San Fran: Openly homosexual Episcopalian divorced bishop to preside at a Catholic parish’s Vespers?

From Catholic World News:

Gay [I hate the misappropriation of that word] Episcopal bishop to preach at San Francisco Catholic parish
November 22, 2011

A notoriously ‘gay-friendly’ parish in San Francisco has invited an openly homosexual Episcopalian cleric to lead an Advent Vespers service.

Most Holy Redeemer parish asked Bishop Otis Charles, a retired Episcopalian prelate, to lead the November 30 service. After serving as the Bishop of Utah from 1971 to 1993, he publicly announced that he is homosexual. Divorced from the mother of his 5 children, he solemnized a same-sex union in 2004.

FacebookEmailPinterestGoogle GmailShare/Bookmark

About Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Fr. Z is the guy who runs this blog. o{]:¬)
This entry was posted in Liturgy Science Theatre 3000, One Man & One Woman and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

65 Responses to San Fran: Openly homosexual Episcopalian divorced bishop to preside at a Catholic parish’s Vespers?

  1. EXCHIEF says:

    And, as usual, it is unlikely that the Priest who extended the invitation will suffer any consequences. Does the Church have any idea how allowing all of the abuses (of liturgy and otherwise) to occur impacts the laity? Is the Church so afraid of “offending” the diminishing number of Church-goers who remain faithful that it refuses to take action? Bishops, with direction from Rome, need to start taking firm action to deal with the increasing abuses of the Liturgy and Canon Law or there will not be many Cahtolics left when they finally do get around to dealing with these matters. I think we are truely headed for a Roman Catholic Church in the USA which will be small in number and an “American Catholic Church” which will be no different than most Pentecostal denominations.

  2. catholicmidwest says:

    Somebody grab a “program” for the service, take pictures and send the whole lot to Rome.

  3. How did I know it was Most Holy Redeemer! The the parish that used to host LGBTQRSVPX events, until the diocese put the kibosh on it; the parish that recently had an open leather S&M slavemaster serving as the vice-president of its parish council (thus really putting the “vice” in “vice-president”); the parish where an archbishop gave Holy Communion to two fully-camped-up members of the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence. And now this. When does this boil get lanced?

  4. Brad says:

    This is also reported by calcatholic.com.

    This man is a sick sheep. Let us try to see him as our Lord does: as, first and foremost, a beloved lamb who grew up, became ill, is surrounded by wolves (the real wolves: demons), has strayed from earshot of the Shepherd’s whistle and is precariously above a crag. The furnace of the Sacred Heart is blazing for this man and us and the Blood pours out for this man and all of us in our foolishness and sins.

    The Father, too, is pacing at the windowsill, watching the road.

    The Holy Spirit as Hound is running Himself ragged in ceaseless charitable effort.

    This man’s present relationship is disordered, gender-wise, sure. But the worst problem is that his wife still exists and has been set aside.

  5. irishgirl says:

    I echo what you said, Miss Anita: when DOES this get lanced?
    The Archbishop should start using his crosier and give this parish some good hard whacks! Not literally, of course…but when does this stuff stop?
    Yeah, Father Z, I also hate the misappropriation of the word ‘gay’. When I refer to homosexuals, I use the word, ‘homosexuals’. NOT ‘gays’!

  6. APX says:

    Homosexuals involved with that pride thing also hate the word “gay”. Apparently they refer being called “queer”. *eye roll*

    I hate reading stuff like this. It is time for a “temple cleansing”. A temple cleansing of all this dissent, heresies and scandal.

  7. Tom Esteban says:

    If this Priest even so much as gets a letter from his Bishop, even if it is just a friendly reminder type nevermind a stern warning, I will cut off my nose. That’s how confident I am that nothing will happen here. I feel so bad for the parishioners who don’t know any better and are being misled. It’s so sad.

  8. Ezra says:

    If only the Archbishop knew!

  9. picayunelayman says:

    Most Holy Redeemer is not simply “gay friendly”, it’s “gay militant”, “gay celebrant”. Google it.

  10. Matariel says:

    Can’t the Archbishop just place this whole parish under an interdict? There’s really no other option I see.

  11. AnAmericanMother says:

    Well, well, well. This is a pretty kettle of fish.

    The Episcopal bishop, William Swing, yanked Otis Charles’s license to officiate and removed him from his office as suffragan bishop.

    So . . . let me get this straight . . . this guy is too far out there for the Episcopalians, and the Catholics invite him to officiate?

    Just so you know what you’re dealing with here – I mean, this fellow is beyond strange:

    Bishop Charles and his ‘partner’

  12. sjg4080 says:

    Oddly enough, last week’s bulletin on the website noted they are having a Latin Mass on Thanksgiving Day.

  13. Ezra says:

    AnAmericanMother,

    I think you’ve done people a disservice in not linking to Otis’ own page of wedding photographs.

  14. MarkJ says:

    I think we should all contact the parish today before this event happens:
    Most Holy Redeemer Church
    PHONE: (415) 863-6259
    FAX: (415) 552-8786
    On the Internet at: http://www.mhr.org

  15. Dr. K says:

    Shut the church down and never look back.

  16. jasoncpetty says:

    NUKE THE SITE FROM ORBIT

  17. Phillip says:

    I’m all for “hate the sin, love the sinner,” but have these people completely lost their minds? Was the Catholic Church founded by Jesus Christ or was it not? Does the Church have the authority to teach definitively in matters of faith and morals or does it not? If it doesn’t, stop calling yourself a “Catholic church” and start your own sect. If it does, start acting like it.

  18. Dr. K says:

    You should check out the parish Facebook page: http://www.facebook.com/pages/Most-Holy-Redeemer-Church/52838432141?ref=mf

    Every other post relates to “LGBT” topics. Also, they have apparently received negative reviews on Google Places and have enlisted the help of parishioners through Facebook to drown out negative reviews there. Something is seriously rotten if a church needs to stoop to that level.

  19. St. Rafael says:

    The archbishop is not going to do anything about it. He is part of the problem. He’s already at retirement age, and a successor must be named asap! A good orthodox priest. I’m tired of the reshuffling of the same old tired liberal Modernist bishops out in the western U.S. They just move around from diocese to diocese. We need new blood!

    Rome is not going to do anything about this abomination, because they haven’t done anything for decades to stop the abuses. No matter how many letters, photos, and videos the faithful send, there has been no action and discipline from Rome for decades.

    And people say there is no state of emergency in the Church! How many times do the SSPX have to be vindicated? There is an absolute case for administering the sacraments because of the current state of the Church. The faith is not being kept in that parish or the SF diocese, or many other dioceses, or other countries for that matter.

  20. Supplex says:

    Mark J., thanks for posting the address of the Bishop, but I agree with the following comment:

    “If this Priest even so much as gets a letter from his Bishop, even if it is just a friendly reminder type nevermind a stern warning, I will cut off my nose. That’s how confident I am that nothing will happen here. I feel so bad for the parishioners who don’t know any better and are being misled. It’s so sad.”

    I recently heard an FSSP sermon that spoke about the early martyrs and how the Church leaders of today generally lack the fortitude to stand for Church beliefs.

    We need to pray because there is a coming persecution.

  21. Clinton says:

    There is an old legal adage that “silence implies consent”. If the archdiocese remains silent
    over the egregious goings-on in this parish, the faithful can only conclude that it is because
    their shepherds in the chancery endorse what is planned at Holy Redeemer.

    How could the leadership of that archdiocese expect to speak with any sort of credibility in the
    future after rolling over on this? Holy Redeemer parish already holds their Ordinary
    in contempt. By refusing to act on this matter, the shepherds of the San Francisco faithful will
    simply explode their credibility with the rest of their flock as well.

  22. Ralph says:

    I know this article is supposed to make me laugh or make me angry. Honestly, it just makes me sad. Think of all the souls being lost. Think of all the pain that our poor Lord is enduring. Think of the little children who are being taught that this parish is a good place doing good things. What hope do they have?

    Sorry for the rant. Like I said, this makes me very sad.

    Oh good shepherds, where are you?? We need you right now!!

  23. merrydelval says:

    Ezra forgot the best part of the wedding photos site.

    http://otischarles.com/images/O%20embrace.jpg

    Indeed.

  24. ray from mn says:

    Archbishop Niederauer turned 75 earlier this year and presumably submitted his resignation letter to the Pope. I suspect he would have been replaced already, but for the problem that nobody wants to take over this den of vipers.

  25. digdigby says:

    “I left my church in San Francisco…”

  26. zama202 says:

    So why should I not make financial contributions to the SSPX and FSSP rather than my local parish?

    Charles

  27. benedictgal says:

    Just wait until the California delegation goes through its ad limina. Do you really think that Pope Benedict XVI isn’t gently going to take a few ordinaries to the papal woodshed? Of course, Texas has its share of problems, too, and these need to be addressed when our group goes before the Holy Father.

  28. AnAmericanMother says:

    Ezra,
    Had no idea that existed! My mind is boggled.
    The Episcopal parish these two loons had their not-a-marriage at is fringey even for the Piskies.
    They have a fresco of 99 ‘dancing saints’ in modern iconographic style — with some fairly goofy people included such as Margaret Mead, Martha Graham, (huh?) Charles Darwin, Cesar Chavez, O-Sensei (?!? – cool dude but ?!?!?), Chief Black Elk, and Malcolm X dancing the two-step with Queen Elizabeth I.
    I was going to say I wasn’t sure, but I’m absolutely certain I don’t follow that thought process. These people are nuts!

  29. pm125 says:

    Is it about money and ‘community’?

    Thou shalt have NO other gods before Me.
    Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in VAIN.
    Remember the Sabbath Day to keep it Holy.
    Honor thy father and mother that it may be well with thee, and thou may live long on the land.
    Thou shalt not kill.
    Thou shalt not commit ADULTERY.
    Thou shalt not steal.
    Thou shalt not bear FALSE WITNESS against thy neighbor.
    Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor’s house.
    Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor’s wife, or anything that is thy neighbor’s.

    Read in Genesis 19 what happened to the self-concerned after God’s warnings.

  30. BaedaBenedictus says:

    “Just wait until the California delegation goes through its ad limina. Do you really think that Pope Benedict XVI isn’t gently going to take a few ordinaries to the papal woodshed?”

    I wouldn’t be so sure about that. Our New England bishops, led by Cardinal O’Malley, recently had their ad limina visit, and not a peep from the Pope.

    Cardinal O’Malley supports Boston’s own Most Holy Redeemer-type parish (St. Cecilia) and scandalously approved the gay pride mass “celebrated” there this past summer. It was a disaster for the Church’s witness.

  31. Joe in Canada says:

    Once we allow ANY Protestant cleric to ‘preach’ at Vespers, why cavil at what type they are? I mean Episcopalian Bishops, for example, are a known quantity. If it’s not a same-sex-married man, it could be a woman married-to-a-man who thinks that abortion is a gift from God (http://www.pursuingholiness.com/katherine-ragsdale-meet-bobby-calvan/), or who is also a practicing Muslim (http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2003751274_redding17m.html), etc.

  32. Long-Skirts says:

    sjg4080 says:
    “Oddly enough, last week’s bulletin on the website noted they are having a Latin Mass on Thanksgiving Day.”

    AMBIGUITY

    One day Assisi
    The next day Latin
    One day The Way
    Some use a paten.

    Some let ministers
    Eucharistic-chick
    Hand out Our Lord
    So you can have your pick.

    Sometimes queer giving
    Advent Vespers, neat!
    Holding hands in the air
    Kneelers obsolete.

    One Holy Catholic
    Apostolic Church?
    Good for some let others run
    In circles as they search.

    For we are all approved
    Don’t ever rock the boat –
    Like those who open schools have classes
    Teaching souls to float.

    Saintly Thomas More
    Could’ve had it all
    Private Latin Masses
    Behind a purpled wall.

    But no – he chose the scaffold
    Where truth and lie collide

    Heads were cut –

    Entrails gut -

    Ambiguity couldn’t hide!

  33. cpaulitz says:

    People have a tendency to look only at this example and not the bigger picture: that this is just but one example plaguing the Novus Ordo typical parish.

    Just look at any polling and you’ll see a majority of Catholics who see nothing wrong with homosexuality.

    Let this church rot as it eventually will. They’re not Catholic anyway.

  34. BaedaBenedictus says:

    Dave in Canada:

    The “abortion is a blessing” Rev. Katherine Ragsdale would be very much offended at your insinuation that she is married to a man!

    She “married” another Episcopalian priestess early this year. The Bishop of Massachusetts performed the ceremony at the cathedral in Boston (otherwise known for offering “hip-hop worship” on Wednesdays and Muslim prayers on Fridays).

    Remember, with Episcopalians, nothing is too outrageous. Our own Modernist churchmen are mighty jealous they don’t have a Rome to hold them back… at least modestly.

  35. Joanne says:

    Interesting that this person was evidently married to a woman. I have to wonder if a person who would enter into marriage under false pretenses, eg, to hide his or her (homo)sexuality or marrying with no intention of being faithful, etc, is not a sociopath. Could someone with a conscience really be capable of lying to someone on such a profound level?

    At any rate, this person is an abysmally poor choice to lead any type of service in any institution, but in fairness, and yes, I know I’m really reaching here, but allowing him to lead the service is not necessarily to condone the way in which he lives.

  36. Tom Ryan says:

    If this parish invited Bishop Williamson, how long do you think it would take for the chancery to act?

  37. cpaulitz says:

    Tom Ryan: Tuche

  38. kallman says:

    Rome moved on Morris and Kennedy.
    It is a matter of getting accurate and factual evidence to the appropriate dicastery in a clear and polite way.

  39. Cristero says:

    jasoncpetty says:
    23 November 2011 at 1:38 pm
    NUKE THE SITE FROM ORBIT

    That is hilarious!

    It’s the only way to be sure!

  40. Former Altar Boy says:

    Is it any wonder why the weak fall away or the fallen away don’t bother to return when they see/learn of disobedience like this?

  41. Banjo pickin girl says:

    joanne, some people marry not knowing they are homosexual or are in denial about it. let’s not assume that things are worse than they already are.

  42. jhayes says:

    Baeda Benedictus said: “Cardinal O’Malley supports Boston’s own Most Holy Redeemer-type parish (St. Cecilia) and scandalously approved the gay pride mass “celebrated” there this past summer. It was a disaster for the Church’s witness.”

    On the contrary, I think the diocese’s statement was a good reminder that God’s church is a church for all people.

    The diocese was concerned that the Mass had been scheduled during Gay Pride Week. They did not want it to seem that the church was supporting Gay Pride Week, so the Mass was postponed into the next month

    June 19, 2011 – Archdiocese of Boston statement regarding prayer service at St. Cecilia Parish Boston
    “The Archdiocese of Boston is committed to evangelization and to being a welcoming Church for all of God’s people. St. Cecilia’s is a wonderful example of the exceptional parishes in the Archdiocese which seek to serve the Catholic faithful with grace, dignity, respect, compassion and love and being devoted to the Gospel and Christ’s saving ministry.

    The reports that the Mass, originally scheduled for June 19th, was cancelled are not accurate. Rather the Mass was postponed. As indicated in the statement of the Archdiocese on June 10, a Mass welcoming the wider community of the faithful, including gays and lesbians, will be held. The Mass has been rescheduled to Sunday, July 10th at 11am.

    We respect the desire of those individuals organizing and participating in the prayer service. We know that the postponement of the June 19th Mass has been disappointing to them. Our hope and prayer is that we can come together as one community of Catholics sharing in the Lord’s divine love for each of us.”

    http://www.bostoncatholic.org/Utility/News-And-Press/Content.aspx?id=20754

  43. AnAmericanMother says:

    Joe —

    To be fair, the female who thought she could be a Muslim and an Episcopal priest(ess) at the same time was inhibited by her bishop.

    And this Episcopal fellow was inhibited by his bishop.

    So at least in those two cases, the Episcopalian hierarchy is showing more backbone and initiative than the Catholic hierarchy.

    What is wrong with this picture?

  44. Joe in Canada says:

    Baeda Benedictus: you’re right – my bad. I thought she was married to a man.
    AnAmericanMother; not at first but yes, eventually. I’m a bit confused as to why she was defrocked by the bishop of Rhode Island when she was a priestess of Seattle. Bishop Otis was not defrocked, merely deprived of his licence to perform their sacraments by his successor. I presume he is still a bishop in good standing with his communion.

  45. Denis says:

    Bishops are too busy fighting the evil traditionalists to worry about trivial matters like this. But remember: these people have their “100% full communion” and “hey I’m fully regularized” papers stamped, so you’d be a cranky old crank to suggest that one might be wise to avoid such parishes and choose the SSPX instead.

  46. rakowskidp says:

    “Is it any wonder why the weak fall away or the fallen away don’t bother to return when they see/learn of disobedience like this?”

    No kidding. Stories like these kept popping up as I was researching Catholicism prior to conversion, and have since made my evangelistic efforts much more difficult than I’d like.

  47. BaedaBenedictus says:

    Mr. Hayes,

    The pastor, Fr. John Unni, of St. Cecilia’s, said the following in a homily during the controversy over the gay pride mass:

    “You are welcome here, gay or straight, rich or poor, young or old, black or white. . . . Here, you all can say, ‘I can worship the God who made me as I am.’ ’’

    So God made people “gay”? You see the implications of this novel teaching Fr. Unni and the St. Cecilia “Rainbow Ministry” have been promoting for years?

    From the Boston Globe:

    The Rainbow Ministry of St. Cecilia’s Church opened its doors to nearly 700 people yesterday for a long-awaited Mass in support of gay and lesbian Catholics, capping a month of controversy over the Boston Archdiocese’s postponement of the service.

    A standing-room-only crowd, larger than Easter Sunday’s, packed the pews to hear the Rev. John J. Unni’s characteristically fiery message of love, acceptance, and the forgiveness of sins.

    Unni’s message, which encouraged the congregation to welcome outcasts as Jesus did 2,000 years ago, was similar to that of weeks past. The difference yesterday, parishioners said, was Unni’s courage to say those words during a Mass that has drawn so much vitriol as well as passionate support.

    “This is not about taking a stand; it’s about standing in the right place,’’ Unni said as members of the congregation, packed shoulder-to-shoulder in the non-air conditioned sanctuary, fanned themselves with programs. “Be with the outcasts. Be with those relegated to the margins.’’

    His words marked the fifth week of back and forth between the church and the archdiocese, which began when St. Cecilia’s announced in its bulletin an “All Are Welcome’’ Mass, scheduled during Gay Pride Month in support of a sizable gay and lesbian portion of the congregation. Many of those members came from the South End’s predominantly gay Jesuit Urban Center, which closed in 2007. . . .

    Leading the processional, Rainbow Ministry president John Kelly walked into the nave in front of Unni, carrying a gold cross.

    “I can’t believe this is happening,’’ Kelly later recalled thinking as he approached the altar. “I never thought I’d see this day.’’

    After growing up gay in South Boston, Kelly, 69, left Catholicism for more than 20 years before finding compassion and a diverse congregation at the Jesuit Urban Center.

    “I went through hell,’’ Kelly said. “But today, I’ve never felt so blessed.’’

    Many in the congregation wore “All Are Welcome’’ buttons showing a cross and a rainbow, the symbol of the gay rights movement.

    “Thank you for saying, ‘This is who we are,’ ’’ Unni said to gay and lesbian parishioners at the end of Mass. “You are a beautiful and integral part of this parish.’’

    Mayor Thomas M. Menino, who attended the service, said he follows the teachings of the Catholic Church for most issues, but on social issues he goes with his heart. The Catholic Church accepts gay and lesbians as humans and Catholics, but considers homosexuality a sin, as it does with extramarital sex between a man and a woman, according to a 2005 letter written by Cardinal Sean P. O’Malley.

    —-

    Now, Mr. Hayes, what kind of message do you think the Archdiocese sends with this? Fr. Unni and St. Cecilia’s has been promoting the homosexual lifestyle for years, and the Archdiocese continues to allow it. Cardinal O’Malley’s lip service to Church teaching is woefully inadequate when he continues to countenance this derogation of TRUE pastoral care to members of his flock who have SSA (and St. Cecilia’s isn’t the only one; all things “LGBT” are promoted in the local Franciscan shrine, and the Paulist Center is a hotbed of “gay liberation”).

    It’s a scandal, just like other approved “LGBT” Catholic centers in San Francisco, the Twin Cities, and elsewhere. My father is now a Protestant, but every time he attempts to feel his way back into the Church, this kind of stuff keeps him away. What’s the point of having a hierarchy when anything goes? We might as well be congregationalists.

  48. Supertradmum says:

    These type of actions on the part of certain priests and congregations will lead to schism in the Church. This would be an excellent time for the USCCB to make a joint statement on such activities, as apparently the American Church needs reminding as to the Truth of the Gospel.

  49. jhayes says:

    BaedaBenedictus says ” what kind of message do you think the Archdiocese sends with this?”

    A very good one. I think. I have never been to St. Cecilia’s church and I have never met Fr. Nunni, but by moving the Mass out of Gay Pride Week, they seem to have threaded the needle of getting across that the church does not support homosexual activity but welcomes and supports people who have homosexual inclinations, just as it welcomes and supports heterosexual couples who are cohabiting outside of marriage, other single people who have sex, divorced and civilly remarried couples and all the rest of us sinners.

    As the Catechism says:

    2358 The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God’s will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord’s Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.

  50. jesusthroughmary says:

    “Out and proud”, practicing homosexuals are not “fulfilling God’s will in their lives”, and should not be encouraged to receive Communion at a special Mass especially for them. That is scandalous and a distortion of Church teaching. To exclude them from Communion is not unjust discrimination, but just discrimination. To celebrate such a Mass and to encourage them, at the risk of their souls and the priest’s own soul, to receive Communion in their current state of life, is in fact unjust NON-discrimination.

    Nor would a Mass for divorced and civilly remarried couples be appropriate, by the same logic.

  51. jesusthroughmary says:

    To be clear, special Mass or otherwise, those living in a state publicly opposed to the Church’s teaching have excluded themselves from Communion.

  52. haribo says:

    jhayes,

    The problem with LGBTQ ministries is that they celebrate identities constructed around tendencies that are “objectively disordered.” That’s not ok, even if the organizers fall short of condoning homosexual behavior. As an example, a ministry for alcoholics might encourage people to come to terms with their sinful tendencies, but it would be wrong to hold a Mass for alcoholics that didn’t also clearly condemn alcoholism.

    This is a distinction a lot of people miss because they’ve always been taught to think of people attracted to the same sex as “gays” or “lesbians” rather than free individuals who can chose not to let their inclinations define themselves. That’s a dangerous assumption the Church can’t reinforce.

  53. jhayes says:

    Jesusthroughmary, I haven’t heard that the priest invited people to come to communion regardless of their state of grace. Have you found that somewhere?

    I’ve found the website or the church. Looks like a pretty normal city parish in a handsome building

    http://www.stceciliaboston.org/index.html

    The photo gallery shows a lot of people engaged what looks like an active parish life

    http://www.stceciliaboston.org/gallery.html

  54. Supertradmum says:

    As a humble reminder, do we not all have tendencies to sin? Why aren’t these liberal churches asking fornicators and adulterers, embezzlers and murderers to come up for recognition without repentance? Why do these liberal priests make an exception of sin for homosexuality, as if the embracing of this lifestyle was not sinful? I am reminded again of the section in the Catechism on the sins which cry out to Heaven for justice: 1867 The catechetical tradition also recalls that there are “sins that cry to heaven”: the blood of Abel,139 the sin of the Sodomites,140 the cry of the people oppressed in Egypt,141 the cry of the foreigner, the widow, and the orphan,142 injustice to the wage earner.143

  55. jhayes says:

    Supertradmum, I think your argument is really with the Cardinal Archbishop of Boston. I can’t speak for him but you’ll find his press release about the Mass up above in one of my earlier posts.

    I don’t know, but perhaps he had this in mind:

    “While he was at table in his house, many tax collectors and sinners sat with Jesus and his disciples; for there were many who followed him.

    Some scribes who were Pharisees saw that he was eating with sinners and tax collectors and said to his disciples, “Why does he eat with tax collectors and sinners?”

    Jesus heard this and said to them (that), “Those who are well do not need a physician, but the sick do. I did not come to call the righteous but sinners.”

  56. Gibbons in SF says:

    You are cherry-picking the Catechism, jhayes. You cite Catechism entry 2358, which is fine, but without providing the context of the preceding entry #2357:

    “Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex. It has taken a great variety of forms through the centuries and in different cultures. Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained. Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity, tradition has always declared that “homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered.” They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.”

    and the following entry #2359:

    “Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection.”

    I don’t know about St. Cecilia’s, but if you think chastity is being promoted at MHR, you are incorrect. Speaking of MHR, the Rainbow Sashers have noted the Most Holy Redeemer/Bishop Charles Vespers service, and are, one hopes prematurely, congratulating Archbishop Niederauer, on his inaction:

    “The Rainbow Sash Movement is encouraged by Archbishop Niederauer lack of action on this matter, and believes he is taking a role in responding to the rampant homophobia that is alive and well in the Church.”

    http://rainbowsashmovement.wordpress.com/2011/11/23/archbishop-of-san-francisco-appears-to-be-defusing-homophobia-in-his-archdiocese/

  57. jhayes says:

    Gibbons in SF said “I don’t know about St. Cecilia’s, but if you think chastity is being promoted at MHR, you are incorrect.”

    I don’t know anything about MHR and I haven’t commented on it.

    Regarding CCC 2357 and 2359, I haven’t suggested that the church does not teach that sexual activity outside of sacramental marriage is sinful regardless of whether it is homosexual, heterosexual or solitary (see also 2351 to 2356).

    Regarding Boston, the cardinal was involved in the decision to hold the Mass, and that’s good enough for me. from my observation, he is an intelligent and holy man.

  58. benedictgal says:

    Just because the bishops coming back from the ad limina haven’t said anything about their meeting with the Holy Father, that does not mean that something didn’t happen. Bear in mind that the groups also meet with the Curia. Even if Pope Benedict may not have directly addressed the situation, whose to say that Cardinal Canizares and Cardinal Burke did not have something to say on the matter? Silence does not necessarily mean the absence of things.

    If enough of the faithful write to the CDW, something is bound to give.

  59. jhayes says:

    In my last post, I mentioned that Cardinal O’Malley had been involved in rescheduling the Mass. Here is his statement at the time

    The philosophical and political agenda of Gay Pride in relation to marriage and sexual morality is incompatible with the Church’s teachings. For that reason, Father Unni rescheduled a Mass of welcome for all his parishioners to a time that would not associate the Mass with the Gay Pride agenda.

    I realize that Catholics who have same-sex attractions are often criticized by their friends for coming to Mass and that the parents and friends of homosexual members of our Church are distressed that their loved ones feel rejected by their Church. We want all baptized Catholics to come to Mass and be part of our community, but we cannot compromise the teaching of the Church rooted in Scripture and tradition.

    We hope that all Catholics will come to experience the love of Christ in our community and that in that love they will find the courage and strength to embrace the cross that is part of the life of discipleship.

    It is regrettable that there has been so much confusion about this matter. I hope the statement on my blog of last week and The Pilot editorial “A teachable moment” will help people to understand the Church’s teaching. We must be a community that reflects both the love and the truth of the Gospel.

  60. jhayes says:

    Here is the beginning of the Cardinal’s blog entry mentioned in the quote above

    I want to begin this week addressing a very important issue.

    Some say that the Catholic Church hates people with same-sex attractions. This is not true. In fact, if there are any members of the Church who hate people because of their sexual orientation, they need to go to confession. But it is true that the Church exists to announce the Gospel and invite people to conversion, to greater discipline in their lives as they seek to follow Christ’s teachings, which apply to everyone, regardless of their sexual orientation.

    As Catholics, we must oppose the hatred and rejection of homosexual persons that exists in our society. We do not want them to be the object of discrimination or violence. We believe, however, that God’s law is written in our hearts and that to lead a fully human life we need to embrace His commandments. This is not always easy, we all struggle and sometimes we fail; but a loving and forgiving God is always there to lift us up and help us start over again.

    http://www.cardinalseansblog.org/2011/06/17/

  61. Supertradmum says:

    jhayes,

    Those sinners in the Gospel repented, which is the entire idea of evangelization. One does not accept unrepentant sinner to receive Holy Communion. Confession first, Communion second. As to accepting all sinners, I hope you, like me, do this daily. We all have fallen short of the glory of God, but to ignore serious sin at Holy Communion is to partake in a sacrilege. My entire world, barring one or two hours per day, is with the active homosexual community here, because of where I am living and with whom I am doing business, a community which is in your face and arrogant. It is my duty to bring them to Christ and repentance, not to give them Holy Communion.

  62. eulogos says:

    I remember once that a priest invited to one of these “gay masses” preached that while it is not a sin to experience SSA, even predominately to experience SSA, and that those who do have the full dignity of all human beings, and are called as we all are to become saints, but that all homosexual acts are sinful, and the inclination itself is intrinsically disordered.

    There were expressions of displeasure from the “worshippers” and furious complaint afterwards. The organization which sponsored the mass apologized for inviting this priest, saying that of course they would not have done so if they had known what he would say.

    I wish I could remember the specifics. Does anyone else know what I am referring to?

    When crowds like this hear that they are being supported as “gay Catholics” what they hear is that they are being supported in their homosexual relationships. They may believe that as Catholics they have to be faithful to one partner and not pick up people at gay bars….and yes, that is a good thing….but they believe their relationships are morally right and loving etc etc, and that God made them homosexual and approves their relationships. When they hear/read what the bishop says, they think, “That’s what he has to say for the sake of the authorities in Rome” and they easily understand that they are not to take those words seriously.

    Now whether the bishop is naive about this or whether he knows very well he is speaking “Rome-speak” for public consumption while not believing a word of it, I don’t know. It is difficult to believe he could be so naive. I don’t want to say he could be so duplicitous. But it has to be one or the other.
    Susan Peterson

  63. BaedaBenedictus says:

    Everyone knows about the rampant homosexual activism at St. Cecilia’s, and the Paulist Center. The Cardinal most certainly does, but he won’t rock the boat, even if it means abandoning his homosexually-oriented flock.

    And he is. Remember Ted Kennedy’s funeral? His Eminence is a Capuchin like Archbishop Chaput, but that’s where the similarities end.

  64. eulogos says:

    About the “marriage” of the Episcopal clergyman: Looking at the pictures I find it particularly outraging that they are aping the ceremonies of Orthodox/Eastern rite Catholic weddings. This church “St Gregory of “Nissa” (should be Nyssa) appears to have blasphemous “icons”, an open worship space without pews, much like many Orthodox churches. The “groom and groom” are wearing “crowns” as the bride and groom do in an Orthodox or EC church. The “dance around the altar” is also an Eastern custom. How dare they? It wasn’t enough for them to copy a secular wedding with vaguely Christian trappings vaguely reminscent of the Book of Common Prayer, which after all is their own tradition? The Eastern wedding ceremony, when done according to the book, contains something like twelve references to the hoped for fruitfulness of the marriage. Obviously, they had to leave out those parts!
    Upsetting.
    Susan Peterson

  65. haribo says:

    Susan,

    The couple was probably trying to imitate the Eastern adelphopoiesis ceremony, literally “brother-making” ceremony, which the gay historian John Boswell claimed in the mid-90s was actually a marriage-like same-sex union. Boswell also made the inaccurate claim that the rite included marriage crowns.