Reaction of NY bishops to the unions-contrary-nature legislation

From the website of the Archdiocese of New York.

My only question… was there a statement of all the bishops before the vote took place?

The following is a statement from Archbishop Timothy Dolan and the bishops of New York State:

The passage by the Legislature of a bill to alter radically and forever humanity’s historic understanding of marriage leaves us deeply disappointed and troubled.

We strongly uphold the Catholic Church’s clear teaching that we always treat our homosexual brothers and sisters with respect, dignity and love. But we just as strongly affirm that marriage is the joining of one man and one woman in a lifelong, loving union that is open to children, ordered for the good of those children and the spouses themselves. This definition cannot change, though we realize that our beliefs about the nature of marriage will continue to be ridiculed, and that some will even now attempt to enact government sanctions against churches and religious organizations that preach these timeless truths.

We worry that both marriage and the family will be undermined by this tragic presumption of government in passing this legislation that attempts to redefine these cornerstones of civilization.

Our society must regain what it appears to have lost – a true understanding of the meaning and the place of marriage, as revealed by God, grounded in nature, and respected by America’s foundational principles.”

+Timothy M. Dolan
Archbishop of New York

+Howard J. Hubbard
Bishop of Albany

+Nicholas DiMarzio
Bishop of Brooklyn

+Edward U. Kmiec
Bishop of Buffalo

+Terry R. LaValley
Bishop of Ogdensburg

+Matthew H. Clark
Bishop of Rochester

+William F. Murphy
Bishop of Rockville Centre

+Robert J. Cunningham
Bishop of Syracuse

Will this be read from all the pulpits of all the dioceses of New York?

Technorati Tags: , ,

FacebookEmailPinterestGoogle GmailShare/Bookmark

About Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Fr. Z is the guy who runs this blog. o{]:¬)
This entry was posted in SESSIUNCULA and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

66 Responses to Reaction of NY bishops to the unions-contrary-nature legislation

  1. BaedaBenedictus says:

    From my experience in Syracuse and Rochester, not likely in some upstate dioceses!

    -

    How can we question this legislation? After all, we share at the Communion table with its author, our dear brother Andrew Cuomo, Catholic governor of New York.

    Ora pro nobis, Al Smith.

  2. Iowander says:

    And in other news, next week the New York legislature will consider a proposal to define pi as 4.

  3. Wayne NYC says:

    A statement opposing gay marriage from Albany or Rochester?LOL
    What a sad day for our Church…the Republican majority betrayed the people who sent
    them there to represent us..Rep.Grisanti before casting the deciding vote said it was
    his “Catholicism”that compelled him to vote for this abomination….”the road to hell is
    paved with the skulls of bishops”.

  4. Patti Day says:

    The Catholics I’ve talked to about this have a ‘live-and-let-live’ attitude toward same-sex marriage. Even in a bible study class, the mention of it at a very appropriate time had people backing up and shutting down, unwilling to ‘offend’ anyone, and WE WERE ALL CATHOLICS.

  5. benedetta says:

    Well one leader says merely that abortion is “the law of the land”. After decades of being shamed into believing we are all unwelcoming bigots (whether we are or are actually and really not at all) I seriously doubt many will care that now little kids who become confused will also be taught to believe themselves bigots and abandon the faith rather than undergo persecution. Although there will still be those merciful enough to lift a finger to help them and not add their complicit aid to condemning the practice of the faith to the underground. It can’t be underestimated. Not everyone is willing to scandalize their children, “Now, Joey, abortion is the law of the land!” How can we quote Jeremiah to believers who said that essentially God has tatooed Himself on us “before you were in the womb”? I guess that is just flowery language to them and to hades with the ones who were tatooed by God but didn’t make it over?

    Some might also add that it is the Land of the Lost…sleestaks coming to a parish near you…

  6. ray from mn says:

    Just you wait, Patti Day. The vast majority of homosexuals don’t want to marry. Promiscuity is their game. This is only step one in a long process that has the intent of destroying the Catholic Church’s influence in this country. The next step will be denying funds to Catholic Charities and adoption agencies. Catholic hospitals will be the next target if they don’t perform abortions.

  7. PostCatholic says:
  8. digdigby says:

    Two things terrify me: 1) ‘Gay Activists’ getting free access to the minds of children and 2) The frontal assault on the Church using the courts, ‘hate speech laws’ and an immensely powerful media. Especially #1. The Dragon wants to devour the Child, the Dragon hates innocence. We are at war with powers and principalities of darkness. Really. Homosexuals playing at ‘marriage’ is all a Trojan horse for the small cadre of the truly demonic haters of God.

  9. Andrew says:

    It is unjust to tell a guy that he can’t be a woman. It is also unfair that I don’t have wings so that I might fly like an eagle.

  10. Jordanes says:

    This letter is all well and good, but what the New York bishops now must do is publicly excommunicate Cuomo, Grisanti, and any other Catholic elected official who voted for this wicked law.

    I’m not holding my breath waiting for that.

  11. ray from mn says:

    I forgot to mention in my previous comment this probably next attack upon the Church: If a Catholic parish refuses to marry a homosexual couple in New York, there will be a movement to deny the Church the ability to perform “legal” marriages. Catholic couples will be required to go before a civil magistrate to record their marriage.

  12. Ef-lover says:

    I live in NYS and I don’t recall the bishops of NYS issuing a a collective statement on same sex marriage in the weeks leading up to last night’s vote. Here in the Archdiocese of NY H.E. Dolan
    preached at his Sunday mass on the issue but there was no news of him going to Albany to address the legislator ( maybe he did it over the phone). If anyone in the Archdiocese knows different please post, I just may not have heard the news. In the parishes we were not asked to sign and mail post cards to our local Rep.’s on this important matter as we did when debate to reinstate capital punishment came up a few years ago and the bishops went all out to oppose it by having us sign and mail post cards.

  13. MarkJ says:

    Gird yourself for the coming persecutions. One way I am doing this is by reading the Roman Martyrology every day (1962 edition) to be inspired by their heroic examples, to learn just how evil things could become again, and to implore the intercessions of the martyrs that we Catholics might have the strength and courage to withstand the devil and his mignons and to thereby one day be granted the crown of everlasting life. Sancti Dei omnes, intercede dignemini pro nostra omniumque salute.

  14. benedetta says:

    I really don’t care if people get excommunicated, for this or for lending material support to the culture of death. Cuomo appears not to believe that marriage is a sacrament, period, this is reflected in his personal choices. The sacraments are no longer really taught in some places calling themselves Catholic. Some places are still trying to teach children that the Eucharist is a wafer, that one need never attend Mass, and that one can legitimately write their sins and burn them in a big bonfire in lieu of confession. The Catholics who supported prochoice were all about stripping the faithful of ability to be a public witness to the cause of human justice in every way imaginable from liturgy to Sunday school to collegiate experience. Prolife never really had a chance with friends like those and as this generation has no respect for the sacramental nature of marriage it believes that nothing really matters. It would be one thing if it were really reflective of a liberal democracy wherein people were free to follow their conscience but that has been interfered with actively for quite a long time, involving children as the first targets for the “message” and manipulation since some used spiritual terminology and means to effectuate what was desired. That is not allowing God to lead a person, that is not permitting grace to work, that is not respecting free will, and that does not view people in terms of respect as it views people as a means to an end, not in terms of who they are in the eyes of God, the way the Church views them. Gov. Cuomo likely attended religious education in Sunday school in Albany where the Eucharist was taught as symbol and nothing more. Nourishment for the select and the entitled. I wouldn’t favor barring someone from receiving who through no fault of his own did not have opportunity to experience the reality. As the dissidents insist, it is “not a reward for good behavior”. I quite agree though that still doesn’t remotely admit to who Truth is.

  15. donantebello says:

    Dostoevsky tells us: “One day beauty will save the world.” Only when we get the Sacred Liturgy right will the Church be able to convince a lost dumbed down pagan civilization of the nature of true splendor, so that they will cease to chase the false and illusory for the truly beautiful and worthy.

  16. bdouglass says:

    ray from mn,

    Would that be all that bad. Catholics would still be married by their priest but it would not be a legal marriage. It strikes me as rather odd that the state regulates sacraments to start with. Why should a priest have to make sure that the ministers of the sacrament have permission from the State to perform the sacrament or face legal trouble? I see no reason why Catholics should want a legal marriage, anyway, by accepting the license, you’re signing onto a contract that the state thinks can be canceled at any point.

    Sodomistic unions are a mockery, but it didn’t start there.

  17. Mundabor says:

    Beautiful words from Dolan & Co., no doubt.

    But Dolan is the same who still tolerates the homo masses in his diocese, and hasn’t managed to excommunicate Cuomo & Co. yet.

    If you ask me, it is time that the confrontation becomes one of facts, not of words. Words are soon forgotten, excommunications burn all the time. Cuomo and the others know that, and will continue to protect the so-called “gay marriage” as long as the pain coming from church disapprobation will be lesser than the advantage obtained from showing themselves “liberal”.

    But try to run as an excommunicated pariah, with all the bishops thundering against heresy, and the situation will change.

    Not today, not tomorrow, but it will change most certainly.

    Our bishop (even many of the better ones) are getting much better at talking the talk, but I can’t see them ready to walk the walk yet.

    Mundabor

  18. Mundabor says:

    “The sacraments are no longer really taught in some places calling themselves Catholic. Some places are still trying to teach children that the Eucharist is a wafer, that one need never attend Mass, and that one can legitimately write their sins and burn them in a big bonfire in lieu of confession.”

    Let a half dozen excommunications fly around and see how it changes.

    Let the church hammer again and again on these concepts and see how they are learned.

    Let it be dangerous again for a Catholic politician to vote against Catholic values and see how they align.

    Mundabor

  19. Fr.Z: Yes, the NYS Bishops have spoken about this collectively prior to yesterday. The website of the NYS Catholic Conference (nyscatholic.org) has an archive. Click News, then Bishops’ Statements.

    I don’t believe the Bishops will order their statement read from the pulpits this weekend. Maybe not at all, sadly.

  20. Jordanes says:

    It strikes me as rather odd that the state regulates sacraments to start with. Why should a priest have to make sure that the ministers of the sacrament have permission from the State to perform the sacrament or face legal trouble? I see no reason why Catholics should want a legal marriage, anyway, by accepting the license, you’re signing onto a contract that the state thinks can be canceled at any point.

    Here are some of the very important reasons why it is obligatory, a matter of absolutely necessary social justice, for the State to recognize and regulate matrimony:

    http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=44209

    If state governments stop officially registering marriages, then who gets to adopt? How are child support and child custody issues determined if the government doesn’t recognize marriage? How about a private company’s health care plans — whom will those cover? Who has legal authority to issue “do not resuscitate” orders to doctors? (Of course, under Obamacare we won’t be resuscitating anyone.)

    Who inherits in the absence of a will? Who is entitled to a person’s Social Security and Medicare benefits? How do you know if you’re divorced and able to remarry? Where would liberals get their phony statistics about most marriages ending in divorce?

    [Ron] Paul can’t even scratch Social Security and Medicare off that list by taking the libertarian position that there should be no Social Security or Medicare, because he also said during the debate: “We don’t want to cut any of the medical benefits for children or the elderly, because we have drawn so many in and got them so dependent on the government.” (And of course, those programs do exist, whether we like it or not.)

    So Rep. Paul is a swashbuckling individualist when it comes to civilization’s most crucial building block for raising children, but willing to be a run-of-the-mill government statist when it comes to the Ponzi-scheme entitlements bankrupting the country. He’s like a vegetarian who says, “I’m not a fanatic — I still eat meat.”

    Some of those legal incidents of marriage can be obtained by private contract — such as the right to inherit and make medical decisions. Gays don’t need gay marriage to leave their electric spice racks to loved ones.

    But there are more obtuse Americans than there are gay Americans, so courts are going to be bulging with legal disputes among the unalert, who neglected to plan in advance and make private contracts resolving the many legal issues that are normally determined by a marriage contract.

    Under Rep. Paul’s plan, your legal rights pertaining to marriage will be decided on a case-by-case basis by judges forced to evaluate the legitimacy of your marriage consecrated by a Wiccan priest — or your tennis coach. (And I think I speak for all Americans when I say we’re looking for ways to get more pointless litigation into our lives.)

    If one spouse decides he doesn’t want to be married anymore, couldn’t he just say there never was a marriage because the Wiccan wasn’t official or the tennis coach wasn’t a pro?

    Under Paul’s plan, siblings could marry one another, perhaps intentionally, but also perhaps unaware that they were fraternal twins separated and sent to different adoptive families at birth — as actually happened in Britain a few years ago after taking the government-mandated blood test for marriage.

    There are reasons we have laws governing important institutions, such as marriage. As in landscaping, you don’t remove a wall until you know why it was put there.

    Marriage is a legal construct with legal consequences, particularly regarding rights and duties to children. Libertarians would be better off spearheading a movement to get rid of stop signs than to get rid of officially sanctioned marriage. A world without government stop signs would be safer than a world without government marriage.

    A society that does not recognize and regulate matrimony is a fundamentally unjust, immoral society, one that must be healed as soon as possible or else tossed in the trash and replaced.

  21. Charles E Flynn says:

    Thomas Peters at CatholicVote.org:

    In NY, A (Temporary) Setback for Marriage

  22. benedetta says:

    Here is how the phenomenon that Patti Day speaks of went down. It goes like this. You, even if you are a minor, out of your own free choice and will prefer prayer and like to attend Mass every week. Many studies of health confirm this is a good way to go in life and especially for teen age group. Some children and teens quite naturally wish to be led by the goodness of God and not because someone guilted them into it. Surprise (big one to some, apparently they must not get out too much or know too many young people). Anyway the insidious thing is then that vocal, wealthy, elitist people, empowered proclaim that they do not go but wish to be called Catholic nonetheless. If you elect to go for whatever reason even if you are a parent and do wish to teach your children to go because that is what parents are supposed to do you will get persecuted as one who is imposing, just for that and nothing else, just by silently doing, on others. When you wouldn’t dream of judging another’s choice or even teach them anything in particular but only that you do, quietly even because this is what is right for you and your family. And not just this but on any issue regarding faith from something rather minor and entirely private to things which play out in political sphere. It is a hatchet job orchestrated from within. Let’s not be naive. We have to face the realities before we may do something about the situation. And no, it does not involving “imposing”.

  23. chcrix says:

    “there will be a movement to deny the Church the ability to perform “legal” marriages.”

    And a good thing too. Marriage is a sacrament – not something to be allowed by the state. Such a change might be a wake up call to those members of the church who don’t yet understand that the modern state is the greatest danger to the practice of religion and is also a jealous god that brooks no rivals.

  24. Joseph-Mary says:

    This is no surprise considering the weakness of the Catholic faith in the state of New York and what certain infamous bishops have done to decimate the faith over the past years. When Catholics, called to be the “soul of the world”, do not live as they should, all society suffers.

    This agenda is demonic. And little children are being indoctrinated into the ways of sin very early on. They do not know right from wrong and those who speak the truth will get no mercy from them in years to come. Sin, intrinsic evils such as abortion and sodomy, are being enshrined and protected and promoted in our society which will infallibly leads to its destruction.

    Here is how things are going in the homosexual “marriage” state of Massachusetts where this class of person has rights and others don’t: http://www.massresistance.org/docs/marriage/effects_of_ssm.html

  25. rroan says:

    I have long believed that the hour is approaching when we will be forced to choose between Christ and Caesar. Just as in Roman times, the consequences of choosing Christ will be martyrdom. The consequences of choosing Caesar will be worse.

  26. rroan says:

    ray in mn:
    denying funds to Catholic Charities

    IIRC, Catholic Charities’ budget largely comes from the federal government, making them IMHO a subsidiary organization to the USG.

    Not denying in any way the wonderful work they do, can we really call them Catholic if they aren’t funded by the faithful? If we allow our institutions to be financed by Caesar, should we be surprised if Caesar wants to dictate how his money is spent?

  27. rroan says:

    It is strange for me to see the Most Reverend Mr. Hubbard on this list, given the welcoming homily in which he gushed about Governor Cuomo and spoke about how their visions were in alignment. Cuomo did campaign that this would be a priority for him.

    I would be interested in hearing His Excellency’s private opinion on this matter.

  28. irishgirl says:

    I’m not holding my breath about the Bishops in New York State.
    Talk is cheap-our shepherds here have to get some spine and hurl some excommunications, beginning with Andy Cuomo. Where is a Becket or a Fisher when you really need them?
    Do we have any ‘real men’ among our politicians? I don’t think so-they cave in to the homosexual lobby and give them everything they demand. If the homosexuals shout and scream enough, the politicians crumble like a secret panel in a wall and give in.
    Dear Lord, please come SOON….Your faithful people can’t take much of this anymore. Immorality reigns, there is no courage among our shepherds.
    Sacred Heart of Jesus, have mercy on us. The homosexuals have their perverted ‘pride’ events in this month dedicated to You. Convert them-show them that their so-called ‘lifestyle’ can lead them to hell for all eternity!

  29. Dr. K says:

    My only question… was there a statement of all the bishops before the vote took place?

    Nothing comes to mind.

    Here is a somewhat strange and rambling response that Bishop Clark gave to a TV reporter when asked about gay marriage in NYS:

    “(Marriage) is an institution so deeply ingrained in the human spirit that to redefine it in such a short time frame under the very wonderful rubric of human rights, which I thoroughly support, the two don’t equate in quite the way its proponents want to present it,” Clark said.

    “We don’t approve of that practice but that’s not to say we don’t see good, loving people who go that way of life. We don’t say that there’s no love there at all, there’s no sign of God’s presence, because indeed they remain God’s children, beloved of us all. It’s more a question of how you reach that wonderful end of equality for all people and we’re just arguing in this case that you don’t effectively, long-term do it, by redefining an institution that’s served us so beautifully.”

    We needed a firm statement that marriage was between one man and one woman, but it appears that the only NYS bishop to take this fight seriously was Archbishop Dolan.

  30. ContraMundum says:

    The idea that ANYTHING the legislature of New York does will “change forever” an important belief of mankind is ridiculous. 500 years ago there was no New York and no United States, and it would be foolish to think that either will be more remembered in 500 years than the Ottoman Empire is today. We have the prideful tendency to think that because we (obviously) are among the very most important people in history (Christians will acknowledge that Christ and the Apostles were more important, but does that knowledge really seep in to our subconscious?) — because we are so important, clearly the time we live in must be a turning point in the grand stretch of human history. Sometimes this manifests itself in secular messianism, sometimes in the conviction that “the Rapture” will happen in a few months, sometimes in the conviction that we live in the most crucial decades in the history of mankind for determining the environmental fate of the planet.

    One hundred years ago, the moral fad sweeping the country was teetotalism, as today it is “tolerance”. In 1920 the Constitution was amended to prohibit alcohol except for very restricted purposes. Prohibition had disastrous consequences, ruining and ending many lives, so in 1933 it was revoked — though it still lives on, in lesser form, in many “dry counties” and “dry towns”. I suspect that “gay marriage” will follow a more-or-less similar trajectory, one that has by no means peaked yet, but one which is doomed to ultimate failure because it is based on false premises.

    It was no doubt the intention of the New York government to “alter radically and forever humanity’s historic understanding of marriage”. We should not pretend that they have any hope of success, though.

  31. danielinnola says:

    I had to laugh… “they” worry that marriage and the family will be undermined by this?????
    Homosexuals are not to blame for the breakdown in hetero marriage and family… It would seem that straight people are doing a good job destroying both of those institutions without any outside help… Lol The hypocrisy of some people amazes me. Whited sepulcheres all…

  32. Joe in Canada says:

    Post Catholic does us a favor by giving us a glimpse of what lies down this road. He could have added another link to his “church”: http://www.uupa.org/

  33. Hopefully, the voters will rise up in disgust in November of next year and throw out every one of the bums who voted for this abomination. Such people are not fit to hold public office. It’s no accident that a vote was taken now; they are hoping we will have forgotten by next year.

  34. benedetta says:

    It has been an entirely logical progression and it is not “random secularism” which is entirely to blame. Quite a lot of people were patient, genuinely respectful, some were confused, and some gave voice and totally supported the outrageously false idea that God would encourage people to slaughter the innocents God creates and only desires the good for. This was dressed up as all about supporting women’s rights and feminism, it appeared under benevolent ideas of what was best for the poor (a la eugenicist dogma), then finally it is just the law which must be upheld and expanded all the more. What happened in Philadelphia with Gosnell barely raised eyebrows and that was because those children were slated for death anyway and we don’t apparently any longer care whether it is within the protection of the womb or outside, it matters not in terms of who is unwanted, undesired, neglected, deprived of humanity.

    After so many years of listening, study, thought, prayer, action, and even giving voice to some really crazy ideas when you look at it objectively, I no longer believe that it was ever really about any of the things that dissident Catholics say it is about, and I certainly totally reject so much of what has been forced upon people, manipulated and shamed into belief as somehow accurately reflecting or having anything to do with the spirit of VII. What I think really occurred was that some authorities studied the way certain regimes, some at work in our own time period, systematically stripped people of dignity and then set about to use terminology of Catholic spiritual practices to effectuate the goal. Under benevolent auspices, perhaps under pretense as “friend of the faith” or the like, some garnered the attention, belief and ears of Church leaders responsible for pastoral practice while also utilizing other means, media, schools such that now within the Church all of this is perpetuated and celebrated as if it is perfectly good. In many places the Church has been taught and now accepts and teaches anti-Catholicism, self-hatred, internalized shame in lace curtain garb. God is love and would never buy that one could love God in return and wish the demise of one’s own people. As a practical matter a leader who loved his people the way God loved them would never buy into such an idea that posed that slaughter of innocents would be acceptable. Who supports the elimination of their own people?

    And why would God come to commune with us as a mere symbol? A God who is love would never be content to be regarded as a symbol among the tchochkes in someone’s compartmentalized life, or an intellectual exercise, or an invitation to doubt, and would never say, it’s fine if you only visit me on Christmas and Easter. A God who is reconciliation and forgiveness embodied would never be content with a big bonfire of scraps of paper with sin written but desires an authentic encounter in human relationship, to direct people to confidence, directing our steps into the way of peace. If children are given the choice, would you like a wafer which is just a symbol or the one true God to be with you, what do you think they choose. And that goes for the most learned as well. No a fraud has been worked and we have been treated not like God’s own lambs but as chattel, instruments for mortal designs and not by friends of God and God’s Church. Now that the various political aims have been achieved, and the law of the land thus settled, perhaps those of us who still wish to worship within the communion of the Church will be permitted a moment of peace with which to get back to attempting to pick up the shards still remaining and give the next generation a real future which means only the good. Who will need the sacraments to fortify as they go as they will be called, for eternity it seems, and regardless of the truth of the matter, regardless of reality, bigots and a people who hate.

  35. Andrew says:

    danielinnola:

    The breaks on your car are not working well. Let’s fix it by removing the steering wheel. Great logic on your part.

  36. tealady24 says:

    This is just all due to the weak state of affairs in the Church and in society in general. For decades we have been entertained at Mass, and the laity have run wild with liturgy, most often with the pastor’s blessing! Little “ministries” have cropped up all over the parish; why do I need someone to open a door for me, and insincerely wish me a nice day?

    Bishops ( and let me not start!) are off in their own little pampered, genteel worlds, letting the word of God, like plants with no water, merely rot on the vine. Where is the catechesis? Where is the real prescence taught anymore? Where are we told of the Saints and pointed to the right paths to walk? Where is the mention of SIN???? The hierarchy in the church float from one Confirmation or Communion ceremony to another, making sure they wine and dine themselves at every opportunity.

    It’s all lip service right on down to most priests. That’s the way I see it, and I’ve been seeing it for many decades now, just like that. Why bother going to confession, or adoration (what’s that?), or simply reading Scripture every day. A rosary? How many “Catholics” can truly say a rosary from start to finish, I wonder?

    Then we have our glorious politicians! Those Kennedys and Cuomo’s who are adored by the media and the empty-headed citizenry who if they can pull their heads out of their cellphone or wifi, (and I’m being nice here), go along with anything they are told. After all, I gotta be popular, not controversial!

    Before we know it, we’ll be able to marry our dog! And in church, no less! Don’t ask why things have gone to hell in a handbasket. And we are all guilty of these sins of omission through the years, by keeping silent, by not writing or speaking out, or walking out, or the church sticking with basics, no matter what!

    And now this disgraceful vote in NY, in the Month of the Sacred Heart, no less. We should all be so ashamed.

  37. danielinnola says:

    @Andrew, I am most surely not A logician… I am A Catholic, A supporter of the SSPX. I state this just in case any “holier than thou” types want to flame my post. Lord knows I deal with enough of those types in the SSPX… lol but I digress. I dont care if gay ppl marry or not. [And you are a follower of the SSPX... riiiiight.] I do care about human rights, whether marriage is one of those or not, I neither know nor care. But when the Heirarchy makes these absurd claims , which are nothing more than scaremongering I felt compelled to speak. “Gay marriage” in NY is less than 24 hrs old…. whats the divorce stats for hetero marriage in the state? How many single parent homes are there? How many abused and neglected or orphaned children? And “Gay marriage” is the cause? The Bishops should focus on halting the (irreversible) decline of the Church, into nothing more than A cultural institution… Much like the Church of England has become, or Reform Judaism.
    God Bless

  38. Ef-lover says:

    philothea.distracted says:
    25 June 2011 at 10:03 am
    Fr.Z: Yes, the NYS Bishops have spoken about this collectively prior to yesterday. The website of the NYS Catholic Conference (nyscatholic.org) has an archive. Click News, then Bishops’ Statements.

    That statement you site in your post was from 2008 , H.E. Dolan was not even appointed Archbishop of NY yet and Andy Coumo was not the governer then either. The present bishops of the state of New York did not issue any statement on the matter until after the vote.

  39. Nerinab says:

    Danielinnola,

    We all realize that marriage has been in trouble for a while (with no-fault divorce, contraception and the influence of pornography) but homosexual “marriage” hastens its demise. I wonder how many people, whether hetero or homo will actually pursue “marriage” anyway. The stats from foreign countries with gay “marriage” don’t look promising. In the diocese of Rochester, NY, there has been a sharp decline in marriage in the Church. What will happen now? More young people cohabiting as they realize marriage doesn’t really mean anything or can mean anything at all?

    I fully expect to hear a “homily” from our “authorized lay preacher” celebrating this decision and saying “now the healing can begin” and “the Church can reexamine Her view on marriage, sexuality, divorce and abortion.” It is no wonder given the rambling non-answer by our bishop quoted by Dr. K. above. Our diocese is on life support right now and I fear all of our efforts might not resuscitate it.

    As someone mentioned above, we were “encouraged” to send post cards and sign petitions for S-CHIP and immigration reform and even “cap and trade” but not. one. word. on defeating homosexual “marriage” legislation. Not. One. Word.

  40. Charles E Flynn says:

    @tealady24,

    The New York legislature will soon find itself under pressure from PETA to allow dogs to marry hydrants.

  41. ptb127 says:

    Why does the government or the catholic church feel the need to make these people who are homosexual feel like they aren’t humans? Wasn’t this nation founded under equal protection for everyone under the law? That should include gay and lesbian couples. I love my religion and my church, so much so that I applied and was accepted to the seminary. I left before I went in. It makes me very sad to think that God would love this gay/lesbian couples any less then he loves everyone else.

    I think this is great article that all should read:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/19/opinion/19dowd.html?_r=2&ref=maureendowd

    [ROFL!]

  42. David Collins says:

    Lord, have mercy. Now sex perverts can get a marriage license in NY.

    Does anyone still think voting Republican will roll back this abomination? Especially since, apparently, it was NY Republicans who helped make this a reality.

    How many pro-life Republicans have been elected since 1973? And what good has that done?

    I fear that those of you who see persecution of faithful Catholics coming are correct. Particularly if you live in the Northeast.

  43. danielinnola says:

    @Nerinab, Thank you for making my point much better than I ever could. :) Histrionics and scaremongering, pointing fingers at the moral failings and sins of others, when our own House is in disarray is not the answer. Lets live and preach the Gospel of Jesus Christ and him crucified , without using words…
    God Bless

  44. Joe in Canada says:

    Danielinnola
    You ignore the important and legitimate role that states should play in the authentic development of human good. The concern the concern the Church has in this matter has to do with the purpose of marriage in society, not with who is doing what. In this regard you do not bear witness to the truth with your statement about “histrionics and scaremongering, pointing fingers at the moral failings and sins of others”. No one on this site, and certainly no Bishop, has engaged in this.

  45. benedetta says:

    danielinnola, I quite agree with you that the family must be strengthened and supported in the first place. Like at least sixty years ago. Anyway it’s not too late to start now. Leaders who are charged with responsibility for the health of young people, even if they permitted any number of other things, may still now do their part to show support. If they do not then it is their own free choice and the consequences can’t be blamed on anyone else. Many have been advocating for the family, from all walks of life, people of faith and of no faith, people in education, science, health, culture, for quite some time. Apparently people choose not to listen and instead wish to chase down so many other things and go in a different direction.

    Still the family unit was apparently good enough circumstance in which God Himself chose to dwell. So apparently it is not only that various people in present times concerned for society and culture who are not being listened to.

  46. Sam Schmitt says:

    danielinnola,

    I largely agree with you that the success of “gay marriage” can be placed on the shoulders of those who have failed to uphold true marriage. No one is “blaming gay marriage” for this. But blaming ourselves instead doesn’t mean that the lawmakers share no blame or that this law is not bad news.

    The biggest danger is that it will lead to an acceptance of homosexual bnehavior by society, which then leads to an intolerance and indeed persecution for any questioning of this behavior. This is already happening. So I wouldn’t call the bishop’s warning “scaremongering.” Whoever is to blame, this bill is not good.

  47. danielinnola says:

    @Sam Schmitt, Homosexual behavior is allready accepted by society. We have to show the world a better way, by living the Gospel of Jesus Christ. When the Bishop says that this is A threat to hetero marriage it makes all of us look ridiculous! and therefore easily dismissed. [So... in effect, you are in favor of the destruction and deformation of the definition of marriage. Put the posturing aside.] Its a world much like the one of late antiquity that we now inhabit, and yet Christianity had its nativity in this world and thrived… are we as Christians today, up to the challenge? or will we be dismissed as irrelevant, because our leaders have their collective heads in the sand?
    God Bless

  48. amenamen says:

    @ Charles E Flynn “The New York legislature will soon find itself under pressure from PETA to allow dogs to marry hydrants.”

    This sounds so silly, but what argument can be raised against “hydro-canine” unions? What can you say that does not make you sound like a hydrophobe? What arguments are left?

  49. torch621 says:

    And I see the news of this on my birthday.

    Thanks a lot, New York. -_-

  50. Nerinab says:

    Danielinnola,

    I won’t belabor the point much further, but I’m not sure how my post demonstrated your point unless you mean to imply that I’m engaging in histrionics. Frankly, every assertion I made can be demonstrated by statistics taken from countries like the Netherlands (regarding marriage rates among homo and heterosexuals) and in my diocese of Rochester, NY(regarding reception of the Sacraments). Plus, I acknowledged your point that the state of marriage has long been under attack. I’m not just a crazed, pajama-wearing, blog-surfing homophobe.

  51. Dr. Eric says:

    As soon as I get enough money (Lottery?) we’re moving to Chile. This juggernaut cannot be stopped without direct divine intervention, and that doesn’t bode well for the nation that endures such intervention.

  52. benedetta says:

    Danielinnola, how does this legislation propose support for families?

  53. Charles E Flynn says:

    @amemamen,

    The argument has been made by several Catholic authors that if one divorces marriage from procreation, then there is no logical objection to extending its definition to include members of the same sex, animals, and inanimate objects. One such argument, dealing with same sex marriage, can be downloaded as a pdf file here:

    http://mooringspress.com/articles/ContraceptionSlipperySlope.pdf

    These arguments often cite the Anglican Lambeth Conference of 1930 as the first instance of any Christian church endorsing contraception. See:

    http://www.catholic.com/library/Birth_Control.asp

    Suggested Google search:

    marriage procreation logic gay Lambeth

  54. Gabriel Austin says:

    Surely much of the blame must be laid at the feet of Bishop Hubbard of Albany, Mr. Cuomo’s bishop. By not reproaching Gov Cuomo for adultery, by allowing him to receive Communion, did he not put a seal of approval on his actions?

    Which is more sinful – encouraging same sex copulation – or indulging in illicit heterosexual copulation?

    Or is it that bishops shy away of speaking about sin: and prefer from cowardice to see their sheep go to perdition?

  55. Kerry says:

    Homosexual ‘marriage’, (scare quotes intentional) is a synthetic creation, a sterile hybrid, offspring of political pressure and venality. Which ‘spouse’ (ditto) will be the mother, which the father? Which give birth? In these homosexual ‘family arrangements’ (ditto), one of the birth parents will always not be present. Are mothers now irrelevant? Fathers interchangeable? “Government is not reason, it is not eloquence — it is force. Like fire it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master; never for a moment should it be left to irresponsible action.” Will the state protect its offspring? Charge with bigotry those who disagree? Will they send “… hither swarms of Officers to harass our people and eat out their substance.” How is the state pursuing churches in court not the reverse of forced conversions? Chesterton: ” “And this is the word of Mary,
    The word of the world’s desire
    ‘No more of comfort shall ye get,
    Save that the sky grows darker yet
    And the sea rises higher.’”

  56. benedetta says:

    Gabriel Austin, even if sin is denied (and if we say we do not sin…), not all have been liberated from the pronouncement. The results are in and by all measures the sexual revolution has not brought about sexual health. In fact by secular methodology young people who do not thoughtlessly partake are healthier (and no, those stuck in the days of disco this does not mean, repressed or prudery). People who have increased respect for others are less likely to use and abuse them for their own gratification as first and foremost. It does seem that the slope was indeed very slippery and once leaders felt free to encourage contraception it seems that the sky was then the limit such that now there is reluctance to frown upon abortion which let’s face it is now utilized as contraception as well. I say it and I know others say it as well. It is all well and good to have made a mistake even a big one, once upon a time. But now to continue on as if there is no data and no consequences as if one everything is fine and as if two the leaders and proponents of free love at woodstock have zero responsibility towards the next generation afflicted by their actions is a total con.

    I guess if leaders do not believe in the goodness or the reality of the sacraments themselves they do not teach them to others. If families would like their children to be acquainted anyway it is up to them to accomplish this via the domestic church.

    This legislation has been about pride, defining rights by sexual expression, and about labeling disagreement as about bigotry. I have read that the first legalized union divorced soon after. Relatively few adopt. The emphasis is on encouraging young people to experiment sexually early and often, and not on stable relationship, this is not mere opinion or speculation.

    Marriage is not a sacrament because of heterosexual sex or because of bigotry towards 5 percent or so of the population. It is a sacrament because children come into the world and being defenseless need to be protected and cared for, nurtured into moral and kind human beings. Condemning a generation of children to the stereotype and label of “future bigot” is not a help to that, is only divisive, harms the Church in tangible ways.

    Likely our leaders will be redoubling efforts to provide sacraments, spiritual direction, vocations, catechism, opportunities for communal prayer, rosary rallies, Eucharistic processions for Catholics in order to prepare for the future. It’s well enough for them to escape the label of bigot but surely they would not wish this on innocents?

  57. Charles E Flynn says:

    The whining has already begun.

    From:

    Gay Marriage: A Bittersweet Victory?

    But some rich and influential religious institutions are not only free to continue to reject gay men and women as equal beneficiaries of all aspects of faith but will now rally their congregants to reject politicians who are willing to abide with this extension of secular civil rights — no matter how much acceptance there is of same-sex marriage elsewhere, no matter how many wedding announcements appear in the New York Times.

  58. frjim4321 says:

    I don’t think that proponents of the bill would force the Catholic Church or any other Church to perform same-sex marriages; I think they just want to provide equal protection under the law to same-sex couples as opposite-sex couples.

    I don’t think the K-of-C can be forced to permit a same-sex marriage party in their reception hall, since they are not taking government money for their programs. It will get dicey with regard to adoption issues for Catholic entities which accept some government funds.

  59. RobertK says:

    Well, all our Churches can do now is plainly FORBID any same sex marriages happening in the Catholic Churches in New york. If he state has a problem with that, then they can take it up with Rome. And those Catholic priests who violate the laws of the Church, are automatically excommunicated, and relieved of their duties. Plain and simple. I’m almost sure the Eastern Orthodox Churches in New York will do the same. As will the Oriental Orthodox Churches. And even the Muslims!. So the only choice they will have is to go join a liberal Protestant Church, that has “invalid” sacraments. The government or a state, will not dictate our Faith!!.

  60. mwa says:

    @frjim4321
    It may well be that clergy will not be forced to perform such marriages, but there is the possibility of losing tax exempt status. Cf your example of the K of C hall to the case in New Jersey with the Methodist pavilion
    http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=91486340
    As the npr piece points out, there is also the question of church affiliated counselors, camps, etc., as well as private businesses like the photographer in New Mexico, successfully sued by a same sex couple for declining to photograph their “wedding.”

  61. heway says:

    I believe that what happened was senators reflecting on ‘equal protection under the law’ -which may not make it right but might make them feel better about their decision.
    Get involved in your local CCD programs – and don’t wait for another Thomas More. I have never seen an instruction that equated the Blessed Body of Christ with ‘a wafer’. Catholic children are still instructed in the sacrament of penance or reconciliation and its importance.
    and you must live under a sheet if you have not known of the impending signing of this bill – get a subscription to a good catholic newspaper, as the bishop is not obligated to inform you of everything…….a little more Catholic Action! – (Rev. PatrickPeyton)

  62. Gravesend Guy says:

    Bishop DiMarzio lead a Prayer Vigil from St.Michael’s church in Sunset Park, Brooklyn, yesterday morning. There were over a hundred people present and included about 30 from Australia. The work of Msgr.Reilly and the Helpers of God’s Precious Infants is known internationally. Fr. Reilly is often called upon to speak and give instruction on sidewalk counselling and prayer conducted at abortion sites. Bshp.DiMarzio mentioned the passage of the SSM bill during his homily at the mass and one could see that he wasn’t pleased at the outcome. The vigil attendees processed to a clinic only one block away and were met there by pro abortion demonstraters who used loud musical instruments and insulting comments inorder to attempt to distract the prayers. The Bishop lead us in prayer . The sidewalk counsellors reported later that there were about seven turnarounds that morning. In a few days there should be a 10 minute video posted on Youtube. If you are interested in watching-goto this link : http://www.youtube.com/user/HelpersNY You can look at other videos that have been posted in the past including vigils at this site that was visited yesterday. Please tell your friends about this link.

  63. piscotikus says:

    Out pastor in Rochester did read the Bishops letter at the end of mass this morning.

  64. Centristian says:

    I had to laugh at the comment above from the SSPX supporter who advocates in favor of same-sex marriages. The strange way the world turns.

    As far as the bishops’s statements leading up to the vote, I can vouch for my own diocese in that the bishop’s press office has positively bombarded us with appeals to write to our representatives and to the Governor in opposition to the legislation. Bishop Kmiec has certainly done his part.