Catholic bishops in the state are instructing priests to read or distribute a letter this weekend asking Catholics to pray that lawmakers in New Jersey not allow same-sex marriage in New Jersey.
It remains unclear whether legislators will vote on the issue during the current lame-duck session. Gov. John Corzine favors same-sex marriage, but Gov.-elect Chris Christie opposes it, and supporters realize that unless it passes before Christie assumes office, prospects of passage in the foreseeable future would be bleak.
The American RC Church might learn the lesson from the Spanish RC Church, where the clergy were instructed to oppose same-sex marriage with might and main, including similar pulpit denunciation. The result has been entirely counter-productive: same-sex marriage was introduced, is supported by 75% of the population (including a majority of the RC flock), and the influence and credibility of the Church in Spanish society, particularly amongst the young, have taken a big tumble in consequence. Church leaders should choose their battles more carefully.
Fr. Mark, I think you are correct.
Most American Catholics subscribe, in some sense, to the idea that the church and state are separate.
Add that many Catholics simply disagree with their church.
Perhaps, however, the catholic church desires ideological purity first.
Huzzahs for the NJ RC bishops — woo hoo and keep it up!
If you truly want church and state to be separate, you would need to revoke the 1st amendment since as U.S. citizens, we (and that includes Catholic bishops) have the right to freedom of assembly and freedom to petition our government. If you truly want church and state to be separate, then you would have to subscribe to continuing slavery, since the 19th century abolitionists included many clergy and based their opposition to slavery to their biblical understanding that we are all equal under God. You would also have to continue segregation, since Martin Luther King, a preacher, petitioned his government to end a practice that refused to acknowledge we are all equal. But, hey, if you want “separation of church and state,” go right ahead and reinstitute those henious practices.
Fr. Mark,
I wonder if you really think that the lack of success is a good reason for not taking a Godly stand. Even Peter tried to tell Jesus that there had to be a better way. Thank the Lord Jesus didn’t listen to him!
I’d say they’re a “day late and a dollar short,” but better late now than never, I guess. Too bad they didn’t condemn this from the very beginning.
The problem with the bishops’ instructions is that it confuses two different terms: marriage as a religious institution and marriage as a civil institution. If the bishops want to denounce the civil institution of same-sex marriage, then they may do so. If the bishops want to convince non-Catholic, non-Christian, and non-religious persons that the civil institution of same-sex marriage is not good for America, then I have yet to hear them make a strong, sustained argument based upon non-institutionally religious reasons.
NTO,
I would think they mean marriage, period, secular or religious. They do not want a redefinition of marriage at all, civil or religious to include homosex or any other variant. As yet, religious institutions have not been “required” to bless same sex “marriages”, although some are happy to do so. They are asking Catholics to pray. They are not asking unbelievers to listen to a debate. Spiritual things are spiritually discerned. This is something I have prayed for. My own state, alas has seemingly lost this battle, for now anyway.
But, CofS, you do not answer my point, which is that fighting such endless futile battles are entirely conterproductive.
With respect, 1. Fr Mark, it is the job of the bishops, and of all Christians, to stand for what is God pleasing and holy, political perceptions not withstanding.
#9: You may have been right in another time and another place, but the momentum has passed. The vote in Maine last month, predicted as a close vote, was not close at all, and all but two or three of the counties voted to kill the marriage statute. When you put California and Maine together, two of the very bluest of states, then you must realize that there has been a shift in the way the wind blows, a shift that should have been predictable because the pandering to homosexuality was so clearly a fin de siecle development. A new century,a new wind. See “FromDawn to Decadence” on the subjectof decadence. One sure sign is the drive to annul normality – a common factor in the homosexual agenda.
Mind you, the left wing forces are still enormous and very wealthy. But the “liberal mind” is a volatile one, easily changed with a change in fashion. They can still do a lot of damage, e.g., the development of “medicinal” marijuana, which, as every one knows, is simply a gambit to distribute the wicked weed without interference. from the law.
In any case, Ii submit that the momentum has shifted – for a lot of reasons. Can the rest of you not feel the wind coming from a different direction? Larry
Incidentally, #7, the day of civil marriage is coming to an end. It has become a contradiction in terms. When Vermont split marriage into civil unions and marriage properly so called, it recognized (and now almost universally recognized) that marriage is a spiritual undertaking. the civil benefits are under state control as they should be, but the state should not, must not, interfere any more in marriage.
The rule is now clear, rational, even handed and constitutional: The state can issue civil benefits but cannot perform marriages; church and religious institutions can perform marriages but cannot engage civil benefits. Isn’t this precisely what the First Amendment is about?
Larry
Fr. Mark,
I’m sorry, I intended to answer your point, perhaps I didn’t make myself clear. I was trying to make the point that apparent success is NOT the point.
Just as the end does not justify the means, possible failure does not discredit the proper efforts to attempt to reach the goal. The Bishops are speaking truth. What else is there to speak?
Perhaps you don’t see this issue as profound. I do. I believe it is enormous. I believe it is an issue that every Christian must take up on some level – certainly at the praying level.
On a positive note: The bishop’s statement is having a good effect on me. I imagine it is having a good effect on faithful Christians in New Jersey. It stands as truth. Jesus said, “I came into the world for this: to bear witness to the truth; and all who are on the side of truth listen to my voice.” So what if the world, like Pilot, says “Truth? What is that?”
Larry Morse – but the wind isn’t blowing from a different direction at all. Here in Europe, 2009 has so far seen 2 new countries legislate for same-sex marriage, two of the world’s richest and most equal societies, Norway and Sweden. This adds them to Belgium, the Netherlands and Spain, two of which were traditionally highly Roman Catholic societies. 2010 is likely to see further additions to the list, Albania and Denmark probably next. Public opinion in nearly all Western European countries is in favour, even in Ireland. I think it is a fairly safe bet that all the 27 member states of the EU will have same-sex marriage on the statute books within, say, ten years. Even those on the conservative side of the church debate acknowledge that.
I think it more a question of whether you are happy to see the US lag behind much longer in an important area of human rights law. If it doesn’t create much more than a ripple of controversy in Europe, where social institutions have a much much longer history than the US, same-sex marriage is hardly likely to cause any dire effects in America either, is it?
#12 — Your analysis of the scope of the First Amendment would be surprising to Mr. Madison, his colleagues in the Congress that adopted it, and the delegates to the State Legislatures that ratified it, not to metion the countless members of the clergy and registrars of public records who managed to wrap their minds around the manner in which things have operated for the last two hundred years.
While some like Fr. Mark in #1 would like to predict gloom and doom to any that get in the way of the gay agenda, if one is a Christian the only one he should fear is the Lord on the Day of Judgment. The judgment in this world of gay activists cannot compare with Christ’s coming on the clouds, one like a Son of Man.
In this Advent season it is vital that we understand that Christ is real and not a metaphor. He is our judge and the gospel is the measure.
#16 Fr. J. [blockquote] if one is a Christian the only one he should fear is the Lord on the Day of Judgment. [/blockquote] On the contrary, Father J., I would point you to the Gospel appointed for today, which suggests the opposite of your proposal: [blockquote] “[color=red]And there will be signs in sun and moon and stars, and on the earth distress of nations in perplexity because of the roaring of the sea and the waves, people fainting with fear and with foreboding of what is coming on the world. For the powers of the heavens will be shaken. And then they will see the Son of Man coming in a cloud with power and great glory. Now when these things begin to take place, straighten up and raise your heads, because your redemption is drawing near.[/color]” [/blockquote] Straighten up and raise your heads, Christians, for the Day of the Lord is drawing near.
Faint with fear and with foreboding, you non-Christians, for the powers of the heavens will be shaken.
Oh dear, are we all into a round of good ol’ time hellfire religion now, instead of reasonable discussion? That sort of language doesn’t cut much ice any more.
I’m sorry, Fr. Mark, are you not a Christian who attends an Anglican/Episcopal/Cathollic/Lutheran/etc. liturgical church? Are you not ordained? Did you not hear the gospel lesson for today when you attended church?
I was merely pointing out to Fr. J. the disjoint between his remark and the Gospel lesson appointed for today.
And yes, it is lamentably true that the sort of language found in the Bible doesn’t cut much ice any more. That is, it doesn’t cut much ice among non-Christians.
Br_er Rabbit — word to #20. Too too true.
Seems our good Anglican priest doesn’t even recognize Holy Scripture.
. . . Typical for a progressive activist.
Thanks, Sarah.
Brer Rabbit: quoting random bits of (scare-mongering?) text out of context is not a wayto arrive at a reasonable position on this issue.
Brer Rabbit: “Faint with fear and with foreboding, you non-Christians,”
So you think these are sensible words to address to people who do not share your religious opinions?
What I’m trying to get at, and yet again discovering that linguistic deftness does not travel across the Atlantic easily, is that the language of “You’d better be scared, mate!” is not appropriate in our contemporary context. In fact, I doubt whether it was ever an appropriate way to spread the word of the merits of the Christian religion.
[blockquote] 23. Fr Mark wrote: Brer Rabbit: quoting random bits of (scare-mongering?) text out of context is not a way to arrive at a reasonable position on this issue. [/blockquote]
It may be fairly alleged that this thread has drifted off topic. It would be in order to review how we got here. [blockquote] 1. Fr Mark wrote: The American RC Church might learn the lesson from the Spanish RC Church, where the clergy were instructed to oppose same-sex marriage with might and main, including similar pulpit denunciation. The result has been entirely counter-productive: same-sex marriage was introduced, is supported by 75% of the population (including a majority of the RC flock), and the influence and credibility of the Church in Spanish society, particularly amongst the young, have taken a big tumble in consequence. Church leaders should choose their battles more carefully. [/blockquote] Fr. Mark’s message is clearly directed at “Church leaders” and alleges that the efforts of the church to “denounce same-sex marriage” is not only ineffective but “entirely counterproductive.”
It has already been pointed out that he is grasping at straws by citing Spain and omitting California and Maine as relevant to the situation in New Jersey.
But then Fr. J. accused Fr. Mark of predicting “gloom and doom,” adding an eschatological tilt to the conversation: [blockquote] 16. Fr. J. wrote: While some like Fr. Mark in #1 would like to predict gloom and doom to any that get in the way of the gay agenda, if one is a Christian the only one he should fear is the Lord on the Day of Judgment. The judgment in this world of gay activists cannot compare with Christ’s coming on the clouds, one like a Son of Man. [/blockquote] The way that he gets there is from his own context as an Anglican who is observing the beginning of a new year, when we consider our place in the cosmic plan and the eschatological time scale: [blockquote] In this Advent season it is vital that we understand that Christ is real and not a metaphor. He is our judge and the gospel is the measure. [/blockquote] This from Fr. J. is surely on topic, as it provides a cosmic context for our actions in “denouncing same-sex marriage” as suggested by the bishops, as an alternative to “choos[ing] their battles more carefully,” as suggested by Fr. Mark.
Then Br_er Rabbit–coming from the same context as Fr. J. of one who had just heard a sermon based in part on the eschatological content of 1 Advent–chimed in with his contribution. He picked at a nit in Fr. J’s argument, using the day’s assigned text of scripture, concluding with… [blockquote] Straighten up and raise your heads, Christians, for the Day of the Lord is drawing near. [/blockquote] …addressing Christians who might be discouraged by the gloom and doom purveyance of Fr. Mark. Then, as is his wont, he could not resist throwing in in a cautionary note to those non-Christians who might throw in their lot with Fr. Mark. [blockquote] 18. Br_er Rabbit wrote: Faint with fear and with foreboding, you non-Christians, for the powers of the heavens will be shaken. [/blockquote] …to which Fr. Mark provided two rejoinders, beginning with this: [blockquote] 23. Fr Mark wrote: Brer Rabbit: quoting random bits of (scare-mongering?) text out of context is not a way to arrive at a reasonable position on this issue. [/blockquote] As noted above, these are not “random bits of text” but rather the content of the morning’s scripture reading and sermon. That it is “text out of context” is arguable, for the text, while fully in context with the morning sermon, may be out of context with the afternoon blog post, whether it purveys gloom and doom or not.
[blockquote] 24. Fr Mark wrote: Brer Rabbit: “Faint with fear and with foreboding, you non-Christians,â€
So you think these are sensible words to address to people who do not share your religious opinions? [/blockquote] Actually no, to an extent. Fear and foreboding are devices used by some to spread the gospel, and in my opinion is both ineffective and counter-productive. Since the context is a blog read primarily by those who self-identify as Christians, the Rabbit would have been better served to write…
[blockquote] Faint with fear and with foreboding, you who claim to be Christians but are not. [/blockquote] … leaving him at least in partial agreement with Fr. Mark’s final rejoinder: [blockquote] What I’m trying to get at, and yet again discovering that linguistic deftness does not travel across the Atlantic easily, is that the language of “You’d better be scared, mate!†is not appropriate in our contemporary context. In fact, I doubt whether it was ever an appropriate way to spread the word of the merits of the Christian religion. [/blockquote] Point taken.
[i]fighting such endless futile battles are entirely conterproductive[/i]
A battle never faught automatically becomes futile.
Brer Rabbit: is this sort of thing really worth wasting time on? I argue on here because 1) I’m fed up with people of little theological education mouthing off about current presenting issues as if they were experts; 2) I’m personally affected by Christians’ refusal to think clearly or behave charitably about the gay issue; 3) I’m embarrassed, as someone who has always been one of the youngest in any church I’ve ever had anything to do with, that so many “Christian” commentators seem to prefer to scare everyone off rather than attract them. So those are my excuses. But I cannot understand why any straight man would be interested in dedicating so much of his free time to fighting pointless battles. Unless, that is, they are really interested principally in fighting pointless battles for the sake of it.
Fr. Mark, I thought I was done, having conceded your point. What is it you require of me?
Secondly, I do not understand what you are talking about when you refer to “endless pointless battles.” It takes two to battle. If it were pointless, you would not be here. But it is not pointless. Eternal souls are at stake.
Fr Mark
Having hung around here on T19 a bit longer than you have I have found that a lot of commenters are rather well generally and theologically educated than you might think, and although they are usually fairly coy about trumpetting it, many are actively involved in Christian mission, relief work and ministry. That is also true of the Rabbit. Many have paided a considerable cost personally. I would be a little careful of bandying around comments like: “linguistic deftness does not travel across the Atlantic easily”; “people of little theological education mouthing off…as if they were experts”; “refusal to think clearly or behave charitably”; and “fighting pointless battles.”
You may well find, as I have, that people are much more linguistically deft, theologically educated, clear-thinking and charitable than you and I. They are generally courteous with us and this is an American site which welcomes those of us from abroad.
But tell me, Fr Mark – what do you make of this letter read to the faithful and what is going on in Ireland. You have been a Catholic priest – what do you reckon? Was the cover up in the US, Ireland and elsewhere just a few naughty bishops and their chums buying silence and hiding what was going on or were they just obeying orders? It doesn’t make much sense to an outsider like me.