Mr. Bruni's argument is that while people may identify themselves as Catholics, if they do not adhere to the teachings of the church, they are not Catholics. The same goes for birth control, divorce and remarriage without annulment or any of the principles of the church. It may make people comfortable to use the "cafeteria" approach to their faith, but it is false, if not delusional. To try to suggest that Catholics are leading the way towards marriage equality is, at best, forced. Rather, what we see is a rejection of the teachings of the church conjoined with a sentimental wish not to abandon treasured traditions. This is completely understandable, but it still debases the notion of what it means to be Catholic. The parishes that are more accepting are following the imperative of any organism (or organization)...survival. It may provide comfort and fill the collection plates, but it is not Catholicism as proscribed by the church leadership. What we see is people leaving the faith in all ways except in their self-image and sentiment. In all other ways, they are "sloughing off their Catholicism." Only when the church welcomes all, supports all and doesn't have to wink at variance from teachings in order to maintain membership can we say that the church has evolved and, in fact, become more Christ-like. Till then, you can call yourself whatever you want that makes you feel good, but you are not by definition a Catholic.
10
One thing about your notion is that Rome itself has taken pains in recent years to ensure that even inactive Catholiics are canonically very much still Catholics. Your notion is, odd as it may seem, a Protestant way of conceiving of the Catholic church rather than a Roman way.
3
If that's the case then very, very few people are Catholic. Most Catholics use some form of birth control.
4
I attend Mass on Saturday afternoons. I am a lector at my parish church. As I prepare for my twice-each-month readings, I study the Gospels and (less often) the Old Testament, always a dark and forbidding place for me. At this point in my life, where the end is a lot nearer than the beginning, I have long considered my mortality in personal and unique terms. I believe in love, faith, and forgiveness. It's difficult for me to attempt to reconcile rejection of another for any personal reason. It wasn't always that way, and that's a sin and guilt that I must bear. I can accept another's sexual orientation without its bring interpreted as a raid on God's loving creation. I think many of my fellow Catholics have become weary of the heavy load of carrying centuries of doom-laden sexual dogma imposed by a priestly culture of (apparent) celibacy, but, as recent history is an unhappy witness, anything but strict chastity and denial of the natural human pull of the erotic. If Gov. Bush, (supposedly) an adherent of the Catholic and apostolic faith means "we," I hope (and pray) that his "we" includes others who may see things in quite another way. No one's faith is greater than another's, by any measure, and that's where evangelical "Christians" run afoul of the Gospel's core message: "judge not, and ye shall not be judged."
242
If you are studying the Old Testament, trying doing so with some Jews sometime. I find the interpretations of the Torah offered by our Reform rabbis to be very enlightening. Some good takes on the sacrifice of Isaac, the wandering for 40 years in the wilderness, the drowning of the Egyptians, the suffering of Job. These are just some of the parables which have been put in unique contexts for greater understanding of ourselves as human, and our history, our needs and our growth.
2
While watching the funeral service for a recently killed Long Island police officer, I was startled to see only men at the altar. It seemed so very odd. Ordination
of women as priests in the Roman Catholic Church is still a long way off.
When we think about the idea of 'liberty and justice for all,' we may be reminded of an Episcopal priest's comment - "All means all."
of women as priests in the Roman Catholic Church is still a long way off.
When we think about the idea of 'liberty and justice for all,' we may be reminded of an Episcopal priest's comment - "All means all."
100
I think there's a strand in the history of marriage within the Catholic Church that focuses on the consent of the partners to the marriage (the rules regarding the efficacy of words of the present tense, words of the future tense plus consummation, etc. as markers for this). Maybe the Church could go back (or forward) to focusing on consent, and to making that consent public and to celebrating it.
And, to the extent that homophobia has anything to do with people fearing unconsensual homosexual sex, a focus on the consent of the partners might reduce that concern, too.
And, to the extent that homophobia has anything to do with people fearing unconsensual homosexual sex, a focus on the consent of the partners might reduce that concern, too.
2
I find your hit on Catholic politicians interesting. You suggest that they are wrong to claim their Catholic faith as the reason that they oppose same-sex marriage because the majority of Catholics are now in favor of it. But Catholicism is not a democracy. That Church has not changed its doctrine. Nor have the biblical teachings upon which that doctrine is said to be based gone away. While the pols may be doing that which is no longer politically expedient, it is, in fact, true to their Catholic faith.
I grew up Catholic, but have long been Presbyterian. I support gay marriage. My very Catholic family members are certainly not among those who support gay marriage. They are among those who have deep faith, who attend Mass weekly, and live faith-based lives. While many claim that the issues is "not about faith," of course it is - at least for those who are conservative. Although I do not agree with their reading of scripture or their position on this issue, I respect people of faith who stand by what they believe their faith teaches them, even if it is not politically expedient.
I grew up Catholic, but have long been Presbyterian. I support gay marriage. My very Catholic family members are certainly not among those who support gay marriage. They are among those who have deep faith, who attend Mass weekly, and live faith-based lives. While many claim that the issues is "not about faith," of course it is - at least for those who are conservative. Although I do not agree with their reading of scripture or their position on this issue, I respect people of faith who stand by what they believe their faith teaches them, even if it is not politically expedient.
5
Since the biblical teachings and doctrines of the church are unchanged should one respect people of faith who take it upon themselves to dictate their strict "morality" on others? Such as condemning condom use in AIDS
stricken parts of the world, injunctions against witches in areas where such
things are still believed in, and the always popular restrictions against abortion even in life - of - the mother situations. Standing by such ideologies shouldn't really be worthy of much admiration.
stricken parts of the world, injunctions against witches in areas where such
things are still believed in, and the always popular restrictions against abortion even in life - of - the mother situations. Standing by such ideologies shouldn't really be worthy of much admiration.
7
So, to be clear, you "admire" those whose faith prevents them from seeing what's real and true? I mean, the Bible condones slavery. Would you admire your family if they felt slavery was still OK? Why does homosexuality get special consideration? Cherry pickers, all.
4
As Mr. Bruni correctly points out, the "Catholics" that are counted in these surveys include those who are Catholic in name only, and have nothing to do with the church except that they were baptized as infants. Though they will always be baptized, and will remain so, they represent the Church's teachings just as much as Judas remained an apostle of Jesus after he betrayed him. It is inaccurate to say that these people are a representation of Catholics because they are actively pursuing the destruction of that which they claim to belong, even though such teachings are unchangeable. This article claims that this is a shift within the people of the Church. What it really shows is that people are removing themselves from the Church.
12
I was always taught that the "church" was not the building, or the priests or the hierarchy, but rather the "body" of all of its members. If what you say is accurate, then the Catholic church is actually a much smaller group of people. The notion that the "teachings" of the church are unchangeable is certainly inaccurate. The rules and restrictions imposed by Catholic dogma, things like meatless Fridays or selling indulgences are absolutely mutable, and have changed through time. Such practices had no basis in the Bible, a document which itself is rife with contradictions when one attempts to take it as a single piece of inspired literature from a single source. Finally, to equate all those who question such things with Judas is to resort to the same exclusionary mind set that pushes people out of the church. After all, why have dinner with the tax collector instead of the Pharisee?
31
If these people removed themselves from the Church, they would no longer self-identify as Catholic. And yes, you can be a practicing Catholic, and still believe approve of gay marriage. Because the Catholic church position on homosexuality is a matter of conscience - not of dogma. Church teaching - the thoughts of church leaders oppose homosexuality - but if you don't agree, it does not remove you from the church - it is not infallible dogma. Even Pope Francis said "who am I to judge".
13
That's the problem. "These teachings are unchangeable," even though they should be, in light of what Jesus himself taught. The organization, which arose some time after Jesus, developed teachings that have been repeated for so long they find it difficult to change. In doing so, they would risk putting their legitimacy in question.
4
“We need to be stalwart supporters of traditional marriage,” Jeb Bush, who converted to Catholicism as an adult, said during a recent TV interview. “It’s at the core of the Catholic faith.”
Who are "we"?
If a religious tenet is the best or only reason he can use for public policy, he lacks both the intellectual ability to be president and an awareness of the diversity of the American people. He may also be engaging in intellectual dishonesty as opposing gay marriage as a threat to "traditional marriage" is a canard.
Who are "we"?
If a religious tenet is the best or only reason he can use for public policy, he lacks both the intellectual ability to be president and an awareness of the diversity of the American people. He may also be engaging in intellectual dishonesty as opposing gay marriage as a threat to "traditional marriage" is a canard.
213
"Intellectual dishonesty" should be Jeb's additional middle names. He also listed himself as "hispanic" on a census questionnaire. That's the least of his problems. His participation in the Project for the New American Century ("PNAC") as an initial signer of its statement of principles in July 1997. PNAC, a "think tank," created our stupid, short-sighted, blind-to-consequences policy in Iraq which became practice in 2001-3, requiring an attack on the mainland (9/11) to trigger it, and which was intended to make Iraqi oil a commodity for mainly U.S. corporate control.
When you look at the consequences of PNAC's proposed policies, it would appear that the U.S. copied Germany from 1933-45 in many respects--none of which were, thankfully, for the purposes of "religion." (Neither was the Third Reich.)
Participating in PNAC should be viewed as a criminal activity and not merely free speech.
When you look at the consequences of PNAC's proposed policies, it would appear that the U.S. copied Germany from 1933-45 in many respects--none of which were, thankfully, for the purposes of "religion." (Neither was the Third Reich.)
Participating in PNAC should be viewed as a criminal activity and not merely free speech.
5
"We" is the people he needs to vote for him,
A church is going to be proven wrong by its flock if it goes against laws of nature or when it takes a position that proves to be unfairly discriminatory. In the end it's difficult to argue against truth and to argue for discrimination. This is a truth that religions need to live with and learn to navigate through if it is to stay relevant.
11
The Catholic hierarchy lost any shred of moral authority it once had on matters sexual by turning a blind eye to child-molesting priests in its ranks and by stubbornly holding out for years on common sense things like distributing condoms in countries ravaged by AIDS. Catholics are now following the consciences (a key part of Catholic upbringing and practice) on this and other issues and going their own ways. I applaud Pope Francis for trying to stem the tide by shifting focus to social justice, peace and environmental issues but I doubt that the rest of the hierarchy is ready to make the change.
251
This is because the Catholic Church as a whole has been on the road to perdition for decades. All you have to do is look at the entire pedophile scandal among the priesthood, and how it has been handled, and that shows you how far it's leadership has fallen. The rest of the flock was sure to follow in it's moral decay, and surely it has.
Catholics as well as many other mainstream religions around the world have slid into a moral morass seeking social acceptance rather than being true salt and light in the world. Most religious people don not live their daily lives according to the Holy Scriptures, instead they choose to interpret Scripture in accordance with the life they choose to live. So, Scripture becomes nothing more than historical writings, and not God's inspired Word that is a road map leading to eternal life for those who choose to live according to it's precepts.
The world has little tolerance for those who actually take a stand for moral purity, and a fixed moral standard. The absolute truth of the Bible is not relative or wavering, and so it is looked upon as hateful and bigoted. Whether the world chooses to believe and live their lives according to Christ's teachings has no relevance as to whether or not it is true or right. What is true and right has never been popular in the past nor will it be in the future.
Catholics as well as many other mainstream religions around the world have slid into a moral morass seeking social acceptance rather than being true salt and light in the world. Most religious people don not live their daily lives according to the Holy Scriptures, instead they choose to interpret Scripture in accordance with the life they choose to live. So, Scripture becomes nothing more than historical writings, and not God's inspired Word that is a road map leading to eternal life for those who choose to live according to it's precepts.
The world has little tolerance for those who actually take a stand for moral purity, and a fixed moral standard. The absolute truth of the Bible is not relative or wavering, and so it is looked upon as hateful and bigoted. Whether the world chooses to believe and live their lives according to Christ's teachings has no relevance as to whether or not it is true or right. What is true and right has never been popular in the past nor will it be in the future.
The funny thing is that Jesus really got involved in the sexual lives of the people of his time. He focused instead on the issues that really matter: taking care of the less fortunate among us, address income inequality, live a compassionate life.
23
Perhaps you could explain to me why so many "Christians" feel free to ignore so many absolute truths from the bible. For instance many people who condemn same sex marriage are just fine with divorce not to mention so many other biblical teachings, eating shellfish, wearing blended fabrics etc.
20
I believe that you dropped a word in your first sentence. "The funny thing is that Jesus NEVER got involved in the sexual lives of the people of his time.
15
There appears to be more to the Irish referendum than Catholic support for same sex marriage. While official figures aren't out, there are widespread allegations from reliable sources, like the Irish Times, that substantial campaign funding was illegally contributed to one side or the other by Americans. Some say the Yes side got tens of millions. Some say the No side was partly funded by U.S. fundamentalists. Most agree that the Yes side had a lot more money and some claim that American money distorted the vote. With all the attention our media gives to Citizens United, I find it troubling that substantial suspicions of dirty money in Ireland have gotten virtually no attention here.
4
Such assertions might be more credible had the measure won by a close vote (e.g. 51 to 49). The magnitude of the actual victory moves it well beyond the likely impact of a financial thumb quietly tipping the scales.
18
And who are the "reliable sources", michjas?
16
Your comment has a lot of "some say," which is not a tremendously reliable source of fact. Can you provide a link to the article or articles in question?
22
Perhaps life-long Catholics have experienced, up close and personal, the tragic results of desire forced underground, and have decided that affirmation of loving and honest relationships is the best way to demonstrate their faith.
185
Insightful comment.
3
Homosexuality is not a sin.
4
If the Church heeds the warning of the archbishop of Dublin, it's in big trouble. I don't know of any religion that could survive a reality check. My years of Catholic education taught me that religions define themselves not so much by those they let in, but by those they keep out. It's hard to find a normal human behavior that is not condemned in one religion or another, and that won't send you straight to hell.
Catholicism seems particularly twitchy about sex. Even the perfectly prosaic kind is forbidden to its priests and nuns, which puts an awkward barrier between the carnal activity of the flock and those who fleece them.
In a Church built on virgin births and immaculate conceptions you've got to wonder if gay sex will ever be kosher. Straight Catholics are supposed to endure loveless or abusive marriages, lest they commit the sin of divorce and be forever denied a sacrament that is essentially an act of symbolic cannibalism.
Centuries of religious oppression and abuse should send the message that what the faithful think is irrelevant. Dogma is not decided by popular vote, even as it seeps into public policy on abortion, or as corporations acquire religious beliefs that deny contraceptive coverage to their workers, or as bishops affect secular politics while being exempt from taxation.
Waiter, I'm ready for the reality check.
Catholicism seems particularly twitchy about sex. Even the perfectly prosaic kind is forbidden to its priests and nuns, which puts an awkward barrier between the carnal activity of the flock and those who fleece them.
In a Church built on virgin births and immaculate conceptions you've got to wonder if gay sex will ever be kosher. Straight Catholics are supposed to endure loveless or abusive marriages, lest they commit the sin of divorce and be forever denied a sacrament that is essentially an act of symbolic cannibalism.
Centuries of religious oppression and abuse should send the message that what the faithful think is irrelevant. Dogma is not decided by popular vote, even as it seeps into public policy on abortion, or as corporations acquire religious beliefs that deny contraceptive coverage to their workers, or as bishops affect secular politics while being exempt from taxation.
Waiter, I'm ready for the reality check.
351
I can see the Eucharist as encouraging participating in Jesus, becoming Jesus, "walking in the shoes of someone else," someone who has located his divinity. Whether it helps another person locate their own divinity to make such an attempt at empathy, I am less certain, since whatever we perceive empathetically has been filtered through our own apparatus, with whatever flaws it still contains.
2
Thank you, gemli, for making my morning! I had never before thought of the relationship between the clerics and the laity as that of fleecer and fleecee.
12
If the Bible is wrong about homosexuality then what else did the Bible get wrong?
Isn't that a relevant question?
Isn't that a relevant question?
4
Gone are the days when kings ruled by Divine Right, when sexless priests reminded cowed parishioners that God himself had called priests to oversee nations, when the Church assured indulgence buyers that their money covered sins that they had not yet committed, when priests sat in black coffesional boxes terrorizing boys with the prospect of insanity if they had an orgasm, when God kept watch over every thought in everyone's mind, when every day we were reminded that the "invidious Jews" killed Jesus and must be banished from our sight because Jesus was God.
The hand and ear of the Church were everywhere. The lists of forbidden books, the anger of thin lipped priests directed at kids smart enough to question the authority of the Church, the smell of incense on the coats of priests extending their hands to be kissed by cardinals and bishops wearing those cone shaped hats that made them look like a gaggle of geese.
There are fires that cannot be extinguished and the Irish vote is but one whiff of smoke that cannot be put out even by a genuinely good man like Pope Francis. If truth be known, the odds are that Christians suspect that the magic of the Gospels are but a narrative scooped up by the net of history. Indeed, religious belief is awash. Surely we need help, for if God came to live on earth, we would smash his windows.