OREGON: Govt. official: those who resist “gay” marriage must be “rehabilitated”

"Hold high the great red banner of Mao Zedong Thought--thoroughly smash the rotting counterrevolutionary revisionist line in literature and art" - 1967

During the Cultural Revolution in China (1966-1976 – the time when the greatest damage was being done in the name of the Spirit of Vatican II) people were bullied into rejection of the sì jiù, the Four “Olds”: Old Customs, Old Culture, Old Habits, and Old Ideas.  The Four Olds were equated with monsters and demons, “cow ghosts and snake spirits”, that had to be purged.

The conforming hoards, taken up in a frenzy of fear and zeal, marched in the streets chanting slogans, pasting up posters, such as “Beat down the bad elements!”, “Beat down Jesus following!”, “Beat down the counter revolutionists!”.

Those who were perceived – usually through denunciation – to adhere to the Four Olds, counter-revolutionists, were seized.  The lucky ones were forced into public self-criticism, humiliation, physical abuse and re-education.  The less lucky were killed. Many “intellectuals” (just about any with more than a high school education) were sent to re-education camps in the country-side where they were “educated” by the purer proletariat through forced-labor and more self-criticism and abuse.

Re-education camps.

I read sometime today at the site of the National Organization for Marriage:

Oregon Official Says Bakers Who Support Traditional Marriage Need ‘Rehabilitation

Despite the fact that Oregon bakers saw a huge boom in business after standing up for their belief in marriage (proving that many other Oregonians feel the same way), Labor Commissioner Brad Avakian says the state government’s goal is to “rehabilitate” them:

A lesbian couple filed a formal complaint against “Sweet Cakes by Melissa” in Portland after the owners – Aaron and Melissa Klein – declined on the basis of their Christian faith to provide services for a lesbian “wedding.”

“To say that this couple needs to be ‘rehabilitated’ for believing and practicing the values on which this nation was founded is entirely beyond the pale,” says [Tim Wildmon, president of the American Family Association].

“This sounds like Stalinist Russia or China under Mao, where those who thought for themselves were forced under government coercion into re-education camps. This is not the America that was given to us by our Founders.”

Matt Barber [vice president of Liberty Counsel Action] says the “rehabilitation” remark connotes some kind of ailment, mental illness or physical ailment. “You know, we rehabilitate criminals,” he explains. “Are they saying that Christianity is criminal here and we have to rehabilitate those who embrace the Christian sexual ethic? That’s what this official in Oregon is saying.”

Wildmon wonders what might follow if the bakery owners refuse to be “rehabilitated.” -One News Now

Please say a prayer for Archbishop Alex Sample, who has the heavy pastoral mandate in the Archdiocese of Portland.

Let’s be clear about something: we are not yet being truly persecuted, in the strong, physical sense.  We are not in N. Korea or China.  Our churches are not yet being systematically burned, as in Egypt.  Our priests and bishops are not yet being hunted down and “disappeared”.

But the storm clouds are gathering.  Soft-persecution is rising.

Pò sì jiù!

 

FacebookEmailPinterestGoogle GmailShare/Bookmark

About Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Fr. Z is the guy who runs this blog. o{]:¬)
This entry was posted in Hard-Identity Catholicism, Liberals, New Evangelization, One Man & One Woman, Our Catholic Identity, Pò sì jiù, The Coming Storm, The future and our choices, The Last Acceptable Prejudice and tagged , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

67 Responses to OREGON: Govt. official: those who resist “gay” marriage must be “rehabilitated”

  1. SKAY says:

    The first year that the Obamas were in The White House there was a picture of Mao on a Christmas decoration on one of the Christmas trees.

    They and the press seemed to think it so funny that anyone would be upset.

  2. jhayes says:

    Here’s the way the word “rehabilitate” was used in context. It’s clear that It doesn’t mean forcing people to change their beliefs. As Avakian is quoted as saying “people are entitled to their own beliefs” [Riiiight.]

    The question is whether a baker who refuses to provide a cake for a same-sex wedding is violating the state anti-discrimination law. I don’t know the answer to that. Presumbly, it will be decided in the courts.

    The law provides an exemption for religious organizations and parochial schools, but does not allow private business owners to discriminate based on sexual orientation, just as they cannot legally deny service based on race, age, veteran status, disability or religion.

    “Everybody is entitled to their own beliefs, but that doesn’t mean that folks have the right to discriminate,” Avakian said, speaking generally.

    An administrative law judge could assess civil penalties.

    “The goal is never to shut down a business. The goal is to rehabilitate,” Avakian said. “For those who do violate the law, we want them to learn from that experience and have a good, successful business in Oregon.”

    The bureau’s civil rights division conducts about 2,200 investigations a year on all types of discrimination, Avakian said.”

    http://www.oregonlive.com/gresham/index.ssf/2013/08/lesbian_couple_refused_wedding.html

  3. mlmc says:

    well his spokeperson Anita Dunn did say she Mao was one of her favorite political philosophers

  4. mamajen says:

    So it’s okay to “rehabilitate” people opposed to gay marriage against their will, but it’s not okay to offer rehabilitation to gay people who want to change. Got it.

  5. pannw says:

    Thank you, Father Z, for bringing this and similar stories to light. The number of people who should know better, that I see claiming there is no, nor will there be any persecution of Christians in the USA in our lifetimes because of the First Amendment, blah blah…is frightening. They are either lying to themselves, others or both. I think it is clearly coming, but even I find it shocking how quickly. Of course, 40 years after the legalization of child murder, I shouldn’t be surprised. Romans 1

    I had heard of these bakers a few months ago and went to their website. Melissa had posted that she was no longer posting names of other recommended wedding service providers since they were being harassed too, simply because she had recommended them. They also had a picture of their three young children, and the hateful radical homosexual agenda pushers were all too willing to see those children’s parents lose their livelihood, just because the parents won’t cater to the homosexual’s perverse desires. Awful… And these are the people behind all the anti-bullying campaigns. Hypocrites.

  6. Tantum Ergo says:

    It’s coming. This is the work of Satan, and for some reason God has allowed this. Maybe it’s a “wake-up call” for us to take this war seriously. Christians are born for combat, that’s why we on earth are called the “Church Militant”. Wake up, for God’s sake: the Enemy has been ravaging our land, and is now at our very doorstep.

  7. Johnno says:

    I’ve had the displeasure of listening to some liberal radio stations recently. One time was when the mayor did not want to participate in the pride parade. The other time was aronud our conservative mp’s remarks about Russia banning homosexual indoctrination in children and activism.

    Repeatedly you’d get pro-homosexual people make reference to ‘shaming.’ ‘Shaming’ and ‘harassing’ the mayor to represent the city in the pride parade, or ‘shaming’ Russia into changing their laws.

    ‘Shaming’ often means using slurs such as ‘bigot’ or ‘religious fundamentalist’ or other such terms repeatedly over and over to drown down a person. Booing them. Insulting them. Ad hominem. Anything and everything possible to force them to change their opinion or beliefs or simply to go away and shut up. Also calling for their employment and livelihood to be terminated. Make them unhirable. Whatever it takes.

    Which is so funny considering these same folks cry about ‘bullying’ and about using slur words against homosexuals, and of making homosexuals feel shame, when they should feel pride! It’s all so conveniently hypocritical. And this is why I fully support Russia in their actions and any attempt to put down the homosexual ideology. They don’t deserve it. Any leeway they have been generously given has been squandered by their double standards and hypocrisy. When Christ told us to turn the other cheek, he was not talking about submission, but defiance in the face of evil. “Here, slap the other one! What do I care. I won’t give in!”

    But now our children are under attack and so are our livelihoods. There is no neutrality. This is a winner-take -all situation. It’s time to make them learn the value of shame and put them in place. Time to call out all our elected officials on their hypocrisy and shame them for their obtuse one sided-ness. Time to hold back votes. Time to hold back money. And also, if you are up to it, arm yourself and get together in groups and with local police, lawyers and security so they can be kept on hand. Protect each other. This is the community we need to build. Not the happy clappy one.

  8. wmeyer says:

    Well of course, mamajen, because being gay is biological, but being opposed to “gay marriage” is a choice.

    Hedonism and hubris are the twin horrors which will ultimately finish this society.

  9. Ben Kenobi says:

    Thank you Father Z for sounding the alarm!

  10. marylise says:

    Militant homosexualism bears comparison with the tactics of King Henry VIII when he abandoned the one true Catholic faith for his own man-made false religion and forced his subjects to follow suit. In both cases, there is a requirement, enforced by the state, to deny centuries of history. Up until the early 1500s, virtually all of England was Catholic. Then King Henry VIII, motivated by lust, suddenly declared, by implication, that those first 1500 years were a mistake. The whole country was wrong to be Catholic. Why? Because Henry wanted a divorce from his legitimate wife and the pope would not condone this injustice. The homosexualist militants are even more extreme. They expect the entire human race to agree that all cultures throughout all times have been wrong in thinking of marriage as a union between one man and one woman. Furthermore, they want to force all of us to declare, at least by implication, that our parents, grandparents and other ancestors were sadly mistaken in believing in the sanctity of their marriages. We must be alert to this aspect of the homosexualist agenda. Any complicity with their program is a direct affront to our parents and the unbelievable sacrifices they made so that we could have life, baptism, education, the security of a stable family and the possibility of eternal salvation. To agree with homosexualists we have to be willing to say that our parents got it wrong and their conjugal love was no better than sodomy. This is such a horrifying lie that it is painful to write, even to refute it. However, we must understand what is at stake.

  11. Supertradmum says:

    Soft persecution does not last long in history, but escalates into hard persecution within a very short period of time. This rehabilitation ideal will merely add to the marginalization and demonization of Catholics, but, I am afraid too many will do what the majority did under Henry VIII and his heirs, bar Mary and that is go along with the government and join in the persecution of Catholics. I also think that because of the media and financial pressures, Catholics will be seen as scapegoats for civil unrest much as the “tea party” and anti-abortion groups are seen now.

    Fines have already been enforced in Canada, even against Bishop Henry of Calgary, brought before the so-called human rights commission and fined for sending a pastoral letter to his priests against ssm and homosexual activity. Now, that was a few years ago.

    I shall give us a maximum of two years before some priests and even laity are severely fined, imprisoned and Church property confiscated for lack of payment of fines. Two years max.

  12. Kathleen10 says:

    Yes, Fr. Z., thank you for your courage in discussing it. We see it coming as well.

    Look, we don’t have to sit here like ducks waiting for the shot. There are things we can do!
    Go to the Facebook page of both Governor Fitzhaber and Brad Avakian! Right on the front of the page there is a place for your comment. Put in a comment! Tell the Governor and Mr. Avakian exactly what you think of Mr. Avakian’s words! Imagine if the Facebook pages of both of these gentlemen were filled with comments demanding a retraction!
    When you confront bullies, they often back down, and these tyrannical actions are indefensible when we demand what we are due, our Constitutional freedom! This stuff has wheels right now only because people are full of apathy and fear. If there is a shred of Patriot DNA left in our people, we have a responsibility to do more than just sideline complaining and fretting. Imagine for a moment if every American did something when these things happen. WE CAN STOP THEM. We just need to get active and involved. Thanks to Fr. Z. for bringing this to our attention. Now, we must ACT on it. This is true however we learn of these fascist maneuvers. Resist!
    Do you think it would have an impact if the Governor of Oregon were flooded with calls and emails? Even commenting on Facebook, or on media sites, it inspires others who may live in Oregon to do the same. It makes a difference, absolutely! Even better, don’t stop. Keep posting, emailing the Governor, expect a response. Sometimes you can’t email to a governor or state employee because you live out of state. Fine, call them! Write a letter, even better. Let them hear from you somehow.

    We can’t say, well I don’t want to end up on a list or whatever. No! We must be courageous and insist on our rights! We will find there are many more Americans who agree with us and will find their own courageous voice to add to ours. The numbers of people who support that kind of tyranny are much fewer than the ones who support liberty and freedom, I feel very sure of that. But one side is feeling bravado right now, and the other is feeling fear and intimidation. We must resist that and do the necessary thing, and that is to speak up and insist on our Constitutional rights. Are we so weak we won’t defend our Constitutional rights against a virtual nobody like Labor Commissioner Brad Avakian?? He deserves to be rebuked in the most strong language! He ought to hear from a million Americans who say NO Mr. Avakian, we REJECT your “indoctrination” camps! He needs to be fired. The people of Oregon need to decide if they are for freedom and liberty or tyranny! We may not live in Oregon, but, we can still voice our displeasure. We can say “We will not visit your state with our tourist dollars, as long as you promote tyranny and you do not protect religious freedom”.
    We can all do something, and we must all do something. Do it TODAY. The days of sitting and lamenting are over. Get busy. When you hear of an incident like this, it is time to spring into action!
    If we all do this, encourage others to do this as well, what a difference we can make.
    Then, in 2014 and 2016, if we support in any way possible the candidates who reflect our values and our Constitutional rights, we can turn things around. We really can. It is not too late.

  13. frjim4321 says:

    It seems pretty clear to me that if I want to be a baker I have to conform to the rules of the marketplace. I have to submit to inspections by the health department, I have to pay taxes, I have to assure that my product is safe and does not cause any kind of hazard to the public. Engaging in the act of commerce as a vender requires that I conform to the strictures that govern that enterprise. As part of that, we live in a society in which certain forms of discrimination are not permitted. I am in fact NOT permitted to say “I don’t serve blacks,” or “I don’t serve dwarfs,” etc. The State of Oregon as lawfully determined that persons of a homosexual orientation also enjoy a protection from discrimination. The bakers therefore have two valid options. They can close their bakery and find some other form of income or employment. Or they can move to some other state, maybe in the south, where legislators may tend to turn a blind eye to forms of discrimination. I have no problem whatsoever with the anti-discrimination laws in Oregon and would hope to see them become universal. I don’t see anything virtuous about these bakers. And I certainly would not consider Mr. Wildmon a person with any degree of moral authority.

  14. yatzer says:

    It seems to me that if the MSM haven’t vigorously reported on something, it hasn’t happened. Like this, for instance. It has happened over and over again, yet the people I know who depend mostly on the MSM tell me they have never heard of such a thing.

  15. Kathleen10 says:

    Do we go quietly into that good night, or do we resist now, with everything we’ve got. If it will only get worse, it is better to do it now. It is like any other problem in life, to delay does not improve the situation. Your appendix and your brakes. Ignore them at your peril. They will not improve with time. Same with this situation. People are being empowered, gaining in strength like a hurricane because they are so rarely confronted. But they are the minority! And we are thus far, cowards!
    We read, we fret, we pray, but do we ACT?? Jesus has no hands bur OURS.

  16. Supertradmum says:

    Kathleen10 thanks for your comment. I have been trying to get people to act from my blog since 2007, with a hiatus. Sadly, moaning is easier than doing something.

  17. AnthonyJ says:

    It is ironic that the two greatest enemies of the Church in the 21st century are turning out to be radical Islam and the homosexual lobby. Ironic because the Muslims are no allies of the gays. I guess history repeats as the Nazis and Soviets were are greatest enemies last century and they hated each other as well.

  18. AnthonyJ says:

    That should be “were our greatest enemies”.

  19. Supertradmum says:

    frjim4321 but where does it end? In the Soviet takeover of Czechoslovakia, those Catholics who insisted on going to church on Sunday lost their jobs, as they were seen as possibly infiltrating the universities with anti-communist ideas, just because they were Catholic. Or in England now, where, if someone has a bed and breakfast in their own home, and many are set up like that, one cannot refuse a homosexual couple by law. Or, the new case in England going to the courts from a homosexual couple who want a big Anglican church wedding and will take this to the Hague.

    I think you understand that Catholics can become so marginalized regarding conscience issues with ssm (and from the health sphere as well), that eventually, as in England in the 15th century, they either compromise or starve to death, as many did so long ago. One can go to hell for knowingly going against one’s conscience and the teachings of the Catholic Church.

    Incremental marginalization and demonization of a particular group is the last step before laws are passed which criminalize the persecuted group.

  20. Supertradmum says:

    Tantum Ergo, read the books of Joshua and Maccabees and see that the reason for wars was the unfaithfulness of the people of God. The first thing the leaders did before battles against the enemy invaders was to ask the people to repent, do penance and pray.

    Are you serious when you do not know the reasons for this coming persecution? When a leading churchman in Chicago said almost 2 years ago that at least 33% of the priests in that diocese were homosexuals, and when there are since January of this year in America 808,450 abortions-already? *Information on abortion statistics from James Toups and information on Chicago statement from protected source.

  21. Kyle says:

    frjim4321,

    Do you not see a difference in actual discrimination against gays (i.e. “No, I will not sell you one of those cookies in our display case because you are gay”) and refusal to create a special order item because the proprietor does not wish to participate in an event? If a KKK member went to a black-owned bakery and asked for a cake for their upcoming rally, can the owner refuse or would that be considered racial discrimination?

    Also, please explain why these bakery owners can be investigated and possibly fined for refusing to participate in an event which is ILLEGAL under Oregon law.

  22. Palladio says:

    Nuremburg law is a precedent for international law, says a human rights lawyer friend of mine whose life is under threat when she visits the countries she monitors (she sleeps in a different place each night to avoid detection). Guess what? Persecution on religious grounds is not only not Constitutional, it is by Nuremburg principles a crime against humanity:

    “The crimes hereinafter set out are punishable as crimes under international law:… (c)Crimes against humanity:

    Murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation and other inhumane acts done against any civilian population, or persecutions on political, racial, or religious grounds, when such acts are done or such persecutions are carried on in execution of or in connection with any crime against peace or any war crime.”

    Now, I am not sure if what is understood is large-scale persecution, but the letter of the law seems clear enough.

    Just in case you were not sure we live in a statist to fascist state growing worse and worse.

  23. Bea says:

    I believe it is Labor Commissioner Brad Avakian who needs rehabilitation.

  24. Bob B. says:

    From Ven. Pope Pius XII’s 1958 encyclical, AD APOSTOLORUM PRINCIPIS

    15. In order to spread these wicked principles more efficiently and to fix them in everyone’s mind, this association – which, as We have said, boasts of its patriotism – uses a variety of means including violence and oppression, numerous lengthy publications, and group meetings and congresses.

    16. In these meetings, the unwilling are forced to take part by incitement, threats, and deceit. If any bold spirit strives to defend truth, his voice is easily smothered and overcome and he is branded with a mark of infamy as an enemy of his native land and of the new society.

    17. There should also be noted those courses of instruction by which pupils are forced to imbibe and embrace this false doctrine. Priests, religious men and women, ecclesiastical students, and faithful of all ages are forced to attend these courses. An almost endless series of lectures and discussions, lasting for weeks and months, so weaken and benumb the strength of mind and will that by a kind of psychic coercion an assent is extracted which contains almost no human element, an assent which is not freely asked for as should be the case.

    18. In addition to these there are the methods by which minds are upset – by every device, in private and in public, by traps, deceits, grave fear, by so-called forced confessions, by custody in a place where citizens are forcibly “reeducated,” and those “Peoples’ Courts” to which even venerable bishops are ignominiously dragged for trial.

    19. Against methods of acting such as these, which violate the principal rights of the human person and trample on the sacred liberty of the sons of God, all Christians from every part of the world, indeed all men of good sense cannot refrain from raising their voices with Us in real horror and from uttering a protest deploring the deranged conscience of their fellow men.

    20. And since these crimes are being committed under the guise of patriotism, We consider it Our duty to remind everyone once again of the Church’s teaching on this subject.

    21. For the Church exhorts and encourages Catholics to love their country with sincere and strong love, to give due obedience in accord with natural and positive divine law to those who hold public office, to give them active and ready assistance for the promotion of those undertakings by which their native land can in peace and order daily achieve greater prosperity and further true development.

    22. The Church has always impressed on the minds of her children that declaration of the Divine Redeemer: “Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s and to God the things that are God’s.”[5] We call it a declaration because these words make certain and incontestable the principle that Christianity never opposes or obstructs what is truly useful or advantageous to a country.

    23. However, if Christians are bound in conscience to render to Caesar (that is, to human authority) what belongs to Caesar, then Caesar likewise, or those who control the state, cannot exact obedience when they would be usurping God’s rights or forcing Christians either to act at variance with their religious duties or to sever themselves from the unity of the Church and its lawful hierarchy.

    24. Under such circumstances, every Christian should cast aside all doubt and calmly and firmly repeat the words with which Peter and the other Apostles answered the first persecutors of the Church: “We must obey God rather than men.”[6]

    Doesn’t this seem remarkably similar to what is (and may) occur here?

  25. NoraLee9 says:

    Oh dear dear Fr. Jim, remember those nine ways to be a party to another’s sin? Surely they must have mentioned the list to you in seminary, no? Following your logics, folks going through medical school should submit to the insistence that they learn to perform, perform, and teach how to perform abortions!
    If I am running my own business, I have a right not to be coerced into being a party to another’s sin! Matter of fact, I think as an American, I have the right to refuse to be a party to anyone’s sin! And I have an obligation as an American and as a Catholic to insure that the right is protected.

  26. netokor says:

    I do admire one lesson John Paul II taught the Polish people: that the communist tyrants were not the majority and that the people could unite and defeat them. No matter how bad things get, we must not give in and we must unite–And we must pray for the strength and courage to shout once again, “¡Viva Cristo Rey!”

  27. Skeinster says:

    The Red China segment of “The Red Violin” is a chilling example of what Fr. describes. Might have to get it out and watch it again.
    Good points all, except for Fr. Jim. I too, was thinking of the “7 Ways”, NorahLee.

  28. jhayes says:

    If you will look back to my 11:19 am post, you’ll see that the “Govt. official” did not say that “those who resist “gay” marriage must be “rehabilitated”

    He said ““Everybody is entitled to their own beliefs, but that doesn’t mean that folks have the right to discriminate,” Avakian said, speaking generally. “The goal is never to shut down a business. The goal is to rehabilitate,” Avakian said. “For those who do violate the law, we want them to learn from that experience and have a good, successful business in Oregon.”

    Mr. Wildmon and Mr Barber have proof-texted the Oregonian article and spun rehabilitating people who break laws into Chinese and Russian Communist-style re-education camps for people who hold unapproved beliefs

    Whether the bakers have actually broken the anti-discrimination laws is a legal issue and may have to be resolved by the Supreme Court.

  29. Bea says:

    frjim4321
    I can’t believe that I read what you posted.

    quote:
    ” It seems pretty clear to me that if I want to be a baker I have to conform to the rules of the marketplace”

    Let us substitute the baker
    for a pharmacist; does he have to conform to the rules of the marketplace and sell condoms, abortifacients, etc?,
    for a hospital; do they have to perform abortions, vasectomies, etc?,
    for a teacher; does he have to teach explicit sex-ed, promote gay life style, evolution vs creationism?
    You want them to “conform” with evil?
    This is the sin of co-operating with evil.
    Did you not study Thomas Aquinas Summa Theologica in the seminary?
    co-operating with evil or tolerating evil can be as evil as the act itself.
    You are advising this?

    I have followed the Oregon baker story from the beginning.
    If a homosexual comes in to buy a cake he will sell it to them.
    The real story here is that this “couple” was ordering a cake to celebrate their “union”
    This baker will NOT co-operate with an evil event.
    He has a freedom of conscience.
    A freedom that the state is attempting to infringe upon.
    How far do we have to go before we stop co-operating with evil?

    I consider Mr. Wildmon with a greater degree of moral discernment than some people who shall remain nameless. “To those to whom much is given, much will be demanded.” Those who actually have the moral authority should take care to not advise souls to go against their conscience.

  30. Vecchio di Londra says:

    Leaving aside the important question of religious freedom, on a practical level it seems that same-sex marriage is still strictly illegal in the State of Oregon.
    If any business knowingly provides commercial services to promote or aid an illegal ceremony, surely it would be regarded as aiding and abetting an illegal act?
    Doesn’t sound like discrimination at all to me. Just being law-abiding and sensible.
    The background news data I’ve looked at suggest to me that the ‘lesbian couple’ have been ‘stirring it up’. They could have found a cake (and a ‘lesbian wedding’) somewhere else or in another State. But they seem to have deliberately targeted Christians they knew would resist, to try to force through a change in the Oregon State law.
    (Rather like the homosexual couple in England who deliberately researched and picked on the one bed-and-breakfast owner in the entire area who could be absolutely guaranteed to object on religious grounds to their cohabitation in their house.)
    The ex-Californian ‘Labor Commissioner’ who’s helping them to stir up the cake mixture is a career Democrat who tried to run for Congress (unsuccessfully) in 2007 and 2011. Who knows, perhaps he hopes this cause célebre will draw him to the attention of the White House and help him hit the DC big-time?

  31. Imrahil says:

    Rev’d dear @Fr Jim,

    then what job is still open for one who does not in conscience want to comply?

    Say what you will about the French Revolution, but at least they acknowledged that they had enemies, that their enemies were enemies for some serious reason, and for that sake they provided for them a decent decapitation. I guess I don’t agree with myself, but there’s certainly a part of me that favors that to the outright negation-of-existence of seriously differring opinions we have now – all the more so if those differring opinions are actually the right ones.

    [Note that I don't accuse anyone of a sin just because he may be said in some sort to comply. In dealing with sins by participation, a distinction must imho be made between forced and unforced, and toleration of the sins of others need not always be sinful. Cardinal Mindszenty wrote "c. f." for "coactus feci" under a false confession that had been tortured out of him.
    As for example in the example presented, if I was a student of medicine and would be certain never to be forced to perform and actual abortion, I would just go muddle myself through the lesson on how to do it, maybe saying on occasion that God's and natural law forbid me ever to put this into practice, and just shut up and write the exam for the rest of the time.
    But the question how far one is personally guilty, and how much, with some thing is one thing. That it is downright totalitarian for the State to push that sorts of things through is another, and there's no doubt possible here.]

  32. netokor says:

    “I consider Mr. Wildmon with a greater degree of moral discernment than some people who shall remain nameless. “To those to whom much is given, much will be demanded.” Those who actually have the moral authority should take care to not advise souls to go against their conscience.”

    Bea, well said! Especially because priests have the duty to do their utmost in order to prevent anyone from going to hell. What a responsibility! Pray for our priests. I can’t imagine the constant attacks from the evil one that they suffer every day. God bless them. May Our Blessed Mother protect them.

  33. OrthodoxChick says:

    In a related and equally depressing story, there was an article in “THE” newspaper of RI (Projo). The article’s author is a Catholic. I went to Catholic high school with his daughter. He spoke with a few Catholic priests around the Diocese of Providence regarding how they feel about Communion for homosexuals, as in the case of Lew Pryeor. Sadly, more of them were willing to look the other way than not. At least, that was the impression I came away with after reading the article. Anyone who decides to follow this link may wish to take an anti-depressant first.

    http://www.providencejournal.com/breaking-news/content/20130817-r.i.-priests-try-to-interpret-popes-remarks-on-gays.ece#07

  34. wmeyer says:

    frjim, at best, you are the frog in the pot of water which soon will be boiling. This chipping away at real liberty has gone on for more than a century, and at the least, a large plurality–possibly a majority–of voting age adults have been so propagandized as to believe that they are still free. I agree with Supertradmum, and not only in the escalation of persecution (that I expect to escalate even more rapidly than the insane spending of this administration), but in the general tyranny. Oh, the superficial formalities will be preserved–the Beltway folks have huge experience with stage plays–but the state will be one under the rigid rule (not government, but rule) of a totalitarian regime. Much of the foundation has already been laid, and now that it has become commonplace to ignore the Constitution, and even Congress, the rest will follow rather easily.

  35. JuliB says:

    I get the AFA magazine. I wish there was something along these lines in the Catholic world. Thank God for our outspoken Prot. brothers.

  36. JARay says:

    I must say that I agree with most of those who have posted here.
    wmeyer says that frjim4321 is at best the frog in the pot of boiling water. So true!
    I don’t know what “AFA” magazine is JuliB but what I read online from Catholic sources, they are quite outspoken about these issues and I see little from any Prot. brothers who are as outspoken. In fact, here in Western Australia when we had the 40 Days for life and prayed outside abortion clinics a friend of mine, who was with me on a regular basis, remarked that the 40 Days for Life was a protestant initiative but that he never saw any protestants praying outside these clinics. They were, in fact all Catholics.

  37. Lin says:

    This is just another example of how strong a hold Satan has on this world and GOD is permitting it. We know who wins but it makes me VERY sad that so many may be lost. I have two Chinese friends who both were banished to re-education camps. One is a Catholic! They both fear their government and as a result have dual citizenship, Hong Kong and England. I now fear our government because it appears that there may never be another legitimate election. We are only a stone’s throw away from the federal government declaring martial law over some contrived emergency. GOD help us! The persecution is coming soon!

  38. frjim4321 says:

    “frjim, at best, you are the frog in the pot of water which soon will be boiling. This chipping away at real liberty has gone on for more than a century, and at the least, a large plurality–possibly a majority–of voting age adults have been so propagandized as to believe that they are still free.” – meyer

    Well, I don’t know how you are defining freedom in your statement, and what you are implying about the lack of freedom. But the issue of marriage rights is one of liberty, in fact a very basic matter of equal protection under the law. It is really about much more than cakes and other confections.

    I don’t dispute the right of the church to restrict canonical and sacramental marriage in accord with its traditional teachings.

  39. MrTipsNZ says:

    frjim4321
    Your argument might hold water if it were valid. It is not.

    Unintentionally I suspect, you have demonstrated very well, an appropriate use of the Socratian protoethymeme (an accepted, but untested, set of assumptions in order to train an individual in rheotoric). Socrates considered it a training method only and a vulgar way to conduct debate in proper.

    Why is your argument not valid?

    Because a baker never makes all the types of biscuit a society might want. He is under no obligation to provide fairy cakes to truckies. Truckies can go elsewhere to find hard core brownies and they would accept that. A mature, diverse society, such as that which existed in 13th Century Italy, knows this.

    In the same way, society has no right to demand a wedding let alone acceptance, from any Church or body that chooses not to conduct “gay” weddings. No more right than the Catholic Church has to demand that all pubs serve only altar wine or Mystic Monk coffee (although the latter might be a good idea from what I’ve heard).

    Ergo, the baker analogy, although perhaps a moderately good one, when tested, is found wanting.

  40. Matthew says:

    They tried to make me go to rehab, I said, “No, no, no”

    Thanks to the late Ms. Winehose.

    I’ll move to a Catholic country first, I can drive to Mexico from here.

  41. Now I’m beginning to understand and sympathize with the long misunderstood passage from Luke that says:

    “For behold, the days are coming when they will say, ‘Blessed are the barren, and the wombs that never bore, and the breasts that never nursed.’ 30″Then they will begin TO SAY TO THE MOUNTAINS, ‘FALL ON US,’ AND TO THE HILLS, ‘COVER US.’

  42. Supertradmum says:

    netokor, but the socialists and Marxists combined are in the majority, both in Europe and America, otherwise one would not see the elected leadership of Obama, Hollande and so on.

  43. Bea says:

    absit invidia:
    Do not lose heart.
    Remember the beatitudes:
    Blessed are they that suffer persecution for justice’ sake: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
    and
    Blessed are ye when they shall revile you, and persecute you, and speak all that is evil against you, untruly, for my sake: Be glad and rejoice, for your reward is very great in heaven.

    These times will separate the men from the boys.
    We also have Our Lady’s promise:
    “In the end My Immaculate Heart will triumph and there will be a period of peace”
    We are not alone. Thanks be to God. If they persecuted Him, true Catholics will also be persecuted.
    Those who want to “get along” and “not make waves” and be “politically correct” are the ones that should be worrying.

    OrthodoxChick:
    I had seen that article, too. So sad that so few stood up for what is right, for what the Church teaches.
    As I posted right above this “Those who want to “get along” and “not make waves” and be “politically correct” are the ones that should be worrying.”
    As “netokor” said:
    “Pray for our priests. I can’t imagine the constant attacks from the evil one that they suffer every day. God bless them. May Our Blessed Mother protect them.”

    In the past (when I was growing up) we assumed all priests were holy and that all priests were “safe” so we may have failed to pray for them, assuming they had no problems and were already close to God.
    But satan never sleeps. He strikes at the shepherd so that the sheep will scatter. Indeed, netokor, this is the time to increase our prayers and fasting for our priests that are under attack and who are in danger of fleeing the teachings of the Church for fear of the wolves.

  44. OrthodoxChick says:

    Bea,

    Exactly. We must pray for them all with fervor.

  45. Palladio says:

    Pray ceaselessly, yes, but this sort of thing, long in the making, will be long in the undoing. Yet, political action is all that’s required: how do you think these folks have made the unnatural seem natural? You need to run for the local school board, for starters. Places are many and not at all that contested. Or encourage a Catholic you know fit for that. We are not pietists, fat for slaughter. We are Catholics, some of whom have abandoned the faith, others of whom have grown lazy and blind to the writing on the wall. Soft persecution, indeed: but do you honestly think Catholics in Maryland and the Colonies had it any better beginning in the seventeenth century? In the early Republic? Catholics in New York City in the nineteenth century? Catholics in Boston in the same and subsequent century?

  46. Gail F says:

    pannw: Check out those “anti-bullying campaigns.” They are not about bullying.

  47. Gail F says:

    frjim1234: You are erring on the side of legalism. It’s no good to say, “this is the law, they must obey it” if the law itself is wrong. Didn’t we learn that from slavery and abortion? The tactic I see many using is to ram a law through and then say, “What makes you so special that you get to break the law?” Everyone then debates about who gets to break the law instead of about the law itself.

    If the HHS tomorrow (and isn’t this still the plan?) says “Everyone must pay a $1/month fee for abortion coverage in insurance” and I refuse to pay it, I will not engage anyone on why I “get to break the law.” It’s the LAW that’s the problem.

  48. Tim says:

    Bea – very well said on all accounts!
    I find myself on all accounts wanting all shepherds to be cut from the same cloth, every time I see something contrary to Church teaching posted I struggle to accept what my eyes are telling me is written in clear text. It reminds me again and again we are all sinners and satan certainly does attack the leadership, we must all pray for them always. God Bless you and all of the faithful Catholics on this blog and especially Fr. Z for being brave enough to speak out in these times.

  49. TimG says:

    Argh. I see I need to update my nickname. This Tim is now TimG…..

  50. Juergensen says:

    Our society will soon be officially homosexual, with heterosexuals outlawed except to the extent they are necessary to produce children for the sodomites and lesbians to prey on.

  51. AA Cunningham says:

    “I don’t dispute the right of the church to restrict canonical and sacramental marriage in accord with its traditional teachings.” frjim4321

    Yet.

  52. jhayes says:

    Sadly, more of them were willing to look the other way than not. At least, that was the impression I came away with after reading the article.

    Mr. Peters explained in great detail that Communion can only be witheld if the Eucharistic Minister knows that all of the requirements of Canon 915 have been met. One of the requirements is that the person’s sin must be “manifest” – that is, broadly known among the people who will see the person receive Communion. Unless the person has publicly announced the sinful activity, it would be very difficult for a priest to know with certainty that “manifest” and the other requiremnts have been met.

    http://canonlawblog.wordpress.com/2012/03/15/1733/

  53. StJude says:

    make no mistake gays want minority status….. as if who you have sex with is on par with being handicapped or what pigment is in your skin.
    Just read ‘father” Jim.. he has fallen for the propaganda.
    If they gain minority status.. guess what they can do to our church.

  54. Cathy says:

    frjim4321, you are not a butcher, a baker or a candle-stick maker, you are a Catholic priest? If you are a Catholic priest, is it required of you to know and conform to the rules of the Catholic Church. When you can no longer accept commerce in the market place as a moral transaction, and the right of the layman to refuse to provide service when such service serves to support an immoral act, you have basically put every member of your parish who owns a business either out of business or out of moral conformity with what the Church teaches and believes. The unnatural act of sodomy reserves the distinction of condemnable by the Church because it destroys the inherent dignity of the human person, regardless of whether or not the person consents to or desires it. So called “same-sex” marriage does not make your homosexual congregants, friends or family members so-called “equal”, quite simply put, it further disintegrates their integral human identity by proclaiming their sexual abuse of each other as “marital relations” and using the force of law to “rehabilitate” those who refuse to support this delusion in commerce.

  55. Pingback: Egypt Nuns Marched Thru Streets Like Prisoners of War - BigPulpit.com

  56. Magash says:

    frjim4321
    Same Sex Marriage is not a case of equal protection under the law. Since marriage is an institution which requires one man and one woman no one is denied access to the institution of marriage who is willing to meet the requirements of that state. Anyone can marry anyone they want, provived that person is not already married and of the opposite gender.
    Since there is not any reason to believe that homosexuality is a state of personhood rather than a decision to engage in behavior that scripture, Church and Tradition tells us is immoral the subject of rights does not come into it. Let me be clear there is not any scientific evidence that same sex attraction is anything but a mental disorder, or more specifically a dis-orderd psychological state, that will in many cases respond to proper treatment, provided such treatment is allowed and sought. There has never been any scientific evidence that it is in any way genetically caused, and lots of evidence that it can result from psychological trauma. Even should evidence be found one would not say that a person should be left to drink themselves to death because alcoholism has a genetic component.
    However just as alcoholism or kleptomania does not alleviate the drunk driver from the responsibility of DUI or the thief from the responsibility of committing criminal larceny so does giving into SSA not protect one form the consequences of sin, or give them license to ignore rights and boundaries of immoral behavior.

  57. wmeyer says:

    I’ll move to a Catholic country first, I can drive to Mexico from here.

    If you’ve not yet seen For Greater Glory, you may want to watch it first.

  58. netokor says:

    “netokor, but the socialists and Marxists combined are in the majority”. Supertradmum, you are right. Times have changed quickly and drastically.

    Matthew, I’m from Mexico and it has also become unrecognizable. I wonder if the majority of Catholics there would die heroically as they did when Plutarco Elías Calles repressed the Church brutally. Probably not.

    The media in the West have served satan non-stop for decades and indoctrinated so many, while the voice of the Church has been silenced. This is the result. God bless everyone as we fight against evil. He is risen. He is with us always.

  59. jhayes says:

    Must photograph same-sex weddings:

    New Mexico Supre Court decision:

    “we conclude that a commercial photography business that offers its services to the public, thereby increasing its visibility to potential clients, is subject to the antidiscrimination provisions of the NMHRA and must serve same-sex couples on the same basis that it serves opposite-sex couples. Therefore, when Elane Photography refused to photograph a same-sex commitment ceremony, it violated the NMHRA in the same way as if it had refused to photograph a wedding between people of different races.”

    http://www.nmcompcomm.us/nmcases/nmsc/slips/SC33,687.pdf

  60. jhayes says:

    My mistake. That is a decision by the New Mexico Court of Appeals, which is one level below the New Mexico Supreme Court. The lawyer for the photographer says they will appeal to the state Supreme Court.

  61. jhayes says:

    Wrong again. It is the Supreme Court decision.

    The Court of Appeals decision was issued in May. The photographers appealed and the New Mexico Supreme Court has now upheld that decision.

  62. acardnal says:

    jhayes wrote, ” Unless the person has publicly announced the sinful activity, it would be very difficult for a priest to know with certainty that “manifest” and the other requiremnts have been met.”

    I disagree. Often priests have private conversations with openly gay couples in their parish. (Hopefully, they do this to dissuade them from engaging in mortally sinful homosexual behavior just as the priest does with an engaged heterosexual couple in pre-Cana counseling. ) So the priest now knows. Furthermore, there are often many parishioners who are aware of this situation because they see the couple in the market place holding hands, hugging, kissing and so forth. Perhaps they even kiss one another during the “Sign of Peace”. Perhaps parishioners have brought these observations to the pastor’s attention. This is “manifest” behavior because it is done openly and in the community. It is not done clandestinely.

    I assume your reference to “Mr. Peters” was referring to Dr. Edward Peters, JD, JCD. If true, it would be more appropriate and respectful if you had wrote “Dr. Peters.”

  63. jhayes says:

    The issue is that the Eucharistic Minister, even if he knows the person is in a state of grave sin, cannot refuse to give the person Communion in a public setting since that would suggest the person’s guilt to others who are not already aware of it – except under the limited circumstances described in Canon 915 (sin must be notorious, etc).

    As Dr. Peters cited: “The minister of holy communion should not publicly deny communion to a person who, being afflicted by grave sin and/or subject to a non-declared penalty latae sententiae [e.g., for apostasy] is not notoriously under those situations.” Gramunt, in EXEGETICAL COMM (2004) III/1: 615″

    My apologies to Dr. Peters for turning Dr. into Mr.

  64. jhayes says:

    On the same subject:

    “Catholic politicians who supported the legalisation of abortion will not be excommunicated or refused communion, the future Primate of all Ireland has indicated.

    Speaking on BBC Radio Ulster’s Sunday Sequence programme, Eamon Martin, presently coadjutor Archbishop of Armagh, said he had never refused Communion to anyone, but reiterated the Church’s position that it is not possible to be a person of faith and actively promote abortion.

    Archbishop Martin said every individual who voted in favour of the Protection of Life During Pregnancy Act – which allows terminations where there is a threat to the mother’s life – should question whether they had actively promoted the killing of the unborn. However, he said he did not believe that “the altar rails are the place to be making a public statement,” on the issue.”

    http://www.thetablet.co.uk/latest-news/5593

  65. acardnal says:

    jhayes wrote, ““Catholic politicians who supported the legalisation of abortion will not be excommunicated or refused communion, the future Primate of all Ireland has indicated.”

    This is unfortunate because the Cardinal Prefect of the Apostolic Signatura, Cardinal Burke, states otherwise regarding pro-abort politicians:
    “There can be no question that the practice of abortion is among the gravest of manifest sins and therefore once a Catholic politician has been admonished that he should not come forward to receive Holy Communion.

    Not only should he not come forward himself, ‘as long as he continues to support legislation which fosters abortion or other intrinsic evils, then he should be refused Holy Communion,’ the cardinal added.”

    http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/bishops-have-a-39duty39-to-deny-pro-abortion-politicians-communion-american/

    As for the opinion of a particular Canon lawyer, they are no different than civil lawyers: they all have differing opinions – which is why we have judges and juries.

  66. acardnal says:

    Here’s another report from the “National Catholic Register” wherein the Prefect for the Apostolic Signatura, Cardinal Burke, is quoted as saying that pro-abort Catholic politicians – including those in Ireland – should not present themselves for Communion and if they do they should be denied the Blessed Sacrament to avoid scandal. Needless to say, other than the Supreme Pontiff, Cardinal Burke is the “supreme court” of the Holy See.

    http://www.ncregister.com/daily-news/cardinal-burke-no-communion-for-irish-politicians-who-support-abortion/

    Homosexual couples who are overtly and conspicuously displaying and announcing their grave sin to the community are “notorious” and “manifest” in their mortal sin.

  67. Pingback: CATHOLIC HEADLINERS FRONT PAGE - DAILY CATHOLIC HEADLINERS