Timothy Card. Dolan, President of the USCCB, reacts to Pres. Obama’s endorsement of unnatural unions

Timothy Card. Dolan, President of the USCCB on Pres. Obama’s endorsement of unnatural unions as if they were marriage.

From the site of the USCCB with my emphases:

Cardinal Dolan: President Obama’s Remarks On Marriage ‘Deeply Saddening’

May 9, 2012
WASHINGTON—Cardinal Timothy Dolan, president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB), issued the following statement:

President Obama’s comments today in support of the redefinition of marriage are deeply saddening. As I stated in my public letter to the President on September 20, 2011, the Catholic Bishops stand ready to affirm every positive measure taken by the President and the Administration to strengthen marriage and the family. However, we cannot be silent in the face of words or actions that would undermine the institution of marriage, the very cornerstone of our society. The people of this country, especially our children, deserve better. Unfortunately, President Obama’s words today are not surprising since they follow upon various actions already taken by his Administration that erode or ignore the unique meaning of marriage. I pray for the President every day, and will continue to pray that he and his Administration act justly to uphold and protect marriage as the union of one man and one woman. May we all work to promote and protect marriage and by so doing serve the true good of all persons.

What Pres. Obama did today, under the false guise of being “Christian” to people of the same sex who want to “marry” each other, as if that relationship could ever be like a true marriage, is tear at the very bonds of society.

The USCCB was correct to make a statement.

Remember to follow Card. Dolan on Twitter.  Read THIS, immediately after following ME on Twitter!

BTW… I picked up the link to Card. Dolan’s statement from his Twitter feed.  FWIW.

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.


  1. Legisperitus says:

    Very interesting how Rome and Washington seem to be moving at the same time into clear opposing formations, day by day. Things are shaping up for a titanic battle of good and evil.

    Oremus pro invicem.

  2. His Eminence is a great man. May Our Lady shelter him under her protection, and may God the Holy Spirit keep and guide him.

  3. catholicmidwest says:

    The whole thing with Obama is complicated right now. He got pushed into this by his running mate, Biden, because Biden is hapless and apparently not in sync with the campaign entirely well. Biden brought it up in a way that couldn’t be ignored, Obama was pressed by the media, and he had to say yes or no. He’s not going to say flat no because to do that would alienate more than the gay faction; indeed it would alienate many socially permissive people who aren’t necessarily even Democrats. I’m sure Obama would rather have been ambiguous about this, because now it’s a factor in his re-election campaign, and not an entirely favorable one.

    You see, young people tend to be socially liberal in general, even those who are politically and economically conservative can be. BUT, they were ready to attribute the gay cause to the Democrats without him having to say so explicitly because it’s conventional to think that way; on the other hand being explicit about it may hurt him with hispanics and blacks, both of whom he is trying to attract. And of course, this is already being picked up on: http://ideas.time.com/2012/05/09/will-black-voters-punish-obama-for-his-support-of-gay-rights/?iid=ent-main-mostpop2

    About the only people this will really please is gays themselves and their families. But did he already have them on his side? Yes, for the most part. So he loses more than he gains. Not a good trade politically.

  4. catholicmidwest says:

    NB: There are potential “cleavage points”– places where the traditional Democratic party coalition can be split apart. This is one of them, one of the biggest and most dangerous ones for the Democrats.

  5. Dr. K says:

    The whole thing with Obama is complicated right now. He got pushed into this by his running mate, Biden, because Biden is hapless and apparently not in sync with the campaign entirely well. Biden brought it up in a way that couldn’t be ignored

    It could have been a ploy like Sandra Fluke and the George Stephanopoulos birth control debate question to rally the base.

  6. Personally I still find Dolan’s words pretty average. Overall these aren’t strong enough words. E.g. “disappointed” means “we’ll it’s not what we we’re hoping for, but we still are OK with you and hope for better in the future.” Better words would have been “disgusted” or “enraged” or “angry” or “morally offended.” or gasp! “Religiously discriminated against” (this last one would work much better in Canada). When he begins espouzing the Catechism’s 2242, and in a dire crisis 2243 (which is the Just War Theory), then I’ll really see him using “fightin’ words”. Same up here with our bishops in Canada with our prime minister and some of our premiers of the provinces. Particularly certain Catholics want Harper to toughen up on the abortion issue and want the act illegal (as there is no law against even third trimerster abortion due to a legal sinkhole), and want out bishops to toughen up on that stance as well as the infiltration of homosexual propaganda and forced secularism in the separate school boards, as well as poor quality Catholic education and increase Latin Masses in major urban centers.

    Also, Dolan keeps saying, “we can’t be silent”, “take action”. But what action Bishop Dolan? Also, do you think the average Catholic is educated enough to even “take action” against Obama and those espousing their own faith, outside of us here on Fr. Z and other conservative Catholic blogs (of which if you travel there, you’re obviously waking up already to things within the institutional Church)?

    I do give him props though on the last two sentences. This is a good start but he will have to be tougher …. a lot tougher though in the face of the government and the pro-homosexual anti-Catholic mainstream media. He especially should ramp up the “campaign” and take a CLEAR stand for November 2012.

  7. catholicmidwest says:

    No, Dr. K. The people who he could possibly have gained by it were already on his side, due to the assumptions that were already present. The people who he might lose were on his side as of yesterday, but this will not make them happy. They may leave; they may stay home in November.

    Either way: forced error for the Democrats. Thank you, Joe Biden.

  8. Johnno says:

    I agree, Dolan, God bless him, needs to be more in-your-face. He should have taken the time to do some basic apologetics and refute Obama’s thinking that this has anything to do with his ‘christian’ beliefs. He should have defended Christ and the Church’s teachings more explicitly. Moments like these are great for proclaiming the actual Gospel truth and clearing up misunderstandings of our faith, proper morality, who Christ is and what His Sacrifice meant! Surely he had time!

    We’re missing golden opportunities here! Golden opportunities to actually educate people!!! And we’re throwing them away!!! It’s no wonder the recent Voris Vortex did a story on a recent poll where, get this… ‘3 out of 5 Catholics believe Jesus Christ could’ve Sinned!!!!’

    Let that sink in for a moment!

  9. Bob B. says:

    I’m surprised, too, that the cardinal didn’t use the word “outraged” or something similar. I know I now have a few more things to say for Confession because of his announcement. Thank you Mr. President….looks like I’ll be going once a week again (like I used to as a kid) because of you. Anyone else ready for the (long) lines for Confession?

  10. Supertradmum says:

    Obama was not forced into this statement, nor did the media have to give him television time for this. Wake up. The man was waiting for an opportunity. The entire political situation of the West is changing very fast. This is not an isolated incident.

    Why are people surprised? All the information of this man and his anti-Christian beliefs have been made public since 2008 and earlier, if one lived in Illinois.

    As to Cardinal Dolan, I am thrilled there is a statement. But, the Church anywhere needs to be ready ahead of the gross politicians and not merely respond when a crisis happens. Thankfully, this might end the unholy marriage of the Catholic Church hierarchy, especially in the East Coast and the Democratic Party. I put the USCCB statement a bit earlier on my blog, to encourage Catholics over here, who are already discouraged by this turn of events, and the French election.

    How goes France, goes Europe. How goes America, goes the West.

  11. JonPatrick says:

    The Church needs to do a better job of articulating why “gay marriage” is a bad idea. Many people have bought into the idea that this is a civil rights issue and do not see where this hurts traditional marriage in the long run, and why traditional marriage is important for the survival of our civilization. The problem is that it is not easy to condense this into a sound bite for the evening news nor put on a bumper sticker.

  12. Legisperitus says:

    My bumper sticker right now would be “Save Our Civilization.” Those who are thinking about the issue would get it…

  13. oddfisher says:

    JonPatrick is right. It’s a good thing to send signals that will encourage those who already get it, but it’s a better thing to explain the marriage issue in a way that will make sense to people who are ignorant or confused, but potentially persuadable.

  14. Elizabeth says:

    I too found Cardinal Dolan’s statement rather lackluster. Of course it’s great that he said something, but overall I found it pretty mild. It didn’t give me any impression of his outrage, nor did it inspire ME to outrage (if I were someone who wasn’t outraged already). When I finished reading this really short uninspiring statement, my first thoughts was, so now what? That’s that?

    Perhaps not only show some disgust or outrage with the President’s public support for this perversion, I suggest the time is ripe to also speak out forcefully and publicly against Vice President Biden (the catholic), Pelosi (the catholic), Sebellius (the catholic), etc. But most inspiring would be if he spoke out and to (publicly) his Bishops, like Wuerhl who doesn’t seem to mind the Vice President speaking in support of homosexual so-called marriage. The position the Cardinal is in as the President of the USCCB is begging for him to stop being collegial and start being a bold, fierce Roman Catholic Cardinal determined to fight the enemy within and without the Church in America.

  15. Facta Non Verba says:

    So much of what President Obama says makes me stop and wonder if I’m reading straight out of 1984 (George Orwell). He justifies his positions with a principle that is a flat out contradiction, and he does so with a straight face. I’m thankful for Cardinal Dolan’s leadership here.

  16. SKAY says:

    This advice comes to mind– Speak softly but carry a big stick.

  17. Ted says:

    Mr Obama was and perhaps still is a member of the UCC, one of the most “liberal” ecclesial communities in USA. He is only repeating what the National Conference of the UCC has preached to him.

  18. JohnH says:

    I’m in 100% agreement with the Cardinal on this. However; what are the chances that any attempt to legally define marriage being between one man and one woman will be upheld by the supreme court? What constitutional argument can be provided to defend the true nature of marriage? I’m not saying it shouldn’t be done, I’m just skeptical that we can be successful. The government already recognizes false marriages (e.g. a divorced Catholic’s “remarriage”). Will the Church also ask the government to cease recognizes these unions? I understand the former is completely unnatural, and the latter is simply living in sin. Still, it seems that constitutionally we don’t have a leg to stand on. We will continue to fight this battle, continue to be painted as the “enemy” of civil rights, and in the end we, I think, will most likely lose. What are our constitutional grounds for this issue? I’m not asking what’s best for the family, because that is obvious. I’m asking, what will the supreme court consider a valid defense of true marriage?

  19. Dennis Martin says:

    Folks, he wasn’t pushed into it by Biden’s”error.” Biden’s statement was deliberate, to test the waters. Obama’s statement was equally deliberate, to distract from the economy.

    We need to be smart about this stuff. The “contraception” “war on women” and now this gay “marriage” business and a host of other stuff are all intended to jinn up something for the “independents” to have a reason to vote for him (out of fear of what the eeeeeeeeeevvvvvvvvviiiiiiiilllllllll “right-winger” Romney will do regarding pelvic issues) because otherwise they will abandon him over the economy.

    Yes, a showdown is coming over homosexual and all the other sexual issues. Inexorably. We need to prepare for it. But this latest thing was a mere head feint. That Obama supports and has always supported homosexual “marriage” was no secret. The only question was if and when he’d stop denying that he supports it. That he did so now was determined by Tuesday’s elections.

    Not original analysis with me. Got it from El Rushbo. But when Rush is right, why disagree with him?

  20. frjim4321 says:

    I appreciated that fact that Dolan’s statement was straightforward and professional and devoid of the characteristic bluster and sarcasm which often undermines his intent.

    With respect to the theory that Biden’s gaffe was intentional in order to “test the waters,” I doubt that they had enough time to focus group that between Biden’s statement and the announcement.

    Nor was this a knee-jerk response “forced” by the sometimes bumbling V.P. It was carefully thought out.

    Interesting point on NPR this morning that vastly those who would be offended by this statement would never vote for the President anyway. Exceptions could be withing the black and Hispanic communities. But it’s unlikely that they would hold their nose and vote for Romney – however they could be no-shows in November.

    I’m look forward to the next round of meta-polls to see where this puts Romney and Obama on the head-to-head.

  21. Papabile says:

    Analyzing this from simply the political perspective, that the President took this position is a clear and convincing win for Republicans. Here’s why:

    1. Gays vote at an extraordinarily high rate and are much “better” educated than the general population. With respect to gays as a voting bloc, there is little to be gained from this position, because it will not result in higher turnout by them.

    2. The culture warriors on the Democratic side ALSO turn out at a much higher rate and are generally “better” educated than the average voter. As a voting bloc, this will not result in much higher turnout.

    3. This was quickly becoming an issue for Obama because of Biden’s statement. The result, if he DIDN’T take a position could have actually been to eat into his gay and culture warrior base. The crosstabs on all the polls generally indicate this.

    4. This is good for Republicans, in the short term, because it WILL increase base turnout, particularly among those evangelicals who were less than happy with Romney.

    5. Additionally, base turnout among Republican culture warriors constitutes a MUCH larger percentage of the Republican party than the Democrats culture warriors.

    6. Basically, few people in the Democratic party will vote on gay marriage and abortion alone (usually about 8%). However, among Republicans, it historically varies, but approximately 16-20% of R’s vote on these issues alone.

    7. Long term, the President’s position will affect either party marginally. More likely, the inclusion of a gay marriage plank in the Democratic platform will affect the long-term prospects. I fully expect to see one of these now that the President has taken this position.

    8. Republicans have the ability to exploit the fact that their demographic gathers on a weekly basis in Church’s and the Democrats largely do not have that anymore. What the democrats DO have are the unions that put money up. The Republican churchgoing base does not generally put money into the equation, and as a result is often marginalized once R’s are in power.

    9. Overall this hurts Obama and helps Romney.

  22. elm says:

    This slip down the slope started when even good Catholics used the term Marriage and SSA in the same sentence. We fell for their screwed-up lingo. Say it enough times and it becomes so. If the citizens get use to the words then they become complacent to the words. It should strike each of us to the heart, but many will respond with “Whatever!”

    Watched Bonhoffer again last night. Just for encouragement. It probably will come to this form and level of harassment and imprisonment. Soft phrases and eloquent words will not stop the harassment from increasing. Our soft stepping bishops are not doing anyone any favors. They wear red because they are suppose to bleed for the faith. So far, I’m not even seeing any bruises or scratches when it comes fighting this war on Christians. No greater love is there than this: to lay down one’s life for a friend. Illicit Sex is what will be the end this great country, it will bring her to her knees where the enemy will destroy her. Rise up, Princes of the Church. Lead us into battle. We will follow you into the Gates of Glory.

  23. FaithfulCatechist says:

    Weak as water!, as Mrs Slocombe would say. His Eminence had the opportunity to refute the President’s armchair theology and missed it.

    As for African-Americans and Hispanics, forget it. They are horse-thief Democrats* and nothing Obama can say or do will alienate them.

    (* No, that doesn’t mean they are horse thieves. It means they’d even vote for a horse thief if the horse thief was a Democrat.)

  24. JARay says:

    I just came across a blog “Veritas Vincit Omnia” by means of the pulp.it
    It’s author spoke about what good could result from marriage being re-defined to include homosexual unions. He proposes that we should introduce the word SACRAMENTAL in front of the word marriage. Then we would have two forms of marriage. We would have Marriage and Sacramental Marriage and the distinction would immediately be seen by all. I think that this approach is one which carries with it the real nature of marriage in that it is a Sacrament of the Church and also brings with it the fact that God is involved and that it is sacred.
    That immediately sets it apart from homosexual play-acting.
    It is not my idea but it is one which I wish that I had thought of by myself.

  25. PA mom says:

    It would be helpful if Card. Dolan would ask Obama publicly some of the questions raised in “the Presiident Comes Out” at National Review online. Just What does the Pres think marriage is? What is its purpose?

    I believe that much of our effort for November must be educating the public that this ain’t your Grandma’s Democratic Party anymore. This Party has EVOLVED….

  26. Massachusetts Catholic says:

    I am always curious as to why there are no Catholic journalists to ask these questions at the few events where the president — now candidate Obama — appears. Can diocesan newspapers get their writers press corps credentials? Can they not attend campaign events and ask pointed questions from a Catholic point of view? If not, why not? And why not have Catholic journalists ask Senate candidates and others to explain their positions on the issues of same-sex marriage, especially if these candidates tie themselves to the Catholic brand?

    Fr. Z — I wish you had a television career.

  27. DisturbedMary says:

    This news is devastating for our society and our Church. That Dolan is “saddened” is utterly weak unless it is meant as weeping for the souls who will be lost on the march downward into hell with our charlatan savior. Can he not even hint that Nov. 6 is a day of reckoning with evil?

  28. irishgirl says:

    I was so sickened by Obama’s annoncement (I’m going through a hard time in my own life, what with losing my childhood home, dealing with social services bureaucracy and now living in a shelter, so this was something I didn’t really need to hear).
    I also wish that Cardinal Dolan used some stronger terms than just saying ‘disappointed’. I hate ‘diplo-speak’. He should have used something stronger!
    Obama’s just pandering to the homosexual lobby….and it’s another one of the long list of reasons why he should be defeated (BIG TIME!) at the polls this coming November!

  29. Supertradmum says:

    I must share that it is worse here in the media in Europe, as there are no opposing voices anywhere in several countries on television coverage of the Obama statement. Two horrid points. Not one station has mentioned the USCCB statement and even worse, the stations are couching Obama’s statement in Christian terms. I am not kidding. The phrases he used regarding Christ and the Golden Rule have been picked up in France and England. I am sick of this.

    This blasphemy is like the shot heard around the world, but for evil.

  30. BenedictXVIFan says:

    (To paraphrase myself from an easrlier thread:)

    Where Pres. Obama offends the most is in his appeal to the Golden Rule. No one except Christ alone (and BVM) has ever lived a life in perfect conformity to the Golden Rule. He cared about setting us straight on marriage, therefore in imitation of Christ, we ought to care likewise for one another. (In fact, if one separates the Golden Rule from Christ, one runs the almost certain risk of manipulating it into an object over which one has control, rather than submitting to it as the sovereign law of one’s soul.)

    If one is going to appeal to Christ to prop up one’s position on marriage, it ought to go like this:

    In Matthew 19 Christ affirmed Genesis 2. (1) a man shall leave his father and mother (this prevents any future appeals to incestuous marriage, clearly) and (2) to be joined to his wife (ONE man, ONE woman, simultaneously knocking down both polygamy and same sex “marriage”, and hopefully any other warpage of matrimony waiting in the wings) and (3) they shall become one flesh (quite obviously a prescription against the divorce of a valid marriage).

    That’s how it should be done, if one professes to be a faithful follower of Christ. We owe nothing less to the one who laid down his life for us.

  31. AvantiBev says:

    Sorry, folks, but we heterosexuals and the bishops / priests who looked the other way on shack ups, hook ups, and serial polygamy aka divorce and remarriage — all in the name of being “pastoral” — WE opened this door by our own acts against chastity and true marriage. I don’t blame my gay friends who walked through that door WE opened. By our actions over the past 40 years of sexual “liberation” we led our fellow citizens to believe marriage is simply a private contract all about: “getting benefits”; splitting up the kids and the goodies once ennui sets in; and putting our “rights” over our responsibilities.

    [And so… what will you be doing about it now?]

    The Sour Grapes Award

  32. catholicmidwest says:

    Obama admits today that Joe Biden “was a little out over his skis” on this issue and that this forced his hand. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2012/05/10/obama_biden_got_out_a_little_bit_over_his_skis_on_gay_marriage.html

    He then considers that it’s okay because he hopes it will get him a poll bump, but if it is it won’t be much and it won’t last long. Obama wants to talk about *anything* other than the economy and Obamacare right now. His reelection campaign is in big trouble in some parts of the country.

  33. catholicmidwest says:


    Europe is one generation ahead of us on the collapse of the culture and the Church. It’s probably truly sickening there. It’s bad enough here.

    But take heart, the Obama campaign is not assured of a win. The odds of Romney winning, and thereby putting our cultural demise on a slower track are increasing fast. I think that you’re in the UK somewhere so you might not have seen the Democrat primary results in West Virginia. Google them and get a chuckle.

  34. Frank_Bearer says:

    Everybody, even the Jovial Cardinal admits Obama’s position is no surprise.

    The surprise is the complete lack of correction of the weekly communicant Joe Biden.

  35. Dad of Six says:

    “The surprise is the complete lack of correction of the weekly communicant Joe Biden.”

    It would be a surprise if the Cardinal Dolan or any member of the USCCB would correct any national figure.

  36. wmeyer says:

    “It would be a surprise if the Cardinal Dolan or any member of the USCCB would correct any national figure.”

    Sad but true. It appears as though latae sententiae is supposed to be the solution. But the example set by these CINOs could mislead millions of souls.

  37. heway says:

    Not surprised at Obama being truthful – and Biden being anti-catholic. People who use the Bible to support their social programs but have never read Pauls’ letter to the Romans or other parts of the Bible are not christians in my book. And I don’t have any respect for those Bishops and Marguette professor who have called Paul Ryan a few uncomplimentary names. One refered to him as a ‘heretic’. Where are those voices today? None of them attacking the great, stupid Biden or the professional anti-Christ, Obama?
    Get on your knees, America!

  38. AvantiBev says:

    Sour Grapes? I have risked family relationships trying to reach out to a gay cousin who simply labels any attempt to discuss these things rationally “hate speech”. So now I find that my own closest relatives have decided that to disagree about agenda or policy which furthers the sexual revolution – hetero or homo – is hateful and un-Christian. I hardly think I am the sour one. I am not the one suggesting they be censored and be silent.

    Sour on the timidity I have found in preachers the past 40 years? Yep.

    What am I going to do about? What I have been doing. All I CAN DO is live the life I was taught by my parents to live and not follow the crowd – which I have in fact done. But swimming upstream in this sewer water is a constant daily battle for the chaste faithful and more tiring when you find out your friends and family are swimming in the opposite directon.

  39. AvantiBev says:

    I have worked hard for several different local campaigns and Santorum during the primary including primary day here in Illinois after having been in the E.R. all night with my Mom. So I hardly think I am sitting around not doing anything.

  40. AvantiBev: Since, without the light of your Earth’s yellow sun my psychic powers weaken, I and the other readers here can’t know those details of your personal life. o{];¬)

    What wearies, like ecclesiastical kryptonite in this time when we clearly need to be drawing together, is the finger-pointing at the present group of bishops, when the body of bishops has really changed over in the last few years.

    “I told you so!” only goes so far.

  41. catholicmidwest says:

    Further confirmation that this is just about Biden shooting off his mouth:
    Biden Said to Apologize to Obama for Gay Marriage Remarks

  42. Johnno says:

    AvantiBev is right Fr. Z. I don’t think her statements should be seen as said to demoralize us, but to once again remind us about what led to this. If we don’t recognize this long list of errors we have nothing to fight back with.

    Consistency is the key. If you want to fight gay marriage, you must also fight divorce, contraception, sex outside of marriage, adultery, masturbation, pornography, etc. etc. All of these things are tied together. Many Catholics forget that masturbation is also ‘disordered’ no different than homosexuality. But how many times do we hear this being preached against? Undermine and disregard one, and the others follow suit.

    That’s the key to winning back the culture, consistency! And Romney is not yet guaranteed to be the nominee. Ron Paul is also in the race, and he’s doing well because of consistency and sticking to his ethics. He’s a much better man for the job of being President.

  43. catholicmidwest says:

    Ron Paul now has about 2-4% of the vote and he knows it. He’s no more than a potential spoiler. If he’s as smart as you say he is, then he’s already cut some kind of a deal with the Republican party and he’ll get out of the way soon.

Comments are closed.