“Theologians” against bishops on unnatural sex

From Catholic World News:

Theologians blast US bishops on same-sex marriage

Three theologians who teach at Jesuit institutions  [Jesuit schools again ... what a surprise...] –Paul Lakeland of Fairfield University, Daniel Maguire of Marquette University, and Frank Parella of Santa Clara University [WHO?  We may have heard of Maguire a few times, but... WHO?  Insignificant wannabes, angling for NCR's "Person of the Year".  They won't beat the nuns.] –blasted the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops for its opposition to same-sex marriage. [A suggestion to parents of children approaching college age: refuse to help or to pay for anything for children to go to any of these schools!]

“[Cardinal Timothy] Dolan and the United States Catholic Conference are misrepresenting ‘Catholic teaching,’  [This is rich,] and are trying to present their idiosyncratic minority view as the ‘Catholic position,’ [Whose view is idiosyncratic?] and it is not,” said Maguire in an e-mail. “The bishops will stand with Dolan and the US Catholic Conference, but on this issue, they are in moral schism[ROFL!  He must be getting soft in the head.] since most in the Church have moved on [to] a more humane view on the rights of those whom God has made gay.” [How many things are wrong with that?  God doesn't make people "gay" (and I hate the misappropration of that word, which disguises the moral turpitude of homosexual acts).  That's absurd.  Even if it could be demonstrated that there is a strong "nature" argument, homosexual acts are contrary to human nature.  Thus, it is far more inhumane (which term seems to me more applicable to how we treat dogs than human beings) to approve of actions that kill the soul, offend God, and create social confusion.  Moreover, Maguire knows better than to suggest that Catholic doctrine is determined by majorities or shifting mores.  That's just plain stupid.]

Most Catholic theologians approve of same-sex marriage [Gratis asseritur, gratis negatur.  Thus, NO, Macquire, they DON'T.  Furthermore, if there were a majority among those who self-identify as "Catholic theologians", such a statement would exclude them from actually being "Catholic theologians".  They might be "theologians" of some sort, but they would not really be "Catholic" in an authentic sense, because they would be upholding something directly contrary to perennial Catholic doctrine.] and Catholics generally do not differ much from the overall population on this issue,” [So what?] Maguire added. Maguire, an ex-priest, has also been a stalwart defender of legal abortion. [But remember: Jesuits give him a paycheck.]

Parella said he sees “nothing in the Gospels” [Two problems: Holy Scripture is more than the Gospels alone, and Catholic doctrine is not determined by Scripture along.] that should lead the Church to oppose same-sex marriage, [piffle] while Lakeland said that the US bishops’ opposition to same-sex marriage is “not really an argument that has a theological justification.” [I can't see any justification for him to receive a paycheck from a Catholic school.]

Homosexual acts are sinful.

Same-sex marriage is NOT a civil rights issue.

Same-sex relationships cannot be true marriages.

Calling such relationship “marriages”, even legally, will not make them true marriages in the eyes of God and Holy Church.

FacebookEmailPinterestGoogle GmailShare/Bookmark

About Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

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

63 Responses to “Theologians” against bishops on unnatural sex

  1. akp1 says:

    This is just incredible. Do any of these people ever stop and actually think.

  2. APX says:

    This sounds a lot like what my priest was preaching on before Lent regarding spiritual blindness, or I think of it, “the more you sin, the dumber you get”.

  3. vox borealis says:

    The Jesuits really should be suppressed. Then again, from a purely strategic standpoint, maybe it’s good to keep them a around as a magnet for all the dissenters. They might even be manipulated into serving as a pretty decent quarantine of sorts.

  4. Pingback: Stuff That Makes My Brain Hurt – And Stuff That Makes My Brain Feel Better

  5. DLe says:

    When I saw the “Most Catholic theologians…” bit, among the first things I thought of was Wikipedia’s “[citation needed]“.

  6. Dr. K says:

    “Parella said he sees “nothing in the Gospels” that should lead the Church to oppose same-sex marriage”

    Are these theologians arguing that if something is not explicitly condemned in the Gospels, then it is acceptable for one to engage in the behavior?

  7. ContraMundum says:

    Know ye that the Lord he is God: it is he that hath made us, and not we ourselves

    I remember hearing this verse as a child and thinking, “No kidding. How could anybody think that they made themselves?” Sadly, as an adult I see that this is a common misconception. People are not only in rebellion against God, but against their own nature, because it is something chosen and made by God and not by them. They really want to make themselves, and they have deluded themselves into believing that this is possible.

  8. Centristian says:

    Protestant proponents of “sola scriptura” would stand in awe, I think, of Catholics who want to get away with something. Yet whenever the scriptures clearly condemn the beliefs of such Catholics, they dismiss scripture as “poetry” or as the irrelevant backwards observations and opinions of uneducated writers from another era.

    It’s just amazing that they regard themselves (the 1%, to use their own language) as the totality of the authentic Church, and then absurdly declare that the 99% (including the Pope and all the bishops) are in schism! The far left fringe and the far right fringe have more in common then they realize in that respect.

  9. AA Cunningham says:

    Three dinosaur heretics coming to the end of the nooses that they’ve fashioned for themselves. All had best get their houses in order prior to their particular judgments.

    “No, I say to you: but unless you shall do penance, you shall all likewise perish. ” Luke 13:3

  10. mysticalrose says:

    “Most Catholic theologians approve of same-sex marriage”

    Um . . . that’s because the theological guild has completely silenced the voices of the younger (and therefore untenured!) generation of theologians. Anyway, just three more boomers in the death-throes of power. Yawn.

  11. plemmen says:

    These self-deluded individuals have the disease of liberalism, that their desires and “feelings” count as a definition of the Church’s teachings, that the true Catholic can vote for the beliefs of the Church, can have any determination on said teaching. They cannot. The truth of God’s Word is not open to adjustment by fools that believe that their opinions, wishes and desires are equal to God’s and they have a vote in changing sin into not sin or changing any of God’s Word because they “feel” that it intrudes on their beliefs. I have an answer for them all: The Unitarian Universalist Church is looking for you and your corrupt, self centered doctrine. Go directly there, do not pass GO, do not collect eternal salvation …

  12. Joseph-Mary says:

    Sigh. Any so called ‘theologian” who supports homosexual actions is NOT a Catholic theologian no matter what they call themselves. Saying don’t make it so.

    And the audacity and pride of these Jesuits! So they know better than the Cardinals and bishops do they? Hmmm…someone just might question their ‘orientation’.

    Lets see, what is that definition of heresy again: According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC), “Heresy is the obstinate post-baptismal denial of some truth which must be believed with divine and catholic faith, or it is likewise an obstinate doubt concerning the same; apostasy is the total repudiation of the Christian faith.” [CCC 2089]

    Ok-and one who promotes a heresy is a HERETIC.

  13. BobP says:

    Government needs to get out of the marriage business altogether.

  14. ronconte says:

    During Mass today, the priest spoke out against same-sex marriage. The people responded with applause. I thank God.

  15. Centristian says:

    You know, they can sit there there and pretend to defend homosexuality because “Jesus never even mentions it” in the scriptures. They also, then, tell us that the writings of Paul, for example, are misconstrued, today, because we have lost sight of what words and expressions meant back in his day.

    Fine, If that is so, however, then it would seem to me that there ought to be some evidence that homosexual Christians once upon a time enjoyed unions that were blessed by the Christian Church, back in the days when Paul’s words were “correctly” understood. Yet they never offer any evidence that such was the case. They cannot point to any evidence of Church-sanctioned homosexual unions existing before that point in history (whenever that might have been) that we began to misunderstand Paul and to so egregiously twist the ‘true” meaning of his words.

    Where are all the same-sex marriages blessed by the Church in Apostolic times…when the Church “correctly” understood the scriptures? Show us! Point to even one! Come on! If you want to prosecute the matter, bring out the evidence! Or did all homosexuals back then become eunuchs for Christ, eschewing legitimate marital relationships in favor of the better path of celibacy?

  16. ContraMundum says:

    Government needs to get out of the marriage business altogether.

    No, government needs to do its job correctly, which is to protect the temporal needs of the people as a whole. Government cannot do that without facing the reality of human nature, including the complementary nature of the sexes, but having done that, there is every bit as much of a role for government to support and encourage marriage as to support and encourage business. For example, government should punish bigamists just as it punishes embezzlement.

    Saying that government should get out of marriage is like saying that because a government is corrupt and uses its powers to shut down the businesses of rivals while granting lax enforcement and sweetheart deals to its allies, all government everywhere should stay out of business operations. It may be a necessary safeguard against an abuse taking place at a particular time and place, but in principle it is not the right way to go.

    Oh, and let’s not lose sight of the fact that our temporal good includes being people of good character. Yes, there are eternal reasons for avoiding sin, but there are temporal reasons, too.

  17. acardnal says:

    Parella said he sees “nothing in the Gospels” . . .

    Hey, Parella! There’s nothing in the Gospels about a large number of moral issues which Holy Mother Church rightly condemns as sinful, e.g. embryonic stem cell research, in vitro fertilization, use of weapons of mass destruction, driving drunk, being a Freemason, need I go on.

  18. robtbrown says:

    Parella said he sees “nothing in the Gospels” that should lead the Church to oppose same-sex marriage,

    That was the MO used by Rembert Weakland: “There is nothing in the Gospels that should prevent me from using diocesan funds to buy the silence of my boyfriend.”

  19. Springkeeper says:

    I think some people are like lions, some like eagles, and some (like these sad little three) are just gnats.

  20. Supertradmum says:

    Why cannot the hierarchy go back to formal, public excommunication? This would not happen so frequently.

  21. BillyHW says:

    Jesuit heretics run free while Fr. Guarnizo is still chained in the gulag for defending Christian Truth and the Canon Laws of Holy Mother Church.

  22. Agreed. Supress the jesuits with exception to the TLM saying ones, if there are any. Especially, make Lonergan Theology banned like liberation theology. Gnats … lol!

  23. ContraMundum says:

    @BillyHW

    Take up the canon law issue with Dr. Peters. The outrages of the Jesuits have nothing to do with whether or not Fr. Guarnizo correctly interpreted canon law.

    On the other hand, the speed with which the archdiocese intervened in the two cases does say something troubling about the priorities of the cardinal and his auxiliaries.

  24. mwk3 says:

    Regrettably, it seems to be becoming more and more difficult to find scholars who are doing serious theology. Forget about Augustine and Aquinas; let’s read some Schillebeeckx and some Lyotard. Mary, Seat of Wisdom, pray for us.

  25. Taylor says:

    These generic-brand “theologians” would also argue that “crime is a civil rights issue.” For, they would say “crime is relative.” They would make the slogan, “Murder today; mercy tomorrow.”

    People like this do GREAT HARM to children. Indeed, they have already done harm. They must be resisted.

  26. tcreek says:

    Genesis 19 & Romans 1:26 don’t count?

  27. Clinton says:

    Canon #812 of the Code of Canon Law of 1983 requires that “those who teach theological
    disciplines in any institute of higher studies have a mandate from the competent ecclesiastical
    authority”. It’s been almost thirty years since that law was promulgated.

    In 1996, a dozen years after Canon #812 became law, the USCCB voted to approve a document
    on the application of Ex Corde Ecclesiae and noted in its text that “the mandate of Canon
    #812 will be the subject of further study by the NCCB”. The bureaucracy of the USCCB, on fire
    for the care of souls and the speedy execution of its duties, has been studying Canon #812
    ever since.

    The text of the mandatum that all Catholic theologians are required to seek from
    their respective bishops is: “I hereby declare my role and responsibility as a teacher of a
    theological discipline within the full communion on the Church. As a teacher of a theological
    discipline, therefore, I am committed to teach authentic Catholic doctrine and to refrain
    from putting forth as Catholic teaching anything contrary to the Church’s magisterium”.

    (italics mine)

    Our bishops have unofficially declared that the granting of a mandatum to a Catholic
    theologian is a private matter between an ordinary and the theologian in his charge. Thus,
    while we laity must assume that a mandatum was both sought and granted, the actual
    status of a particular theologian’s mandatum is not for us to know.

    There is an old legal adage that “silence implies consent”. I neither know if theologians
    Lakeland, Maguire and Parella ever bothered to seek a mandatum from their
    respective bishops, nor can I know if ones were ever given. However, I think I can be forgiven
    for assuming by the bishops’ silence that mandates were given. If so, then doesn’t a bishop’s
    continued silence in this matter imply that he considers this to be valid, authentic Catholic
    teaching? Just sayin’.

  28. Mrs. O says:

    So, there’s only 4 OR 5 theologians in the US?

  29. Marc says:

    To call these gentlemen “theologians” is a bit of a stretch, it is clear that they are homosexualists.
    As far as GOD making people gay, I would refer them to Persona humana:

    “A distinction is drawn, and it seems with some reason, between homosexuals whose tendency comes from a false education, from a lack of normal sexual development, from habit, from bad example, or from other similar causes, and is transitory or at least not incurable; and homosexuals who are definitively such because of some kind of innate instinct or a pathological constitution judged to be incurable” (VII)

    And the Catechism, “Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained (CCC 2357)

    After that, I would show them to the door.

  30. LisaP. says:

    These universities charge $30,000, usually $40,000+ *per year* in tuition.

    My state university, $6,000 a year.
    Wyoming Catholic College, $17,000 a year. [And the students shoot guns and rise horses!]
    Our Lady Seat of Wisdom Academy, $6,000 a year.

  31. Gaetano says:

    Paul Lakeland is an angry ex-Jesuit who can be relied upon to spew forth the same tired invectives against the Church & Magisterium whenever the NCR needs one. It’s the same warmed over bile that he’s been venting for several decades now. He also has the theological depth of a rain puddle.

  32. Scott W. says:

    Clinton said, “I neither know if theologians
    Lakeland, Maguire and Parella ever bothered to seek a mandatum from their
    respective bishops, nor can I know if ones were ever given.”

    I reply: I think you would find this interesting where a layman had the cheek to send out 60+ letters to the faculty of Xavier asking about their mandatum:

    http://otritt.wordpress.com/2012/04/11/catholicbuckeye-15/

  33. Supertradmum says:

    It astounds me how those who are so wrong make so much noise to seem right. The real evil is that they want evil to be acceptable theologically.

  34. Tom T says:

    Sadly, this is only part of the Jesuit institutions of higher learning story. Recently there was a
    great deal of controversy over a pro-choice speaker invited to and spoke at the University of Scranton run by a Jesuit priest that recieved phone calls and requsts from pro-life groups and
    over 8500 emails and a protest from the local bishop. Add to this the recent controversy over the invitation of HHS Secretary Sebilius to give a speech at one of the oldest Catholic Universities in America Georgetown, another Jesuit run school, and throw in Fordham and the nun whose book on theology was banned by the USCCB via the Vatican, and you can see a disturbing trend here. I do believe the Jesuits are working on their third excommunication. Pax.

  35. tioedong says:

    nothing in the gospels about homosexuality? well, the Jewish law condemned it,and until 15 years ago, so did everyone else..

    . But those nearby Greco Syrians living in Palestine probably were practicing the well known pedophilia of young boys who worked for them, and one wonders if some of the elite “religious” leaders (appointed by Rome) did so too.

    Which makes me suspect that when Jesus said anyone who “corrupted” children should be thrown into a lake with a millstone around his neck wasn’t talking about those teaching them to eat non kosher meat…

  36. ContraMundum says:

    I wonder if these “theologians” find that the gospels discuss nuclear war? Or immigration?

  37. digdigby says:

    tioedong-
    When Jesus spoke of ‘little ones’ being corrupted, it almost certainly means not children but those new in faith. There is a quite venerable tradition from the trustworthy St. Jerome that when the Beloved Apostle John was quite old at Ephesus he would preach over and over again, “Little children love one another” to his flock. So often did he say this that some thought it might be the effect of old age on his mind, but he said, “I say this often because my Lord said this often.”

  38. Son of Trypho says:

    @robtbrown

    Gold.

    -Strange reasoning for these guys though – I suspect they would be the first to advocate that the Gospels must be examined within their historical/social context (eg. ask them to explain the Good Samaritan story) but in the case of homosexuality they are deliberately ignoring that context and historical/social understanding.

    The bit about moral schism is interesting though – it is suggested that most have moved to a particular position. This suggests that the majority are against the teaching of the Church. The reality of this is that instead of the bishops being in moral schism, a majority of the faithful of the US Church are in effect in moral schism – a terrible indictment of the state of the Church in the US if anything.

  39. Clinton says:

    Scott W., that sounds about right.

    I recall an article in the National Catholic Register (the NCR that’s not a fishwrap)
    wherein the responses of Catholic colleges to Canon #812 were described. A professor from
    the theology department at the University of San Francisco– a Jesuit and occasionally Catholic
    university– was named and interviewed. In his interview, the man went on record to say that
    he and his colleagues in the department all regarded the mandatum as a joke. He went
    on to say that he did not know of a single person in the university’s theology department that
    had bothered to obtain one.

    It wasn’t news to me that he and his colleagues felt as they did. What did surprise me was
    that the man evidently had no qualms about going on record in a nationally published paper
    smugly proclaiming that he finds the idea that a Catholic theologian should owe the Church he
    purports to serve a bare minimum of respect to be– ‘a joke’. It’s been about 10 years since the
    NCR article, and I’d wager nothing has changed in that time.

    Our bishops have through inaction and obfuscation made Canon #812 a dead letter. The
    scandal that is the public statements made by men like Lakeland, Maguire and Parella is the
    inevitable result. It appears our bishops are OK with that.

  40. The Cobbler says:

    “He also has the theological depth of a rain puddle.”
    Sir, thou dost insult that glory of God, the Puddle du Raine. ‘Tis a creature whose depth is not measured by the appearance of its surface; but even if’t were, ‘twould be deeper by far than such ill-named “theologians”.

    Alas, I am not even being humourous.

  41. heway says:

    Maguire is the same clown that made disparaging remarks about Paul Ryan!
    Now we had better prepare to protect ‘sacramental’ marriage as being separate from ‘Obama’ marriage.
    I hate the idea that all Jesuits are thown into the same sewge pile…because I do not believe that they are all on the same page.

  42. Pingback: ‘Theologians’ blast US bishops on same-sex ‘marriage’ | Catholic Canada

  43. Maxiemom says:

    Why do people hate the Jesuits so much? I get so tired of hearing how awful they are. My son attended one of the Jesuit universities listed and not only did he receive a wonderful education, the Jesuits were one of the reasons why he attended mass regularly. And getting college students to attend Mass away from home is not easy.

    I’m sure I’ll take heat for my post, but it is my opinion.

  44. SegoLily says:

    Maxiemom,

    It’s not that Jesuits are hated, it’s that they are dragging down so many in the Church. Other than attend Mass regularly, is your son well catechized and can he be articulate in defending the Church against the world? Does it appear he is Catholic first and his chosen profession second?

    If he attends Mass but also is in the GLBT-Straight Alliance, would like to see women priests, wants all of us to pay for contraception and stumps for Obama are you sure he got the education you wanted?

  45. Maxiemom says:

    Sego Lily –

    “If he attends Mass but also is in the GLBT-Straight Alliance, would like to see women priests, wants all of us to pay for contraception and stumps for Obama are you sure he got the education you wanted?” – sounds to me like you are making an assumption that just because he attended a Jesuit college that he is in favor of these things. Believe me, he’s an intelligent young man who can certainly make up his own mind.

  46. jm says:

    “he’s an intelligent young man who can certainly make up his own mind.”

    Are you trolling?

    But if you are serious, my comment is simply, I would hope *anyone* could make up their own mind, but the point here, very clearly I might add, is the Jesuits are pushing people to make up their minds AGAINST the very clear mind of the Church, and sponsoring heretical voices. No one hates the Jesuits, but many decry their subversive activities and wonder how they justify actively evangelizing against the explicitly confirmed teaching of the Magisterium. Going to Mass is great, but if your head is filled with teaching that undermines the very nature of the service, well, that is reason for taking the teachers to task.

  47. Logician says:

    Why should we think something is wrong simply because it’s contrary to human nature? If I do anything *wrong* when I disregard the driver’s manual and fill my car with inappropriate fuel (which is debatable), it’s not *because* my action is contrary to the telos of the car.

  48. NoraLee9 says:

    The Greeks, upon whom St. Thomas Aquinas based much of work, maintained that most folks have a built in moral compass. I have to ask therefore, why do we hear so little about the “ewww” factor regarding homosexual unions? For all of the political correctness out there, get most Americans home, in the kitchen or the livingroom, with a 6 of beer and a twinkie, and they will admit that the thought of two fellas mixing it up in bed inspires, well, ewwww.

  49. Imrahil says:

    We do hear about what you call the “ewww” factor, but as a clear example of modern absurdity, it is used as argument not against but for homosexual. After all, that mankind through millenia has rejected it, that from the midst the homosexuals’ utopia of tolerance, 4th century BC Greece, Plato denounced it as disobedience to Divine Law, equal to sacrilege (see his Nomoi), that Scripture forbids it, that Christians collectively (which is worse) pity them, – - – that is not little enough of a proof to prove it is wrong; it is much enough of proof that the proof can seemingly only be faked, and prove reversely that mankind has acted tyrannously on it, and that it must be freely allowed.

    “The fact that men have always felt [a thing] only makes [some people] more certain that [it is] unnecessary.” G. K. Chesterton

  50. Granny says:

    NoraLee9
    The eweee factor is pretty high, I don’t want the picture in my head. Read Romans 1- “Because that, when they knew God, they have not glorified him as God, or given thanks; but became vain in their thoughts, and their foolish heart was darkened… who changed the truth of God into a lie; and worshipped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen. For this cause God delivered them up to shameful affections. For their women have changed the natural use into that use which is against nature. And, in like manner, the men also, leaving the natural use of the women, have burned in their lusts one towards another,

    men with men working that which is filthy,

    and receiving in themselves the recompense which was due to their error… they who do such things, are worthy of death; and not only they that do them, but they also that consent to them that do them.”

    Pretty clear ewe factor, “working that which is filthy”
    I wonder if these Jesuits have read Romans?

  51. Imrahil says:

    the Chesterton quote is of course “felt [a thing] necessary”.

  52. BenedictXVIFan says:

    Almost enough to make me ashamed to be a Marquette alumnus. Luckily I took courses in both Christian Marriage (essentially Catholic anthropology and sexual morality) and Theology & Values (really just moral theology, with an emphasis on medical ethics surrounding cloning and the like) from the anti-Maguire. He now teaches at the Pontifical College Josephinum in Columbus, OH. I cannot say it enough: I was so lucky! (Same priest/professor introduced me to Ratzinger (mid-’80′s), in relation to his multiple run-ins with then-Georgetown(?) professor Charles Curran while BXVI was head of the CDF.) Sadly, many of my classmates had Maguire, some seeking him out.

  53. Deacon Steve says:

    Lord, have mercy.
    Christ, have mercy.
    Lord, have mercy.

    These clowns need to fired, pure and simple.
    Thank God for our bishops.

  54. Deacon Steve says:

    Lord, have mercy.
    Christ, have mercy.
    Lord, have mercy.

    These clowns need to fired.
    Thank God for our bishops.

  55. Deacon Steve says:

    Lord, have mercy.
    Christ, have mercy.
    Lord, have mercy.
    These clowns need to fired.
    Thank God for our bishops.

  56. Paul M says:

    As a Santa Clara alum, it’s always painful to see how far off the reservation the school has gone. No surprise that only 48% of undergraduates are Catholic…..

  57. Clemente says:

    What has really happened to these three nutheads is that they have lost the gift they received at their Confirmation — the gift of Wisdom. Well, actually they didn’t lose it; it was taken away because what they have really lost was the gift of Fear of the Lord, which is the beginning of Wisdom. I wonder the need to give these “theologians” media exposure. But it sensationalizes and that’s what people want to read.

  58. Clinton says:

    Deacon Steve, I agree that these clowns need firing. Unfortunately, that’s not gonna happen.

    The brutal fact is that our bishops have zero say in who gets to self-identify as a Catholic
    theologian. That authority has been assumed by the hiring/tenure committees at our
    occasionally Catholic universities and by those who run the journals that publish them.
    If the bishops don’t like the choices places like Georgetown make, they can lump it, for
    it is they who arranged this current state of affairs.

    Rome gave our bishops the means to exercise some oversight over theologians claiming to
    offer Catholic teaching. Our bishops have for 30 years dodged any exercise of the limited
    oversight that is the mandatum. Why this abdication of responsibility? I don’t
    know, perhaps it’s too haarrrd. At any rate, now it’s the increasingly secularized “c”atholic
    universities which determine just who is a Catholic theologian– and as we’ve seen, those
    places are accountable to no one, certainly not the Church they purport to serve.

  59. Cathy says:

    There also is nothing in the Gospels that confirm that 2+2=4. Yet, we accept this as truth. Our Lord had much to say about the exclusivity of marriage when questioned about divorce, I recall He said that in the beginning it was not so, that a MAN would leave father and mother and be joined to his WIFE and the two would become one flesh. A man does not leave father and mother to be joined to another man, he leaves reality and civilization in doing this. A society that promotes this, promotes the divorce of reality and civilization for themselves and their posterity. We’ve been down this road before and have evidence to support the empty promises of contraception, abortion, embryonic stem-cell research and no-fault divorce. It is our obligation and responsibility, not to accept another delusion in the form of so-called same-sex marriage. I am a little more than angry when the USCCB has everything to say about Paul Ryan’s budget, but is mum about Pelosi and Biden’s support for same-sex marriage. It’s so PC to condemn a man for a budget policy, yet so hard to bark at wolves who would destroy a civilization altogether. Pardon my comment, still searching for a bishop, any bishop who has uttered a word to correct either of them in their support of same-sex marriage.

  60. robtbrown says:

    Logician says:

    Why should we think something is wrong simply because it’s contrary to human nature? If I o anything *wrong* when I disregard the driver’s manual and fill my car with inappropriate fuel (which is debatable), it’s not *because* my action is contrary to the telos of the car.

    If you fill your gas tank with water, it is an action that contradicts the telos of car because the car won’t run. Omne agens agit propter finem.

    The finality of a thing is proportioned to its nature, thus its natural acts. In so far as man’s natural end is to act rationally, whatever he does that contradicts his nature also contradicts his natural end. Some sexual sins are contra naturam (homosexuality). Others, howver, are natural acts done in inappropriate situations (e.g., fornication).

  61. Imrahil says:

    Dear @Logician,

    precisely: yes it is. That you do something wrong* with your car if you fill the tank with water or coals is beyond question; that this is wrong *because* it is against the nature of car-using is even clearer.

    *Note that wrong does not necessarily mean sinful. However, although in my private thoughts on morality I’m as far lax as the Church allows me to be, and most friendly to the idea of doing something unforbidden just for the fun of doing it, I actually can hardly think of a likely situation where filling the tank with water wouldn’t involve some sin of some sort.

  62. Dr. Eric says:

    Actually, Our Lord DID teach on marriage:

    “And it came to pass when Jesus had ended these words, he departed from Galilee, and came into the coasts of Judea, beyond Jordan. And great multitudes followed him: and he healed them there. And there came to him the Pharisees tempting him, and saying: Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause? Who answering, said to them: Have ye not read, that he who made man from the beginning, Made them male and female? And he said: For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife, and they two shall be in one flesh.

    Therefore now they are not two, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let no man put asunder.” -St. Matthew 19:1-6

    “And rising up from thence, he cometh into the coasts of Judea beyond the Jordan: and the multitudes flock to him again. And as he was accustomed, he taught them again. And the Pharisees coming to him asked him: Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife? tempting him. But he answering, saith to them: What did Moses command you? Who said: Moses permitted to write a bill of divorce, and to put her away. To whom Jesus answering, said: Because of the hardness of your heart he wrote you that precept.

    But from the beginning of the creation, God made them male and female. For this cause a man shall leave his father and mother; and shall cleave to his wife. And they two shall be in one flesh. Therefore now they are not two, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder. ” -St. Mark 10:1-9

  63. Supertradmum says:

    Dr. Eric, you beat me to it….great list. Thanks and keep up the good fight.