NJ archbishop sets rules for barring Catholics from Communion

File under: Grandstanding Idiot

By 

Archbishop John J. Myers of Newark, N.J., addresses Pope Francis at the conclusion of Mass at the Pontifical North American College in Rome on May 2, 2015. Photo by Paul Haring, courtesy of Catholic News Service
Archbishop John J. Myers of Newark, N.J., addresses Pope Francis at the conclusion of Mass at the Pontifical North American College in Rome on May 2, 2015. Photo by Paul Haring, courtesy of Catholic News Service

Even as Pope Francis and Catholic leaders from around the world debate ways to make the Catholic Church more inclusive, Newark Archbishop John Myers has given his priests strict guidelines on refusing Communion to Catholics who, for example, support gay marriage or whose own marriage is not valid in the eyes of the church.

In the two-page memo, Myers also orders parishes and Catholic institutions not to host people or organizations that disagree with church teachings.

He says Catholics, “especially ministers and others who represent the Church, should not participate in or be present at religious events or events intended to endorse or support those who reject or ignore Church teaching and Canon Law.”

The new rules could raise eyebrows given that Francis is currently leading a high-level Vatican summit, called a synod, where he and some 270 bishops are debating whether to let divorced and remarried Catholics receive Communion, and how to be more welcoming to cohabiting and gay couples whose lives don’t conform to Catholic teaching.

The guidelines could also up the ante for the coming election season, when Catholic candidates who support abortion rights or gay rights are sometimes challenged by conservatives over whether they should receive Communion.

A spokesman for Myers said in an email on Tuesday (Oct. 13) that the archbishop saw this as an opportune moment to set out the guidelines for priests in the northern New Jersey archdiocese.

“With so much being generated in the media with regard to issues like same-sex unions and such, this memo about ensuring that Catholic teaching is adhered to in all situations — especially with regard to the use of diocesan properties and facilities — seemed appropriate,” James Goodness, a spokesman for Myers, said in an email.

LetterArchdiocese of Newark Memorandum

Archdiocese of Newark Memorandum

The memo is titled “Principles to Aid in Preserving and Protecting the Catholic Faith in the Midst of an Increasingly Secular Culture.” It is dated Sept. 22 and was sent to priests this week, according to a source who provided a copy to Religion News Service.

In the memo, Myers writes: “The Church will continue to cherish and welcome her members and invite them to participate in her life to the degree that their personal situation permits them honestly to do so.

“Catholics,” he continues, “must be in a marriage recognized as valid by the Church to receive Holy Communion or the other sacraments. Non-Catholics and any Catholic who publicly rejects Church teaching or discipline, either by public statements or by joining or supporting organizations which do so, are not to receive the Sacraments.”

Myers issued these guidelines even though he is scheduled to retire next July when he turns 75, turning over the reins to Archbishop Bernard Hebda.

In 2013, Francis named Hebda a “coadjutor archbishop” — meaning he would automatically take over when Myers left office — after a series of controversies that angered many priests and parishioners in the 1.4 million-member archdiocese.

In one instance, Myers was criticized for allowing a priest — who was under court order to stay away from children — to work with youths, and in another he was criticized for using church funds to pay for pricey renovations to a retirement home.

Complete Article HERE!

The mystery surrounding the letter allegedly sent by cardinals criticising Synod procedure

By andrea tornielli

According to a list of names published by Vatican commentator, Sandro Magister, the letter was signed by thirteen cardinals. But four of the men mentioned – Scola, Vingt-Trois Piacenza and Erdö – denied signing the document. The incident underlines the importance of Francis’ call for this “hermeneutics of conspiracy” to stop

synod heads

Thirteen cardinals – Synod Fathers – are said to have sent a letter to Pope Francis, expressing their doubts about the procedures followed in the current Synod on the family and raising fears of piloting with the aim of obtaining “predetermined results”. The cardinals were apparently especially keen to know about the composition of the commission tasked with drafting the concluding text. They asked that the rapporteurs of the language-based discussion groups be elected, not nominated (the possibility of having non-elected was nominees was wafted about by some media circles on the eve of the Synod but it was never considered seriously).

The letter was published in full by Vatican commentator Sandro Magister, along with a complete list of the letter’s signatories: Carlo Carlo Caffarra, Archbishop of Bologna, Thomas Cardinal Collins, Archbishop of Toronto, Timothy Cardinal Dolan, Archbishop of New York, Wim Cardinal Eijk, Archbishop of Utrecht, Péter Cardinal Erdö, Archbishop of Esztergom-Budapest and Relator General of the Synod, Gerhard Cardinal Müller, Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Wilfrid Cardinal Napier, Archbishop of Durban and one of the presidents delegate of the Synod, George Cardinal Pell, Prefect of the Secretariat for the Economy, Mauro Cardinal Piacenza, Major Penitentiary, Robert Cardinal Sarah, Prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, Angelo Cardinal Scola, Archbishop of Milan, Jorge Cardinal Urosa Savino, Archbishop of Caracas, André Cardinal Vingt-Trois, Archbishop of Paris and one of the presidents delegate of the Synod.

But four of these figures denied their names were on the letter sent to the Pope. The Archbishop of Milan, Angelo Scola’s spokesman issued a statement on his behalf, confirming that he had signed no such letter. Later, the Archbishop of Paris, André Vingt-Trois, also denied having signed the letter, in a statement to French Catholic newspaper La Croix’s Vatican commentator. Then, in the late morning, the Major Penitentiary Cardinal Mauro Piacenza also denied signing the text. In a statement to Vatican Insider, he said he had not signed the letter, nor was he invited to do so. In the early afternoon, the General Rapporteur of the Synod, Cardinal Péter Erdö, also said his signature was not on that letter. Following each of these statements, Sandro Magister removed the signatories’ names from the list in his article.

In their letter, the cardinals – who gave their assurance that their concerns were shared by other Synod Fathers too – criticise the Instrumentum laboris, the Synod working document, stating: “it also has sections that would benefit from substantial reflection and reworking”. They criticise “the new procedures guiding the synod seem to guarantee it excessive influence on the synod’s deliberations and on the final synodal document”.

“The new synodal procedures,” the letter reads, “will be seen in some quarters as lacking openness and genuine collegiality”. Although the cardinals do not mention specifically which “quarters” they are referring to, it is clear that these doubts are their own.  “In the past, the process of offering propositions and voting on them served the valuable purpose of taking the measure of the synod fathers’ minds. The absence of propositions and their related discussions and voting seems to discourage open debate and to confine discussion to small groups; thus it seems urgent to us that the crafting of propositions to be voted on by the entire synod should be restored. Voting on a final document comes too late in the process for a full review and serious adjustment of the text.”

In another paragraph of the letter, cardinals write: “the lack of input by the synod fathers in the composition of the drafting committee has created considerable unease. Its members have been appointed, not elected, without consultation. Likewise, anyone drafting anything at the level of the small circles should be elected, not appointed.”

In turn, these things have created a concern that the new procedures are not true to the traditional spirit and purpose of a Synod. It is unclear why these procedural changes are necessary. A number of fathers feel the new process seems designed to facilitate predetermined results on important disputed questions.”

Finally, cardinals express their “concern that a synod designed to address a vital pastoral matter – reinforcing the dignity of marriage and family – may become dominated by the theological/doctrinal issue of Communion for the divorced and civilly remarried. If so, this will inevitably raise even more fundamental issues about how the Church, going forward, should interpret and apply the Word of God, her doctrines and her disciplines to changes in culture.”

The Secretary General of the Synod, Cardinal Lorenzo Baldisseri and the Pope himself responded to this letter in the Synod Hall the following day. Baldisseri explained that the signatories were off the mark in the comments about procedural changes to do with the commission in charge of drafting the final document and about the appointment of rapporteurs in the circuli minores.

Regarding the first objection, Baldisseri explained that until the Extraordinary Synod of 2014, three or four people from the General Secretariat had been in charge of writing the final document. It was Francis who wanted to expand this task, assigning one Synod Father from each continent. The commission was never elected by the Synod Fathers. In addition, the prediction some media circles close to the signatories made about the failure to elect rapporteurs and moderators from the language-based discussion groups (circuli minores), proved to be mistaken. As in 2014, the rapporteurs and moderators of the circuli minores, were elected by the Synod Fathers and not appointed. And the reports issued by these circles were published in full like last year.

Readers will recall Francis’ reference to a “hermeneutics of conspiracy”, defining it as “sociologically weak and spiritually unhelpful”. In other words, it is exactly the opposite of what the Synod Fathers are called to do and all these suspicions about conspiracies and plotting needs to stop. His words were welcomed with applause.

The Pope pointed out that “Catholic doctrine on marriage has not been touched, no one called it into question in this assembly or in the Extraordinary assembly. It has been preserved in its integrity”. He also urged Synod Fathers not to let themselves “be conditioned or limit” themselves, “seeing the question of communion for remarried divorcees as the only problem”.

Complete Article HERE!

Pope Francis’s meeting with Kim Davis should come as no surprise

By 

The pope’s enormous influence has undermined LGBT people all over the world, as evidenced by his thinly veiled anti-equality statements in the US

Francis in DC

 

Pope Francis’s no-longer-secret meeting in Washington DC with anti-gay activist Kim Davis, the controversial Kentucky county clerk who was briefly jailed over her refusal to issue same-sex marriage licenses in compliance with state law, leaves LGBT people with no illusions about the Pope’s stance on equal rights for us, despite his call for inclusiveness. It should now be clear to all that he and the Catholic Church remain steadfastly on the wrong side of history, mired in a discriminatory past.

While in the US, Pope Francis spoke about treating others as we would like to be treated. Yet his enormous power and influence have undermined LGBT people all over the world, as evidenced by his thinly-veiled anti-equality statements both in Congress and during his post-visit press conference – all broadcast before a global audience.

He even repeated the tired old nonsense that we are a threat. In his speech to Congress, he lamented that “fundamental” family relationships were threatened by modern alternatives and, in a press conference conducted in-flight en route to Rome at the end of his visit to the United States, he stated that it is a human right to refuse same-sex marriage licenses and referred to it as conscientious objection.

Yet, Davis, with whom he met and apparently offered moral support to, was quite free to conscientiously object to same-sex marriage. She even had the opportunity to resign or allow her deputies to issue the licenses without her, but she refused to do either – and went so far as to reportedly altering the license forms in a manner that may invalidate people’s marriages. She apparently thought she could “conscientiously object” and keep the perks of the job she conscientiously objects to performing at the same time.

The pope’s support of Davis and others objecting to same-sex marriage and actively trying to keep people from marrying will result in more bigotry and discrimination against us, and is at variance with his overall message of inclusiveness.

Francis is championing “fundamental” family relationships at the expense of hard-won rights by gays and their families – and already many are using the pope’s comments to further their anti-equality agenda, including Davis and her lawyers with the anti-equality Liberty Counsel. But none of this should have
come as a surprise.

Statements made by Pope Francis just a few months ago in the Philippines underscore his opposition to marriage equality. “The family is threatened by growing efforts on the part of some to redefine the very institution of marriage, by relativism, by the culture of the ephemeral, by a lack of openness to life”, Francis said at a Mass in Manila. “These realities are increasingly under attack from powerful forces, which threaten to disfigure God’s plan for creation”.

These views were even more obvious and succinct than the thinly-veiled swipes against marriage equality that he made in America last week. His anti-marriage equality stance stands in stark contrast to some of his other statements. For instance, Pope Francis rightly lectured Congress and the world about the refugee crisis and quoted the bible’s message “do unto others as you would have them do unto you” – but to ‘do unto others’ means affording equal rights to all, not select groups. Affording unrestricted access to marriage rights strengthens the institution of marriage in a democracy and it is very troubling for the pope to suggest that same-sex marriages threaten traditional marriage.

That oft-demolished illogical and unreasonable argument is ludicrous and the US supreme court ruled accordingly – as did the citizens of Ireland (a predominantly Catholic country) and in other countries where gay marriage has been legalized. The pope may not have given much emphasis to his bigotry or prejudice when he was in the United States, but it was there all along – if we paid attention attention. His meeting with Kim Davis in Washington DC is more definitive proof of which side he is on when it comes to human rights for LGBT people.

Next time, perhaps we’ll be less surprised when he shows his true colors.

Complete Article HERE!

LGBT Catholics Alarmed With Pope’s Remarks About “Unjust Discrimination”

Pope Francis made the comments on Wednesday in the context of marriage, family, and religious liberty. LGBT Catholics said they believe the term “unjust discrimination” channels a specific history of antipathy toward gays and lesbians in the church.

By 

In his first visit to the United States, Pope Francis condemned “unjust discrimination” while speaking about religious liberty, family, and marriage. The pope’s overture was couched as a nod to inclusivity, but the remarks nonetheless riled LGBT Catholic leaders who said the unexpected comments echoed talking points from the hierarchy of U.S. bishops who oppose LGBT rights.

The pope’s comments were not entirely specific, however. Delivered at the White House on Wednesday, the remarks were broad enough to possibly address a number of social and political issues facing U.S. Catholics, including health care, contraception, and LGBT rights.

But the pope’s use of “unjust discrimination” — a term that appears in a key Catholic teaching on homosexuality — seemed particularly pointed in that context to LGBT Catholics. They say church officials have used the term to argue that there are, in contrast, just and fair forms of discrimination against LGBT people.

“It is a term that has dangerous ramifications for LGBT people,” said Marianne Duddy-Burke, executive director of the LGBT Catholic organization DignityUSA, who sat in the VIP section at the White House during the pope’s remarks. “To any well tuned LGBT ear, or anyone listening, it is support for a position many U.S. Catholic bishops have taken — which is against same-sex marriage, the right to fire married gay employees or transgender employees, the right to exclude LGBT people from adoption, and to deny LGBT people foster-care services.”

“It set off warning bells,” she told BuzzFeed News.

The term itself — “unjust discrimination” — appears in a key, conflicting paragraph in the Catholic catechism about homosexuality. “This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial,” it says. “They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided.”

Pope Francis on Wednesday also visited Little Sisters of the Poor, who in 2013 filed a lawsuit to challenge provisions of the Affordable Care Act that require employers to provide contraception coverage. The nuns cite religious objections. While the pope was supporting the nuns’ legal challenge by making an appearance, it is unclear that the pope’s comments earlier in the day were confined to that issue.

Contacted by BuzzFeed News in a phone call, Father Federico Lombardi, a spokesman for the pope, did not clarify which subjects the pope was addressing — same-sex marriage, the Affordable Care Act, homosexuals in the church, or something else — when discussing discrimination and religious freedom.

Since taking leadership of the Catholic Church, Pope Francis has made gestures of tolerance toward LGBT people, such as famously asking, “Who am I to judge?” However, Francis has not pushed for changes to church doctrine, and he has supported a ban on same-sex couples marrying.

Francis DeBernardo, executive director of New Way Ministries, another prominent LGBT Catholic group, told BuzzFeed News, “We haven’t heard that term in a long time — in the three years since Francis has been in — and it is disturbing to hear him resurrect it. I think the record shows that sometimes he speaks out of both sides of his mouth.”

Unjust discrimination has been a talking point for the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, which leads of the country’s roughly 70 million Catholics. In 2013, for example, the bishops told the U.S. Senate to reject a bill that would protect LGBT workers from discrimination while, in the same statement, also saying the bishops oppose unjust discrimination.

While Duddy-Burke was enthusiast about the pope’s visit, she said, “If he winds up enforcing the U.S. bishop’s agenda, that means a continuation of the war on LGBT people from the catholic hierarchy.”

At the White House, the pope said he would “celebrate and support the institutions of marriage and the family at this critical moment in the history of our civilization.”

“American Catholics are committed to building a society which is truly tolerant and inclusive, to safeguarding the rights of individuals and communities, and to rejecting every form of unjust discrimination,” he continued. “With countless other people of good will, they are likewise concerned that efforts to build a just and wisely ordered society respect their deepest concerns and the right to religious liberty. That freedom reminds one of America’s most precious possessions. And, as my brothers, the United States Bishops, have reminded us, all are called to be vigilant, precisely as good citizens, to preserve and defend that freedom from everything that would threaten or compromise it.”

DeBernardo reflected, “I would be fearful that right now the U.S. bishops think that just discrimination would be being able to discriminate against gay and lesbian people who choose to marry.”

He noted that Pope Francis’s comments could be interpreted two ways: that the pope rejects unjustifiable discrimination against LGBT people, or he rejects unjustifiable discrimination against religious people who oppose LGBT rights.

The latter issue has inflamed numerous denominations that support the right to refuse services to same-sex couples on religious grounds.

DeBernardo said he believed the pope was progressive at heart and acknowledged a challenge for the pope’s trip abroad. “I think Francis is really trying to hold the church together, he said. “The Catholic Church around the world and in U.S. is extremely divided over many serious issues.”

Complete Article HERE!

Christian Brothers High School denies homecoming date for gay student

Lance Sanderson
Lance Sanderson

MEMPHIS, TN – A student at Christian Brothers High School said the school will not let him bring his date to the school’s homecoming dance.

Lance Sanderson is a senior at CBHS, and he wants to bring a male date to homecoming.

He believes administrators at the private all-boys Catholic school are discriminating against him with a policy laid out in a September 24 news bulletin on the school’s website.

“CBHS students may attend the dance by themselves, with other CBHS students, or with a girl from another school. For logistical reasons, boys from other schools may not attend.”

School administrators have not commented publicly on this policy or Sanderson’s specific complaint. However, a letter was issued to the CBHS community explaining the development of a more pro-active outreach.

According to the policy, Sanderson would be allowed to bring a male date from CBHS but not from another school.

“I can bring like, a friend from CBHS or like, a girl friend from another school but I can’t bring like a boyfriend from another school or a date from another school,” Sanderson explained. “The other students have that option.  They use it.”

Sanderson said he has been out as homosexual since his freshman year. He said the previous school administration agreed to let him bring his date to homecoming, but now the school has changed its tune.

“I feel like they’re discriminating against me because I want to bring a guy and they don’t support that right now,” said Sanderson.

He said he’s asking to be treated like all of the other students at his high school.

Sanderson created a Change.org petition with the hopes of getting the school to change its mind before homecoming. He’s gained more than 6,000 supporters.

However, experts at Gold Law Firm said there does not appear to be any discrimination in the CBHS policy, because it’s been the school’s policy not to allow men from other schools at their dances.

Additionally, the administrator who gave verbal permission to Sanderson last year didn’t legally have the authority to do that.

Sanderson said he’s now pushing for more progressive policies.

“I’d like the policy to change,” he said. “If not now, maybe sometime before prom.”

CBHS’s homecoming is scheduled for Saturday, September 26.

Complete Article HERE!