Also, I am a little confused over the calls for Governor Cuomo's "excommunication". The reason given is that he has caused a scandal by taking a public position in opposition to Church teaching while still calling himself a Catholic. That I can understand. However, have not the bishops of New York perhaps also caused a bit of scandal themselves but not "excommunicating" him sooner? He has, after all, voiced opposition to numerous Church teachings before and has been openly living with his paramour for sometime now. Why was he not "excommunicated" for that? Does this not send the message that co-habitation is "not as bad" as supporting "gay marriage" (sorry for the quotation marks overload here)? The whole gay crowd loves to complain about being picked on but in this case, if Cuomo is disciplined for this when he has not been disciplined for his flagrant disobedience to the Church in the past, I would have to concede that they would have a point. However, maybe I am just out of date in my thinking on this subject. I'm still "scandalized" by the fact that two (at least) politicials were publically excommunicated in the 60's for opposing de-segregation but not one Catholic politician in this country has ever been excommunicated for supporting abortion. I would tend to view murdering innocent children as a greater sin than Whites or Blacks Only bathrooms, but i guess that's just me. -Put in your twopence if you have any.
*Update: I have now heard that in at least one diocese the bishop asked all parishes, schools & institutions of the Church to refuse any appearance, any honor and to refuse to accept any honor from any politician who voted for the gay "marriage" law. However, soon after this was modified to include all politicians no matter how they voted. What message does that send? I would be willing to bet that this change came about when they realized that most of those who voted for the bill were from one party and all of those who opposed it were from another and they did not want to appear to be taking a political side.
Such is the issue with our Bishops, isn't it? We're not often sure whether they're doing their job, sort of like politicians. Nevertheless we need them.
ReplyDeleteAny excommunication at this point would be unwise, as it would create a massive gash in the public face of the diocese of New York (well, not in my opinion, but in the general eye, they'd be excommunicating him for being pro-homosexual "marriage" and nothing else, and would therefore be "homophobic".
The est thing to do would be to limit his actions within Catholic communities, with a reasonable explanation that this was the last straw or something.
Well, if we're going to go with the whole "human rights" thing hypothetically, then none should be greater than the other. The rights provided by common sense however, would place the right to life above the right to be accepted/tolerated.
MM,
ReplyDeleteCorrect me if I'm wrong, as I'm not Catholic, but my understanding of the Code of Canon Law is that all Catholics, and this includes Cuomo, who support abortion are excommunicated latae sententiae, regardless of whether the Church issues an official proclamation to that effect.
I wish they would stick to big issues, the real "religious" stuff and stay out of the squabble on other things. I have started to see, for the first time, a sort of racial-ethnic divide amongst the local Catholic community, which doesn't seem to be in the best of health from my own observations. It seems to many people I know that the bishops fight harder and protest louder over defending illegal immigrants than defending the unborn or call more forcefully for enlarged social programs than for the defense of traditional values. Why does it seem that the message has never been so inconsistent as it has since they organized themselves into a single conference?
ReplyDeleteSam S, I think that is the case and that is usually pointed to whenever someone says "why havn't they been excommunicated?". That is why I said "what would amount to" excommunication. In other words, what is being called for is for the priests to refuse him communion if he tries to take it rather than leaving it up to him to come forward or not. Still though, I think it sends a message, and not a good one, when people like the SSPX are excommunicated publically but politicians like Ted Kennedy or Nancy Pelosi are not. Why is one act of disobedience treated differently than another? In the same way, why would Cuomo be denied communion for supporting gay "marriage" when he was not denied communion for supporting abortion or living with his mistress? To me, it just doesn't look good from any angle.
ReplyDeleteMadMonarchist,
ReplyDeleteI think you're right about "public" excommunication and the message it sends. After that, though, I have mixed feelings. I would like nothing better than to see the Church excommunicate(publicly) every pro-abort and gay marriage supporter. On the other hand, I can see the disadvantages you have stated, and they're valid. Even if the Church claimed all his previous sins as reason, it would ring hollow and people would still think it was "really" about gay marriage.
What the Church really needs IMO is a hard right rudder. His Holiness the Pope should immediately publicly excommunicate all Catholic public figures who are known and unrepentant adulterers along with pro-aborts and gay marriage supporters. If he does that, he can avoid the charge of treating gay marriage support as worse than adultery which might otherwise be leveled.
I don't know if he could do that though. The bishops are absolute in their particular dioceses and they would never dare do such a thing. The Pope is supposed to have universal authority but "supposed to" and "does" are not the same. Whether it was the Canadian bishops and Paul VI's order on birth control or all the feet dragging over Benedict XVI's push for Latin mass availability it seems many bishops do not feel the need to do as they are told.
ReplyDeleteBare with me, my point is obscure. But I never believed you can separate Politics from Religion.
ReplyDeleteI think that the root cause of Republicanism is the same root cause of the Catholic Churches decline in moral standing, and the decline in Protestantism of late as well.
Rebellion.
Rebellion motivated casting off the Kings of the Earth, for why should we bow our knees before them? We should stand as EQUALS! This only appeals to our egos as we are told no one is better than us and we are supreme. Its also a lie. Look at how we fawn over the Politicians because they hold Public Office. Do we really think Barack Obama is treated like Joe blow down the street?
If you read the original calls for Revolution and Republicanism, they seem to define Liberty in a different way too. Liberty is having things our own way. Being free of past moral constraints or past obligations. Liberty is thus seen as focusing on my every want and whim and making that somehow a right. That why we are even in the state we are in as society today: Because we think as a society that everything we want to do should be permitted and the world should revolve around our personal desires, and that we should never have to owe up to the responsibility for our actions and live with the negative consequences.
Our entire Culture is now based on the idea that majority Rules and that the Might of the crowd makes right, and that Human Rights are defined by making us all individually happy by giving us not only the right to live how we wan to live, but making our choices unquestionable and forcing society at large to accept our decisions and way of life. Well, provided this doesn’t reflect Tradition.
Despite what one may read In Neo-Con or American Conservative literature, the Truth is that Republicanism is inherently collectivist, and inherently leads to the expansion of Liberalism and decay of morality.
As all of us on this blog know, even suggesting Monarchy makes you seem insane, and you are told you support a Dictatorship. But the same applies to mentioning Traditional morality.
Its seen as oppressive, and cruel, and those who live by it are authoritarians who are emotionally damaged and control freaks. Even if they only privately practice it tis because they deny who they really are and suffer for it. Meanwhile, the Hedonistic glutton will be seen as “Free” and “Healthy” and “Leading the good life”, even if the reality is never quiet as cut and dry.
Combine this with the fact that the Church went the way of the crown, and is now basically seen as a Social Club with antiquated moral riles they suggest we follow, and you end up with what we have now. If the Bishops spoke out on Actual Moral issues that were not in line with increased Liberalism they’d be targeted for hatred and attacks, which would be justified in many peoples minds because gosh, the Church is oppressive and trying to ram their religion down our throats.
I mean, Hustler and Playboy should have free speech in politics but not the Church! That’s just going to lead to a Theocracy like Iran!
So they fall silent at first. Then the Bishops, who are all educated men, begin to absorb the new Cultural Philosophy for themselves as they grow up in the 1920’s-1960’s, and begin to teach the new Revolutionary Philosophy openly in Catholic Schools and Seminaries. Seriously, outside of the SSPX, do any Catholic Schools, even in Canada or the UK, say Monarchy is the best form of Government? DO any of them teach absolute Moral Rights other than the ‘Big ones’ like Abortion? Do they actually teach you how to examine your conscience and think like a Catholic? No, most push the pro Democracy angle and how all Power in a society should come from the People. They teach that the Church and State should be separate, not united. That Religion is a private affair not a social one. Then they focus on “Social Justice” which in turn is rooted in the same general liberalism that modern culture is based upon.
Most of today’s Bishops are, quiet simply, Liberals to a degree, in much the same way that American “Conservatives” are by and large Liberal.
ReplyDeleteWhile the Bishops most go along with the Official Church Teaching that’s well known on the big issue s of the day like Abortion or Same Sex Marriage, many of them actually support those things. Even those who don’t still thin it’s a “Church matter” not a “Social matter” and believe that these things should be allowed in civil law even if not in Church law as the two are distinct.
Until the Church understands that the Separation of Church and State, and the ensure basis of our Secular Culture, is wrong, until it realises that today’s Secularism is not an absence of Religion but a sort of resurgent Paganism, and until the Bishops begin to take seriously their own Catholic Faith as something other than an abstraction, then they will just sit on their laurels and let anyone come into the social club and take part in the pretty rituals like communion which have long ago ceased to have any real meaning to them.
Coumano should have been vocally condemned for taking a Mistress. He should have been excommunicated for his Abortion stance. As wrong as I know Homosexuality is, two guys screwing each other is nothing compared to the murder of an innocent.
But we know they won’t go that far, will they?
Unfortunately, based on the current track record, you would probably stand a better chance of being excommunicated if you were a priest who said Church and State cannot be separated, democracy should have limits or that equality exists only in the eyes of God than if you were a politician who says you're Catholic but votes for abortion or gay "marriage".
ReplyDeleteThe "Gay Marriage" isn't a real marriage because to form a family are needed a man and a woman not two persons of same sex.
ReplyDeleteIt is shocking to see how the western world is turning a moral dump when our friends from the other side of the mediterranean sea are still ruled by the moralism, that is someting that we should relearn from the Arabs.
Talking about Cuomo he should be excommunicated right now.
All the churchs of the world no matter of what faith they are should meet and make commons politics about fighting the gay marriage and abortion, because both things are sins, alike the atheism.
AM, the porblem with "Common Cause: is that loads of Chu5rches don't see them as sins, and hers see them as sins but beleive in seperation of Curch and State and embrae Secularist ideals or civil Law.
ReplyDeleteThe whole disease is inherant in our thinking.
Exactly, even many of the major Protestant "churches" no longer view the Bible as authoritative. Some are even starting to view Christ as not absolutely essential. The Catholic Church is not much better off, the authority is still there, but is optional. It is not supposed to be of course but when there are no consequences for disobedience, even at pretty high levels, obedience becomes optional. The Revolution has crept into the chapels no doubt about it.
ReplyDeleteZarove: Ok, my error.
ReplyDeleteToo bad that not all churchs saw it as an sin.