Posted on 08/09/2011 3:26:26 PM PDT by NYer
Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley has rejected an appeal from Baltimore’s Archbishop Edwin O’Brien, who urged him not to promote same-sex marriage out of “mere political expediency.”
Responding to a personal letter from the archbishop, O’Malley—who is Catholic—said that he felt a moral obligation to change a law that produces an “unjust result.”
Archbishop O’Brien wrote to O’Malley in July, warning him not to endorse a measure “that so deeply conflicts with your faith, not to mention the best interests of our society.” In his reply, the governor said that he has “a public obligation to try to change that injustice.”
The exchange of letters was made public by Governor O’Malley, who has announced his strong backing for the bid to give legal recognition to same-sex marriage.
Source(s): these links will take you to other sites, in a new window.
Kudos to Archbishop O’Brien for initiating the discussion.
Starting a discussion is all well and good, but when are the Catholic bishops and/or the Vatican actually going to DO something about these "Catholic" politicians that openly promote abortion, homosexuality and all other types of sin? You would think they would at least withhold Communion or possibly even ex-communicate such people. Not doing so severely damages the credibility of the Catholic Church on those topics.
Discussion is one thing; action is quite different. In acting on their commitment to support homosexual marriage (ex: Governor Cuomo, NY), they essentially excommunicate themselves from the Catholic Church. In this instance, the governor is still in the 'discussion' phase. The archbishop has done the right thing and called in the governor for discussion. The Church takes a "wait and see" approach at this time. Let's pray he makes the right decision.
I could agree with your analysis except I have yet to see any high-profile liberal Catholic held to account for opposing the teachings of the Catholic Church. Pelosi, the Kennedy clan, etc - they all very publicly and proudly promote abortion and other sin, and make the claim that doing so is not in conflict with their faith. By not disciplining them spiritually, the Catholic Church appears to agree with them - the politicians suffer no consequence from actively opposing the teaching of the Church. How can they expect anyone else to subscribe to the teachings of the Church, when they don't appear to believe those teaching enough to enforce them on their own parishoners?
He’s driving him more into his obstinacy. Maybe it’s felt the Catholics will know what the church teaches through a debate.
Excommunicate... there’s nothing to discuss or debate.
For the sake of his soul. Oh, and to end scandal.
I guess he wants it taught in Catholic schools, the priests to marry them and Catholic orgs to let them adopt as well.
And yet I still see him (Omalley) at Saint Mary’s in Annapolis receiving communion.
“O’Malley—who is Catholic”...IN NAME ONLY!
Well some still do talk the talk, its walking the walk that needs to happen.
NO, that’s not a Catholic Governor. It’s a governor. There’s nothing “Catholic” about him.
O’Malley, who often attends weekday Masses and has sent his four children to Catholic schools, until recently advocated civil unions as an alternative to same-sex marriages.
This is a tremendous scandal when people believe that they can promote abortion of children and homosexuality and be a Christian at the same time. Let us pray that the Archbishop will have the courage to stand up for Christ.
This kind of stuff just drives me nuts.
People have no idea what it means to be Catholic.
To be Catholic is to submit to the Catholic Church’s authority on faith and morals and doctrine.
One is not Catholic merely by attending Mass and going to Communion.
One receives the Eucharist because one is Catholic not the other way around.
Ok, thanks for letting me vent.
Back in those bad ol' middle ages people actually feared for their souls, including princes and kings, and the excommunicated would do public penance and the interdiction would be lifted.
In our enlightened age the church wouldn't dare try excommunication or interdiction for fear the people wouldn't miss the sacraments.
Thanks for the post and ping. You're right, of course, that at one time, people feared for their immortal souls. Enlightenment, as you also point out, has supposedly 'liberated' them. Or has it? A while back, our pastor was making rounds at a local hospital. He stopped by the bed of a retired politician. He told the priest he had just learned that he was dying and would the priest hear his confession. While the priest did not reveal the content, he apparently repented of some of his political stances.
Today a young woman called the rectory looking for an RCIA class. Apparently, she was baptized but never made any other sacraments. She wants to get married in a catholic church and was told she must complete that program before so doing.
Even the enlightened, it seems, have consciences ;-) We need to pray that they will not only repent and study but also apply these teachings to their own lives and return to the church.
“A while back, our pastor was making rounds at a local hospital. He stopped by the bed of a retired politician. He told the priest he had just learned that he was dying and would the priest hear his confession. While the priest did not reveal the content, he apparently repented of some of his political stances.”
The priest should never have said a word. Confession is never to be discussed especially if it is possible for you to know who the sinner is.
Also, if this was a politician who caused public scandal then it would behoove him to repent in public.
Either way, this pastor is setting himself up as violating canon law.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.