Punditry

Zorak (my favorite blogging mantis) points to a Catholic columnist in Virginia complaining about Bishop DiLorenzo. It goes through all the standard points for dissent continuously made.

…In divining his public comments so far, the new bishop is leaving little or no wiggle room for Catholics except to adhere strictly to doctrine. A conservative, he’s much in the mold of Pope John Paul II, who assigned him here. Outgoing Bishop Sullivan was considered more open to differences of opinion.

Except when those opinions were in conformity with Church teaching.

As The Pilot’s Steven Vegh reported Wednesday, some local Catholics applaud the pronouncements from Richmond. But for others like me, the bishop’s comments suggest certain topics are no longer up for discussion. That, and the strange feeling — paranoia? — that DiLorenzo is shepherding a flock in the 21st century with a paternalistic attitude more reminiscent of church leaders from many decades past. This seems more like devolution than evolution in the church.

Moral truth never changes. The Letter to the Hebrews did not say "Jesus Christ was different yesterday and today has progressed and will keep changing for ever." Of course they never explain why it is the paternalistic attitude that is the cause of the constant teaching of the Church. There is a paternalist attitude involved though – The Father, Son and the Holy Spirit.

Is discussion of married and female priests now verboten — at a time when many parishes struggle because not enough men enter the seminary? Other faiths seem to do just fine with female ministers.

Here we go again the arbitrary mixing up of dogma and a discipline of the Church.

Will discussion of birth control, which the church bans, now be squelched? This is ludicrous, given that most families today are much smaller than the tribes that used to pack the church pews on Sundays when I was a child. The rhythm method — sounds quaint, doesn’t it? — isn’t that effective. Given the financial challenges of having large numbers of children, scores of families have already adopted a “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy on contraception.

Yes it should be squelched. Birth control is a lie and all lies should be removed. Talk about a tautology -he wants birth control because families today are much smaller. This is certainly putting the cart before the horse. Why is it that in the past that large families in much stricter economic circumstances were able to maintain their families; while those of us today in much better economic circumstances with cars, TVs, DVD’s, Computers, etc are unable to support larger families? But this demonstrates the attitude today of children as burden. That openness to life is defeated by a spreadsheet. That when you vision having another child you also vision your favorite material items or hobbies disappearing before you.

Plus, the Catholic Church lost enormous amounts of credibility during the clergy sexual abuse scandals and the subsequent cover-ups by bishops in communities around the country. It seems an odd time to now throw down the gauntlet on those who have stayed with the church.

Recently journalist have lost enormous amounts of credibility because of the scandals at the NYT, USA Today, CNN and others. Does he mean that all journalist should now be ignored because of the faults of their compatriots.

Maybe the uneasiness toward Bishop DiLorenzo is an overreaction on my part. But in the few weeks he’s been here, it seems he’s given me two choices: Shut up and stay a Catholic, or protest and leave the church.

I pray that’s not the case.

Actually if you evaluate your conscience as not conforming to the truth of the Church – the option is not to shut up, but to kneel down. The Gospel is preached for repentance not censorship. We should never shut up and stop saying that we are sorry for all the offences that we give to God. Let us not be quiet but contrite.

Recently I have been thinking about those who dissent from the Church always bringing up the idea of married priests and women priests. They usually state that their goal is make the Mass more available and that we need more priests to keep the circumstances from worsening.

I observed that in the cases of all the articles I have read by people advocating married priests that never once have I heard them call for married nuns and brothers. Why is this? Is not the response to vocations even worse among religious sisters and brothers. If married priests are a cure all then why not married religious sisters and brothers. Are they so unconcerned with the state of the praying Church? All Martha and no Mary? In all the web sites I have seen by these groups that advocate for married priests I have not seen a prayer for vocations. Why is prayer so downplayed and advocacy for their causes encouraged. When it comes to consecrated religious life do they realize that marriage is not something that is truly compatible to the religious life of living in convents and monasteries? If they can realize that then why can’t they see the life of a priest which is totally given to God and his own parishioners as being in most cases incompatible with normal family life.

I also find it ironic that the call for women’s ordination is justified to increase the availability of the Mass The reality is that it would only increase the availability of illicit Masses with no consecration of the Eucharist. Many of the efforts of progressives have not increased availability of the Eucharist, but have decreased it. Recipes for altar bread that cause the elements not to be consecrated. Playing around with the words of consecration. Quick, name me a progressive diocese that has steadily increased vocations? I know that’s a tough one, but naming a diocese that is faithful to Church teaching that has increased vocations and even built new seminaries is not. Name a convent of religious sisters where progressive ideas became the norm that is now larger today than it was in the sixties? Sorry time expired.

Lord Jesus, Son of the Eternal Father and Mary Immaculate, grant to our young people the generosity necessary to follow Your call and the courage required to overcome all obstacles to their vocation. Give their parents that faith, love and spirit of sacrifice which will inspire them to offer their children to God1s service and to rejoice whenever one of their children is called to the priesthood or religious life. Let Your example and that of Your blessed Mother and Saint Joseph encourage both young people and parents and let Your grace sustain them. Amen.

Update: This article was so fiskable that Credo of Credibility has stepped in with his own fisking.

The collapse of the Earth’s magnetic field, which both guards the planet and guides many of its creatures, appears to have started in earnest about 150 years ago. The field’s strength has waned 10 to 15 percent, and the deterioration has accelerated of late, increasing debate over whether it portends a reversal of the lines of magnetic force that normally envelop the Earth.

During a reversal, the main field weakens, almost vanishes, then reappears with opposite polarity. Afterward, compass needles that normally point north would point south, and during the thousands of years of transition, much in the heavens and Earth would go askew.
[Full Story]

I wonder if John Kerry has anything to do with the Earth’s magnetic field flip-flopping? Well he doesn’t exactly have a magnetic personality, so probably not. In fact if a compass was based on his magnetism it would probably point both north and south at the same time.

Elena of My Domestic Church posts a story about "Spiderman II" beating "Fahrenheit 9/11." As many pundits predicted that the audience would be heavily front loaded with "Hate Bush" supporters and to dissipate rather rapidly after the first week. In fact it has grossed less than Dodgeball and a little bit more than White Chicks. Not quite the Passion for liberals.

Though I do think thre are parallels between ole spidey and Mr. Moore. Michael Moore spins a web of deceit. In this case spin can be used in both of its meanings. Another similarity is I think that Mr. Moore suffers from Iraqnophobia. Also in Mr. Moore’s case with great media power come great irresponsibility. The parallels will stop there as to not slander our eight legged friends or those who serve in spandex.

Larry of A.M.D.G. points us to a group called Catholic Action Network for Social Justice in St. Louis. Judging by the content of their site it is another social justice for everyone but those in the womb groups. In a voters guide called 10 Questions to Ask Candidates we get questions about global warming, NAFTA, repealing the Patriot Act, and of course abortion. Actually I was kidding about them including abortion. It didn’t make it to their top ten lists of concerns. This is like sitting in the middle of a battlefield and complaining of the noise pollution because of the gunfire. Another common factor is that this groups is willing to quote Vatican documents as authorative when it suits them, but are also willing to advocate for women’s ordination. I found this part pretty funny. Under Prophetic Witnessing they had.

during local masses (using WOC’s fake dollar bills, etc.
Compiling a registry of local women called to ordination.

But what Larry had pointed to is a group of pictures that they encourage you to print out under the title "Voting Issues: More Than Abortion!!" This mention of abortion in fact is the only reference to abortion on their whole site. Their campaign is in response to Archbishop Burke strong action on denying Communion to pro-abortion Catholic politicians.

Besides them being graphically challenged this campaign shows a lot about their attitude. Their catch-phrase "Receiving Communion Anyways" sounds more like a line from the movie Dogma than a serious slogan for a Catholic group. Since Archbishop Burke Communion ban was specified for pro-abortion politicians or as he recently added actions like somebody wearing a "I support abortion" T-shirt. This group by complaining about this is saying that they support abortion even though like most "peace and justice" groups they never come right out and say it. Why complain about a Communion ban that did not apply to them?

The circular sign quotes from Vatican II’s Declaration on Religious Freedom (Dignitatis Humanae). Taking this statement out of this document is like taking a Gold Fish out of it’s tank. As the rest of the document shows that conscience has to be informed by the truth, and once known to submit to it and to be obedient to proper authority.

2. This Vatican Council declares that the human person has a right to religious freedom. This freedom means that all men are to be immune from coercion on the part of individuals or of social groups and of any human power, in such wise that no one is to be forced to act in a manner contrary to his own beliefs, whether privately or publicly, whether alone or in association with others, within due limits.

…It is in accordance with their dignity as persons-that is, beings endowed with reason and free will and therefore privileged to bear personal responsibility-that all men should be at once impelled by nature and also bound by a moral obligation to seek the truth, especially religious truth. They are also bound to adhere to the truth, once it is known, and to order their whole lives in accord with the demands of truth However, men cannot discharge these obligations in a manner in keeping with their own nature unless they enjoy immunity from external coercion as well as psychological freedom. Therefore the right to religious freedom has its foundation not in the subjective disposition of the person, but in his very nature. In consequence, the right to this immunity continues to exist even in those who do not live up to their obligation of seeking the truth and adhering to it and the exercise of this right is not to be impeded, provided that just public order be observed.

…Wherefore every man has the duty, and therefore the right, to seek the truth in matters religious in order that he may with prudence form for himself right and true judgments of conscience, under use of all suitable means.

8. Many pressures are brought to bear upon the men of our day, to the point where the danger arises lest they lose the possibility of acting on their own judgment. On the other hand, not a few can be found who seem inclined to use the name of freedom as the pretext for refusing to submit to authority and for making light of the duty of obedience. Wherefore this Vatican Council urges everyone, especially those who are charged with the task of educating others, to do their utmost to form men who, on the one hand, will respect the moral order and be obedient to lawful authority, and on the other hand, will be lovers of true freedom-men, in other words, who will come to decisions on their own judgment and in the light of truth, govern their activities with a sense of responsibility, and strive after what is true and right, willing always to join with others in cooperative effort.

…In the formation of their consciences, the Christian faithful ought carefully to attend to the sacred and certain doctrine of the Church.(35) For the Church is, by the will of Christ, the teacher of the truth. It is her duty to give utterance to, and authoritatively to teach, that truth which is Christ Himself, and also to declare and confirm by her authority those principles of the moral order which have their origins in human nature itself.

And from Evangelium Vitae:

The legal toleration of abortion or of euthanasia can in no way claim to be based on respect for the conscience of others, precisely because society has the right and the duty to protect itself against the abuses which can occur in the name of conscience and under the pretext of freedom.

They even have some form letters to send to the Archbishop and to the newspaper. They all start out:

I am a faithful Catholic, and active member of my faith community.

Nice tag line from a group that supports homosexual activity, same-sex marriage and women’s ordination. I wonder what their definition of a unfaithful Catholic is? Well here is what I think might be a more accurate campaign.

Here is an
article on HBO’s hit piece on celibacy.

Roman Catholicism is not the only religious faith that
extols the virtues of celibacy. But as Antony Thomas points out in his eye-opening
documentary “Celibacy,” no
other branch of any major world religion compels its clergy to abstain from
sex.

The effect has been cataclysmic: 500,000 nuns and priests have left their
orders since the 1960s, Thomas says. What’s more, legal actions involving thousands
of children abused by priests have been filed in 10 countries.

This has got to be one of the silliest arguments against the
mandatory discipline of celibacy. If celibacy was the problem than why was
it only after the 1960s
that it became a problem? If you look at something was true before and after
an event you surely can’t say that it was the cause. Of course there have been
zero celibate priests who have abused children, it is only those who broke
their vows and were not celibate.

I can’t speak for all of Buddhism but in Thailand Monks are required
to be celibate. While looking up this information I found a rather interesting/funny
set of questions asked during their ordination ceremony. The man is asked
a series of questions, for which there is only one right answer to each:

• Do you have Leprosy? (No)
• Are you male? (Yes)
• Do you have boils? (No)
• Are you free of debt? (Yes)
• Do you have ringworm? (No)
• Are you released from government service? (Yes)
• Do you have tuberculosis? (No)
• Do your parents permit you to become a monk? (Yes)
• Are you epileptic? (No)
• Are you at least 20 years old? (Yes)
• Are you human? (Yes)
• Do you have your robes and your alms bowl? (Yes)

So I guess if your non-male and/or an alien or have other diseases, tough
luck. Sorry E.T. The article continues:

…“Celibacy” begins by making the case
that the sex drive is stronger than hunger. Thomas heads to the East, where
he produces remarkable
video of
practices undertaken by other religions to sublimate the carnal urges of men.
(I should warn the guys that one of the scenes here will make you squirm.)

His point is that the sex drive cannot be ignored or
suppressed — and
yet, Thomas argues, that is exactly what the church has done.

So by this logic those who are married I guess are allowed to ignore temptations
to sin and can commit adultery. Or those before marriage can indulge in fornication
so to keep from feeling suppressed. If you are going to use reasoning like
this you are not just aiming it at celibacy but the whole order of the Church’s
teaching on sexual morality. Of course that is exactly the point. If you have
pedophile urges would he encourage these people to suppress them?

…One brave priest, interviewed on camera, admits to having
had two dalliances with women in 21 years. He says he is the rule, not the
exception, among priests,
many of whom have relationships with women. He says he understands why.

“I love being a priest,” he tells Thomas. “But
as (my parishioners) are leaving, I see that big empty church. And that church
is symbolic of the
emptiness inside me.”

My definition of a brave priest is one who has braved temptations
and has not broken his vows.

From the Atlantic
Journal-Constitution.

Some government decisions are legitimately political; others are not. For
example, politics should never play a role in the decision to approve or
disapprove drugs for human consumption. By law, such decisions are supposed
to be made solely on the basis of medical evidence that determines first
whether the drugs are safe, and second whether they are effective.

That’s no longer the case. The integrity of the nation’s drug-approval process
has been compromised by the Bush administration for crass political purposes,
another in a long line of cases in which it has ignored or distorted scientific
evidence.

Oh now this reporter finds interference in the FDA to be political.
During the Clinton administration RU-486 was given fast-track approval. By
the law
fast-track approval was to be used only for development of drugs to save lives,
like with cancer treatment medications. The only reason
it was given fast-track was to get the abortion pill approved prior
to President Clinton leaving office (another legacy).

We have long disapproved drugs for political reasons. Recreational
drug use has longed been banned under law. Regardless of how safe and effective
some hallucinogens, depressants, and amphetamines might be; a moral view
on their use came into play. An FDA that would approve any drug based on zero
moral concerns is not a government agency that protects the people. A suicide
pill could rapidly be developed that was effective and safety wouldn’t even
come into the picture (long term effect studies would not be necessary). If
a pill was developed that made people stronger and more violent and it effectively
did this and had no side-effect on the body would this reporter see this as
something that should be approved with zero political questions?

It is within the scope of government to not just look at the
science of something but at the moral consequence of it. Cloning, embryonic
stem-cell research, and other technologies all fall into areas that legitimately
should come under government oversight.

This is from a bulletin via St.
Gertrude Catholic Parish in Chicago, Il.

We are happy to announce that the Rev. Jesse Jackson, Sr., will speak at the
10am mass this Sunday, June 20th. Rev. Jesse Jackson will speak at the 10am mass
this Sunday (June 20th) at St. Gertrude. He will reflect on the day’s lessons
for about 1/2 hour after communion, around 10:45am. Since the 10am mass will
run a little longer than usual, we hope this reminder will help ease the flow
between the end of the one mass and beginning of the other.

Mark Loveless, who participates at the gym mass and also at Operation Push,
has been negotiating this event for a number of months. We are grateful for
your effort, Mark

And this is from a letter from the Pastor of this same church.

Dear St. Gertrude,
Reverend Jesse Jackson joins us today at the 10am mass, thanks to the persistent
effort of Mark Loveless. Mark and his son, Nathan, participate at the gym
mass as well as at Operation PUSH. It was Mark’s connection there that
led to the inspiration to invite Rev. Jackson to join us. Welcome, Jesse!
No chance I suppose that you’d be running in November to get us out
of the mess we seem to find ourselves in?

Arg! Where do i start. I was afraid to find out anything about
the Gym Mass and I was prophetic on that wish because it is even worse than
I imagined.

The hallmark of 10:30 a.m. Mass is the communal homily, whereby
people share from their own experiences of living the Gospel. Art, drama, music,
and liturgical dance also engage participants in a fresh look at the central
symbols of our faith. Plan for a longer Mass (about 1 hour).

Oh my, liturgical dance and a communal homily. And with all this
fun they have managed to schedule a whopping 30 minutes of time for confession
once a week.

Jessie Jackson was once pro-life and like so many others has
arranged a Faustian deal for political power in the Democratic Party. I always
wondered how someone, especially a Reverend, could go from pro-life to pro-abortion.
Do you wake up one day and realize that God did not ensoul that child
at conception? That one day it was a human being in need of protection and
the next a tissue blog to be excised when inconvenient. Regardless this Church
offering Jackson a change to speak during Mass is beyond inappropriate. It
would be bad enough allowing him to speak in an non-liturgical event, but as
part
of the Mass and after the Eucharist sacrifice is just plainly a scandal. I
guess the pastor did not read the letter
issued by the Bishops two days previous
to this event.

It is the teaching of the Catholic
Church from the very beginning, founded on her understanding of her Lord’s own witness to the sacredness
of human life, that the killing of an unborn child is always intrinsically
evil and can never be justified. If those who perform an abortion and those
who cooperate willingly in the action are fully aware of the objective evil
of what they do, they are guilty of grave sin and thereby separate themselves
from God’s grace. This is the constant and received teaching of the Church.
It is, as well, the conviction of many other people of good will.

To make such intrinsically evil actions legal is itself wrong. This is the
point most recently highlighted in official Catholic teaching. The legal system
as such can be said to cooperate in evil when it fails to protect the lives
of those who have no protection except the law. In the United States of America,
abortion on demand has been made a constitutional right by a decision of the
Supreme Court. Failing to protect the lives of innocent and defenseless members
of the human race is to sin against justice. Those who formulate law therefore
have an obligation in conscience to work toward correcting morally defective
laws, lest they be guilty of cooperating in evil and in sinning against the
common good.

… The Catholic community
and Catholic institutions should not honor those who act in defiance of
our fundamental moral principles. They should
not be given
awards, honors or platforms which would suggest support for their actions. (emphasis
added)

The pastor’s wish that Jessie Jackson would be running for president
is pathetic. What isn’t John Kerry pro-abortion enough? Exactly where does
Mr. Kerry and Mr. Jackson depart on issues.

In this article
:

When Father Bruce Cecil walked up and down the pews
during Sunday Mass, he shook all hands, extending an animated smile and his
peace to everyone.

And when he held the host high above the altar, broke it and placed it in
a goblet next to the wine, he spoke to all.

"Brothers and sisters," Cecil said in Spanish. "This is the
sacrament of our faith."

Cecil, who’s been preaching at Our Lady of Soledad
Catholic Church in Coach-ella for five years, didn’t ask anyone for
their stance on abortion, gay rights, stem cell research or corporal punishment.

Politicians, as of late, haven’t been so lucky.

Of course right off the bat we notice that Fr. Cecil was
committing a liturgical abuse by walking up and down the aisles shaking everybody’s hands.
Redemptionis
Sacramentum says:

[72.] It is appropriate “that each one give the sign of peace only to
those who are nearest and in a sober manner”. “The Priest may give
the sign of peace to the ministers but always remains within the sanctuary,
so as not to disturb the celebration. He does likewise if for a just reason
he wishes to extend the sign of peace to some few of the faithful”. “As
regards the sign to be exchanged, the manner is to be established by the Conference
of Bishops in accordance with the dispositions and customs of the people”,
and their acts are subject to the recognitio of the Apostolic See.[152]

And of course the boilerplate for all articles that talk about
Communion and Catholic politicians must include this part:

It’s not uncommon for politicians, even those who profess religious
faith, to take stands that seemingly conflict with religious teachings.

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, a Catholic, is also pro-choice. President George
W. Bush supports the death penalty.

I always enjoy the unbiased journalism of using terms such as
"seemingly conflict ." Supporting murdering a child in the womb only seemingly conflicts with thou show not kill. In reference to the Bishops statement on Catholics
in Political Life:

Father Cecil felt it was a fair decision.

"If a politician, or anyone, wants to call themselves Catholic, they
should adhere to the Catholic religion," Cecil said after his third Mass
of the day. "A church is not a club where you get to pick and choose."

Cecil said that, according to the church’s teachings, issues like abortion
and the death penalty are black and white.

Fr. Cecil gets the first part right and then calls the death
penalty issue black and white.

Cecil said the church has an obligation to take a stand on these
issues.

And some church-goers agreed.

"People learn from church," Raul Monroy of Thermal said about how
denying lawmakers with contradicting religious and political views could teach
Catholic morals. "Learning from the streets isn’t right."

California lawmakers’ beliefs also differed on how religious beliefs
relate to political service.

Sen. Jim Battin, R-La Quinta, said Kerry’s conflict with the Church’s
abortion teachings are of interest to voters.

"It tells you something about the man," Battin said. "I think
it’s legitimate to talk about."

The relevance may come from a model politicians are meant to uphold, said
Assemblywoman Bonnie Garcia, R-Cathedral City.

"If there are some guidelines within your religious faith I don’t
think that should be a discussion in politics," Garcia said. "But
if you hold yourself out as this type of person and you’re saying ‘do
what I say but not what I do,’ then it creates a problem, whether you’re
a politician, a teacher, a banker or whatever."

Schwarzenegger, however, disagreed. Through a press secretary, Schwarzenegger
described the issue as a private matter between a Catholic and a priest.

For the most part, Cecil said the decision to take communion is, and always
will be, a personal one.

"It should be up to the individual conscience," he said.

Now first Fr. Cecil says the Bishop’s statement was fair and
then he says it is up to individual consciences. If his Bishop decides as
a pastoral matter that pro-abortion Politicians should not receive Communion
in his diocese then it would not be up to just the individual conscience. The
individual who is aware that they are not in communion with the Church should
voluntarily refrain, but in the case of public sinners who persist in manifest
sin it is then up to the priest in accordance with the official
interpretation of canon 915.

…"The one that should judge is God," said Cindy
Cazarez
of Coachella. "Not the people or the priests."

Well then let us let everybody out of prison since according
to her we have no right to judge people’s actions. People often confuse the
Jesus’ statement to not judge with normal judgment of actions. We can not
judge interior dispositions or a person’s final fate, but we certainly must
judge external actions when appropriate. I am sure that if someone holding
a knife came running at her that she would immediately judge that person as
doing something wrong that needed to be stopped.

And as far as Gov. Schwarzenegger goes it should be "Asta la
vista, Sacraments," until he repents of his pro-abortion view. After that he can say ” I’ll be back.”

The latest news on the God beat for the Kerry campaign is that they have sidelined its new religion adviser Mara Vanderslice and are closing journalists’ access to her. The outcry seems to have had some effect, yet the consequences aren’t much better. Now that the Rev. Robert Drinan is advising the campaign to “keep cool” on the subject of Communion and to clamp down on the use of any religious rhetoric. Rev. Drinan says he is part of a “kitchen cabinet” advising the Senator on religious matters. With those kind of adviser’s shouldn’t it be “Hell’s kitchen cabinet?” Drinan, a Jesuit, is the only Catholic priest to be elected to Congress and was responsible for advising Catholic politicians with the “personally opposed, but..” excuse. Now I really can’t blame the Kerry campaign for having to rely on a socialist activists/Act Up Communion protester and now the dissident Rev. Drinan. The pool of religious advisor’s that have no problem with abortion/same-sex marriage/embryonic stem-cell research/etc is not exactly filled with faithful Christians.

I can understand the advise of Rev. Drinan to Kerry to not talk about the Communion controversy. I wonder if he was also advising the Bishops during their retreat this week since they seem to have come to the same conclusion. Kerry has nothing to worry about from the Bishops as a whole. Unfortunately as a group they are a den of Teddy Bears unwilling to come to a more forceful consensus that is more in-line with theology and canon law.

I found this paragraph to be informative.

The campaign source also said former Clinton aides Paul Begala, John Podesta and Mike McCurry have tutored campaign operatives on more aggressively using religion to appeal to voters.

“Why the campaign is not listening to any of them, I don’t know,” the source said. “Conservatives are about 20 years ahead of us on this stuff.”

Stuff? We must appeal to the believers of stuff. This attitude in the Democratic Party I think explains it all. What I find most annoying is not the fact of these poor choices for religious advisers, but the fact that they need religious advisers. This is just an attempt to pander to religious believers. There is no solidarity with religious beliefs and concerns but just an attempt to gain a vote. Mr. Kerry when it comes to his faith does not have a vision but is willing to settle for a revision or anything that helps him to come out on top.

BOSTON — Catholic leaders in the only state that allows gay marriage are considering new employment policies that would call for the firing of workers who marry their same-sex partner,according to a published report.

The Boston Herald reported that the proposal has been circulated in memos to the state’s four bishops and their staffs. No decision is imminent.

“It’s obviously a very volatile issue,” said the Rev.Christopher Coyne, spokesman for the Archdiocese of Boston. He would only say there have been “discussions about it.”

The most annoying thing about policies and statements coming from different diocese is that the number one concern always seems to be political fallout. This is not a difficult decision when only weighing the teaching of the Church.

The church aggressively lobbied state lawmakers to vote for a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage, which became legal n Massachusetts last month. The amendment received initial approval from the Legislature and could go before voters in November 2006.

A second new employment policy proposed by the church is more lenient and would let workers follow their own consciences, the Herald reported.

Why do I have the feeling that this second proposal will probably win out?

The four dioceses in Massachusetts operate separately but are working together on a possible uniform employment policy. Catholic teaching prohibits homosexual relations.

Church-affiliated groups that operate in both the public and private realms are anxiously awaiting the final policy. Catholic Charities, an independent provider of social services, currently has no policy regarding same-sex marriage or whether to provide benefits or penalize those who marry.

“If the archdiocese adopts a formal policy, this will be a relevant consideration for us,” said the Rev. J. Bryan Hehir, head of Catholic Charities.
[Full Story]

The statement “this will be a relevant consideration for us” is just about par for Catholic Charities which has reportedly had no problem with adopting children to active homosexuals.

If they do issue a strong statement I hope they also include those who are cohabitation or have divorced and remarried without being granted an annulment. The fact that they have to deliberate and discuss whether to fire employees who have become “married” is a sign in itself. These issues should be a slam dunk unless you care more about the political aspects and nothing about the scandal caused.

Domenico Bettinelli has also just weighed in on this.