There are two good recent commentaries available about the dark works of the relentless Jesuit homosexualist activist James Martin.
At Crisis there is a piece by Kevin Wells which compares Martin’s works to those of Fred Rogers. My emphases.
Mr. Rogers, a Presbyterian minister, seemed remarkably untethered to anyone or anything outside of his Christ-appointed mission to help children see their own unique dignity and value. He knew of life’s monsters; his mission was to ennoble children before the monsters could strike.
For several years now, Fr. James Martin, appearing like-minded, has been tender-hearted in his care for those experiencing same-sex attraction and gender dysphoria. Unlike Mr. Rogers, Fr. Martin seems to be enabling rather than ennobling. And it is for this reason that he has become one of the monsters.
[…]
It’s a shame, because it doesn’t have to be this way. Fr. Martin could die a saint and be remembered as one of the great forces for good in this world if he decides to be a Catholic priest rooted in the fullness of Truth.
Recently, Fr. Martin tweeted, “Interesting: ‘Where the Bible mentions [homosexual] behavior at all, it clearly condemns it. I freely grant that. The issue is precisely whether the biblical judgment is correct.’ ” This tweet marked the moment when Fr. Martin could have been converted by a hailstorm of fraternal correction from fellow priests and clergy. But nothing happened. Bishops and priests—save a very few—remained mute in the aftermath of the offending tweet.
Because of Fr. Martin’s Mr. Rogers-like warmth, friendly smile [“La faccia sua era faccia d’uom giusto…”] and accompanying words, many millions—gay and straight alike—have rooted themselves to him. He is regarded as the long-muted prophetic voice of God. And because so many thousands of bishops and priests have muted their own prophetic voice on the complementarity of the sexes, Fr. Martin’s subterranean fight to normalize homosexual relations and same-sex marriage has been emboldened and advanced. His words, tweets, and thoughts will continue to spread throughout the world like an invisible poisonous gas.
Mr. Rogers was rooted to God in accompanying children. He unearthed and remedied the wounds caused by fathers; Fr. Martin affirms those wounds.
[…]
Invisible poisonous gas.
Next, Fr. Dwight Longenecker comments on Martin’s inevitable whine about the denial of Communion to an openly Lesbian judge in Michigan who civilly “married” a women in Michigan. Fr. Scott Nolan of the Diocese of Grand Rapids denied her Communion. She went to the press. There was a hideously biased hit piece published, to which I reacted HERE. The local bishop wound up backing the priest, thanks be to God.
Of course it was only a matter of micro-seconds before inveterate tweeter Martin stuck his nose in.
Fr. Longenecker dissects some of Martin’s tweets about the affair. Here is one, just as a sample. My emphases and comments:
James Martin: As with all these sad cases, the question is: Why are only married LGBT people being singled out? Is Communion denied to all parishioners who are not following church teachings? That is, married couples using birth control or IVF? Or young people engaging in pre-marital sex?
DL: LGBT people are not being “singled out” for not following church teachings. Ms Smolenski was not denied communion because she is a lesbian. She is not even being denied communion for being in a lesbian relationship. She is being denied communion because she “married” another woman. [She committed scandal. In can. 915 the Church focuses on public acts that cause scandal.] This is not simply a matter of “not following church teachings.” By attempting a marriage with a woman Ms Smolenski publicly, formally and irremediably denied the Catholic teaching about marriage. [The judge could remedy the situation by publicly announcing a civil divorce and then publicly denouncing what she did,with an expression if adherence to the Church’s teachings.That would help to repair the scandal she caused.]
Marriage is a Catholic sacrament. It is one of the means of grace. For it to be a valid sacrament it requires proper form, minister and matter. The proper matter is the conjugal act. The proper ministers are the man and woman marrying one another. Therefore to attempt a same sex marriage is not simply “not following church teachings” it is rejecting church teachings and doing so formally and publicly. When a Catholic attempts a same sex marriage they are rejecting the Catholic teaching about the sacraments.
That Fr Martin does not admit this or teach this indicates either that he is very poorly educated (but he is a Jesuit so that can’t be the case) or he is deliberately misleading God’s people.
Attempting to marry a person of the same sex is not at the same level of commitment as a couple using birth control or IVF or someone committing fornication. All these sins are private sins and can be repented of. [They are “occult”, private, not publicly known. That can be taken care of in the confessional. Civil marriage is a public act.] In a same sex marriage the person is not just “not following church teaching.” They are rejecting church teaching. They are saying by their words and actions, “Gay sex is not a sin. It is something to be celebrated. It is something God blesses. The Catholic Church is wrong and I am publicly, formally declaring that I reject the Catholic Church’s teaching.”
In other words it is not breaking the rules it is rejecting the rules and in rejecting the rules rejecting the authority that sets those rules.
This distinction is something any eighth grade confirmation student could understand. [Hence, Martin understands it. He just rejects it.]
It is important to know what the homosexualists are doing. They are patiently, though less and less so, engaging in a kind of permineralization process, like to how over time minerals replace organic matter to create fossiles. The homosexualists are trying to replace the Church’s clear teaching with ambiguities that cause doubt and then self-justification. Note how, some time ago, Martin admitted that Scriptures clearly state that homosexual acts are sins. Then, incredibly, he called into question the veracity of Scripture, suggesting that Scripture is wrong.
Interesting: “Where the Bible mentions [same-sex sexual] behavior at all, it clearly condemns it. I freely grant that. The issue is precisely whether the biblical judgment is correct. The Bible sanctioned slavery as well and nowhere attacked it as unjust.. https://t.co/52jL6NDgRu
— James Martin, SJ (@JamesMartinSJ) October 23, 2019
Kevin Wells is reminded of a darker version of Fred Rogers.
I, rather, am reminded of Geryon from the Divine Comedy.
Ecco la fiera con la coda aguzza,
che passa i monti e rompe i muri e l’armi!
Ecco colei che tutto il mondo appuzza!
Lately, I’ve been thinking much about Augustine and his conversion. What an enormous leap he made, with grace-emboldened courage. What a magnificent contribution he subsequently made, worthy of multiplying honors for all time. Wells made a really good point. Martin could be so much more, do such good.
Loading ...
“Invisible, poisonous gas” made me think of the great and terrible work by Neville Schute, “On the Beach”. I highly recommend it to everyone, it’s one of the few books that made me weep openly at the end. In it, a nuclear war has devastated the northern hemisphere: those who weren’t killed by the blasts were killed by a noxious cloud which circled the globe. The Southern hemisphere was spared, if only temporarily, by wind currents in the atmosphere, but slowly the radioactive cloud works its way south, and the book concludes with the death or suicide of every character.
I connect it to something a friend told me, which I believe to be a quote from a more authoritative source. It’s the idea that Christ will return when the last priest is saying the last Mass and the forces of evil have circled and are about to close in upon him.
These articles are a fitting reflection for Advent, as the End is surely coming sooner or later. We can stave off the radioactive cloud with a good confession.
“Bishops and priests—save a very few—remained mute in the aftermath of the offending tweet.” And the Pope also says nothing, instead invites him for a private meeting as an (seeming) endorsement.
Sed et serpens erat callidior cunctis animantibus terrae quae fecerat Dominus Deus.
We must continue to pray for this embattled priest.
Hypothetically, could (or should?) a priest (or EMHC) deny communion to a fellow priest, bishop, or even pope who publicly supports communion by this judge, or communion for the divorced and remarried, denies the divinity of Christ, etc?
Very apt analogy with respect to Fr Martin’s teaching.
One thing in Fr Martin’s tweets jumped out at me: “As with all these sad cases, the question is: Why are only married LGBT people being singled out?”
If, as seems highly likely, he refers to same-sex putative “marriages” then those are not at all marriages, in the eyes of the Church or of God. Rather, they are a mockery of marriage, a union between a man and a woman.
As with the sin of homosexuality, Fr. Martin full well knows this truth about marriage and has chosen to reject it.
I don’t condone the works of Martin Luther, or Henry VIII, but one must keep in mind, that corruption in the church, made much of it acceptable. Today we are experiencing a level of corruption, that has the average person shaking their head. I have read where our church leaders have paid out over 3 billion dollars to settle the homosexual claims alone.
Our catechism expressly states that homosexuality is innately disordered, which means, by it’s very nature. Yet we have, a very high profile priest, who almost approves of it. He also wants to correct sacred scripture, by implying that the Evangelist were mistaken for condemning such an act. I ask our prelates, who allow this to go on, where are you taking us?
“Why are only married LGBT people being singled out?”
I recollect back in 2011 when A. Cuomo was elected guvanur there was a Holy Mass prior to his inaguration. He arrived with his ‘live-in’ girlfriend and his bishop gave him communion. Online agitation, chancellery response, Dr E. Peters weighs in. ‘Detroit’ reference. Messy that. Fr Martin, The lady doth protest too much. I’ve said enough.
Notwithstanding all the red wishful thinking to the contrary, Judge Sara Smolenski is undoubtedly going to remedy the situation by publicly announcing an appeal to the Vatican and Amoris Laetitia. This is nothing other than a model test case being lobbed up by the Michigan diocese to Rome. Of all the civilly joined gay Catholics to make a public example out of, they pick a District Court Judge. It’s guaranteed to be appealed to the Vatican in order to affirm Amoris Laetitia with an expanded definition of irregular unions to include homosexuals.
“Why are only married LGBT people being singled out?”
They’re not singled out. In fact, Father Martin knows they’re not singled out, because he has commented publicly several times on the discussion after Amoris Laetitia was promulgated, on possible Communion for those who publicly have a civil divorce and marriage.
Also, he (and many others) needs to stop publishing extended discourse on Twitter. It’s a terrible platform for that purpose, although I suspect the arbitrarily deconstructed, effectively non-indexed, generally chaotic nature of that platform is seen as a feature by those who seek deniability for the interpretation of what they say.
What a heavy moral responsibility he has put on himself. And to publicly question whether scripture got it right. He is questioning, was God right, perhaps God got it wrong. After all, we have a pope more merciful than God, so a mere priest questioning if he knows more than God was bound to happen, and here it is. And it could all be remedied so easily from Rome, but rather than that, let’s meet with him for a full half hour and rubber stamp the approval of his deeds.
We are all doing some of our Purgatory here.
We ought to care about people caught up in this insanity, especially the children and young people who are being destroyed by it. But for a priest to confirm people in sin, it’s unbelievable.
There is no comparison between the amazing Fred Rogers and James Martin. I’m betting that comparison would be rejected by the Rogers family. It’s a totally insulting comparison, and unfair, since Mr. Rogers is dead. But James Martin advances the “gay Jesus” concept, so, what’s it to him, he’s a man short on decency.
@Kathleen10 of course God cannot be wrong as He is the very embodiment of Truth. However Modernists such as Fr. Martin believe that Scripture is just stories written by people and therefore can be accepted or rejected at will. Which of course rejects the authority of the Church which declared the canon of scripture to be the inspired word of God. It does seem OK for them however to cherry pick whatever in scripture suits their particular agenda e.g. “Mercy”, “eating with sinners and prostitutes” etc. and present that as something we must follow.
‘Where the Bible mentions [homosexual] behavior at all, it clearly condemns it. I freely grant that. The issue is precisely whether the biblical judgment is correct.’
And thus one ceases to follow Christ, no longer adhering to the true Christian Faith and instead begins to follow himself, making a god of his own intellect.
Pingback: Two good commentaries today on the works of @JamesMartinSJ | Jean'sBistro2010's Blog
Pingback: SATVRDAY EDITION – Big Pulpit