Boston Cardinal Cites Canada as an Example on Crackdown on Religious Freedom

Catholic Ping
Please freepmail me if you want on/off this list

That's my Bishop! K of C bump!

So it should now be obvious to everyone that same-sex marriage is an attack on religion.

So it should now be obvious to everyone that same-sex marriage is an attack on religion.

Only by their insistence that religions accept it.

The homosexuals don't want to form their own religion, instead they want the courts to force long standing religions to perform gay marriage ceremonies against the tenets of that religion.

Don't be to shocked the day a judge somewhere rules that Catholic churches must pervert themselves and perform gay marriage ceremonies else face fines or the threat of having the church shut down.

20 years ago, such a notion would be so far fetched, it would be laughed at.

Tip of the iceberg. You have to wonder how "Freedom" to marry actually means we are forced to acknowledge someone else's very private sin as normal.

I think the choice will be for churches to perform the gay "marriages" or lose their tax exempt status.

I do not believe that the Church will cave today and I believe that Benedict XVI will choose bishops and cardinals wisely in order to prevent the Church from caving 20 years from now.

In a way, it might be better to lose the tax exempt status. Then we could take the gloves off and some straight talk from our pulpits.

I do not believe that the Church will cave today and I believe that Benedict XVI will choose bishops and cardinals wisely in order to prevent the Church from caving 20 years from now.

Interesting that you should say this! Rocco Palmo at the WITL blog, posted the following commentary today.

The Pauline Ordination Conspiracy?

So it was noted here yesterday that Bishop-elect Provost of Lake Charles was an ordination classmate of Archbishop Burke of St Louis. Both had their priestly beginnings on 29 June 1975, when they were among a group of deacons personally elevated by Pope Paul VI to mark the feast of Ss. Peter and Paul and the twelfth anniversary of his coronation (even though he renounced the tiara in 1965).

Thanks to a tip, it can be reported that the prelates are far from alone in sharing the day. No, it's not a conspiracy -- a group of 359 priests ordained together in Rome, by the Pope, to commemorate a Holy Year is bound to produce a bevy of bishops.

Thirty-two years on, it's done that and then some.

Provost is but the latest of his ordination class to be raised to the fullness of the priesthood. Alongside Burke, others from its number include Cardinal Josip Bozanic of Zagreb, Archbishops James Harvey, the prefect of the Papal Household; Michael Miller CSB, secretary of the Congregation for Catholic Education, and the currently-omnipresent Malcolm Ranjith, the secretary of CDW. Bishops Michael Cote of Norwich, Patrick Zurek, auxiliary of San Antonio, and a host of others from Latin America, Asia and Africa round out the list, which a quick Catholic-Hierarchy.org check turns up.

Who said "reunion in April"?

I think BXVI is working very hard to head this off. In Italy, they tried to pass the equivalent of a "gay marriage" ordinance, one that essentially made unmarried couples, gay or straight, the equivalent of married couples for all purposes. It was pushed by the gay lobby, of course, which had demonstrated outside the Vatican.

Prodi was supporting it. He was called in for a meeting with the Pope and left rather glumly, with no comment. He presented his list of projects, including the marriage bill, in their Parliament. After a vote, he had to resign - because he did not have the support of three legislators known to be firmly Catholic. He presented the program again a few days later - minus the marriage bill. That time the three legislators voted for him and he was once again installed as the PM.

So I think the Pope does know how to play hardball, and I think he is counting on firm, committed laymen to do their bit. This should be a message to "Catholic" legislators here in the US.

Well, it's nice to have something to thank poor Paul VI for!

I am so grateful to my Cardinal for highlighting the ever spreading restrictions on the freedom of speech, religion and association running rampant all over the West.

Not to mention, an attack on the fundamental unit of society, the nuclear family. And, as such, an attack on all of society and civilization.

I saw that! I just read the first part of "Inside the Vatican" for February and it is a beautiful tribute to the Tridentine Mass and the hoped-for "motu proprio." Speaking of the "Motu proprio," did you see where Rocco claims it is now circulating in Rome? It appeared on his blog midday today.

F

Speaking of the "Motu proprio," did you see where Rocco claims it is now circulating in Rome? It appeared on his blog midday today.

Indeed, and will look for some corroborating, follow up info before posting it to the forum.

I wish the "Inside the Vatican" article was on-line in its entirety. It is, in a word, elegant. It really encapsulates the realm immediately post Vatican-II.

In one portion, British intellectuals petitioned Pope Paul VI for an Indult so the Mass could still be said in Great Britain. They used marvelous "British prose" to indicate the value of the Mass to the entirety of Western civilization, the arts and the psyche of Westerners. Great English intellectuals (Evelyn Waugh, for example) signed it. The Pope saw the petition, recognized the name of Agatha Christie and said her name aloud as he read it.

Britain did get the Indult in 1970, I believe.

Moynihan warns us not to believe everything that is posted about this NYer. He cites the case of the Italian Cardinal who tried to amass support against the Motu Proprio and wanted to attain 10,000 names against. He didn't come even close; the for the Motu Proprio was 10:1 those against. Many of those who signed against used the name "Marcel Lefebvre." We can expect the same garbage from the media.

F

"In a way, it might be better to lose the tax exempt status. Then we could take the gloves off and some straight talk from our pulpits."

Amen, brother. I often wonder how many punches get pulled due to fear of loss of that tax exempt status. In my view, we're better off without the "thirty pieces of silver" status.

The Cardinal comments that the most disturbing aspect of the case "is that it underscores how, by redefining marriage in Massachusetts, people's religious rights are going to be challenged by the state."

I'm glad Cardinal O'Malley is speaking out forcefully on this. The Globe, Democrat politicians, and homosexual activists thought they'd won when Cardinal Law resigned, because they thought they'd damaged the Church's credibility when speaking out on this matter. When O'Malley showed up in his Franciscan robes and sandals, they thought they'd hit the jackpot!

Heh. Too bad. ;o)

It is the other way around.

The Bible is considered forbidden in Canada because of what it says about sodomy (same sex marriage).

Also, a same sex marriage is an unnatural marriage. No children can be produced.

In Canada, the Bible is considered hate speech.

But then telling the truth in Canada is hate speech...

Time for backers of the Church (Catholic and other Christians) to start educating people. Sodomy was against the law in many states in the United States for a long time under various local measures.

Also, it is an unnatural marriage for two people of the same sex to marry. They cannot have children.

Having sex with children is against the law. There are many gay and lesbian people that want to have sex with young children. The children need protection.

Canada considers what is written in the Bible as a Hate Crime. But on the other hand, there was a case where a Catholic Church in Canada was defiled with used condoms and all sorts of other stuff. But that was not a hate crime in Canada... The Canadians are full of it...