maintaining ritual purity
By Diogenes (articles ) | Aug 04, 2006
You shouldn't rob banks. But if you really need some extra cash, and you can find someone else to point the gun at the teller, well then that's a completely different story. Right?
Wrong. If an act is intrinsically wrong, it's wrong for everyone.
The Vatican teaches that arranging for children to be adopted by homosexual couples "would actually mean doing violence to those children." Violence. That's what the Church teaches. And doing violence to children is wrong-- not just when you do it or when I do it, but always. This isn't very hard to understand, is it?
Still the executive director of Catholic Charities in San Francisco doesn't get it, if a Boston Globe story is accurate. Brian Cahill explains that in a shell-game arrangement, staff members from Catholic Charities will be assigned to work for a pro-gay adoption agency. "If that work ultimately leads to a match between a gay parent and a foster child, that is fine, he said."
Cahill said his understanding of Vatican teachings is that a Catholic agency cannot be "directly involved in the placement" of a child in a gay household.
Cahill's understanding of Church teaching is childish-- to the point of incoherence. Is it wrong only for a Catholic to do violence against children, and morally neutral for someone outside the faith? Impossible. If it's wrong for me, it's wrong for you; and it's wrong for you to encourage someone else to do something that you know is wrong. You can't get off the hook by claiming you didn't participate in the act.
Regrettably, Cahill is not the only Church official depicted in the Globe story as having a strange understanding of Catholic moral teaching on the point:
When asked if the new plan still puts Catholic Charities in a position of assisting with gay adoptions, San Francisco Archbishop George H. Niederauer said he thought it was a form of potential "remote" cooperation that does not conflict with Catholic moral teaching.
Remote cooperation? Try to convince the jury that you were only "remotely" involved in that bank robbery, when you supplied the gun and drove the getaway car. Staff members of Catholic Charities are being sent to work for an agency that facilitates same-sex adoptions. They know what this group does, and plans to continue doing; they're going to help.
Brace yourself; it's about to get worse. The archbishop...
... said he has consulted his predecessor, Cardinal William Levada , the prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith in Rome, on this plan.
Let's hope the Globe story is inaccurate.
All comments are moderated. To lighten our editing burden, only current donors are allowed to Sound Off. If you are a donor, log in to see the comment form; otherwise please support our work, and Sound Off!
Posted by: -
Aug. 07, 2006 3:08 PM ET USA
First of all I need to pray for all the priests and bishops who are actively furthering the gay agenda because I so angry about the state of our Church that I can't see straight. But I also need to speak up loudly. The use every opportunity I have to tell clergy that I never hear about chastity from the pulpit. I have used open intercession time at Mass to call for the promotion of chastity in my parish and been rounded denounced by my pastor. But those who don't read this site have heard me
Posted by: ladybird -
Aug. 05, 2006 11:46 AM ET USA
Old Chinese saying: "Keep your friends close, but your enemies closer". Where better to have a tight hand on Levada than where he is now. And how better to ensure that his cohorts and sycophants are chastised and corrected, but by his mouth through directives carefully vetted by the Supreme authority. We shall see if this works out. I agree with Leo. Prayer. That's our job. God will move the rest to His will.
Posted by: BostonBlackey -
Aug. 05, 2006 10:05 AM ET USA
i know it is very cynical of me to think this way but I believe that this gay adoption issue is where it is because so many of the clergy and the hierarchy are gay. I agree with Art Kelly: "Explain to me again why Levada was the best choice for prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith."
Posted by: Art Kelly -
Aug. 05, 2006 1:26 AM ET USA
Explain to me again why Levada was the best choice for prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.
Posted by: TheJournalist64 -
Aug. 04, 2006 6:49 PM ET USA
There was a day in which such tortuous reasoning would be called "Jesuitical." But even today I think it would be not easy to find a Jesuit who would concur with this idiocy of rationalization.
Posted by: -
Aug. 04, 2006 6:07 PM ET USA
Note the two Bishops involved here are among B16's frist appointments. If Rome will not act here, it proves the problem is not the scattered bishops alone, the problem is Rome.
Posted by: Gil125 -
Aug. 04, 2006 4:04 PM ET USA
The Boston Globe has certainly published many inaccurate stories, but if you read everything both men (Levada & Niederauer, who plan to retire together to their condo in Long Beach) have written, there is no reason to think that the Globe has erred in the slightest in this case.
Posted by: -
Aug. 04, 2006 3:43 PM ET USA
I wonder if there is any Bishop left with the courage to talk with the Pope about this. If it is true, but there is bad reporting of some aspect or circumstance, the least we Catholics are owed is a complete valid explanation, something that seems unlikely and even impossible. If we don't get it, then what so many feared about Cdl. Levada seems to be plausible, and the Pope himself has been duped by his own man.
Posted by: Pseudodionysius -
Aug. 04, 2006 11:52 AM ET USA
"better for a man to put a millstone around his neck" With the new line of rack equipment, being produced by Inquisitor manufacturing of Salmanaca as we speak, additional millstones (made of a lovely pewter so as not to clash with the penitents vestments) are available as accessories. It also comes with a Dragon audio to text conversion system which allows recanting without the need for a juridical secretary. Perfect for prizes at your parish bingo night.
Posted by: patriot6908 -
Aug. 04, 2006 10:53 AM ET USA
I am willing to allow sufficient time so that the wheat of the news can be separated from the chaff of normal inaccurcies. However, should all of what is reported above prove factual, then neither Cardinal Levada, Archbishop Niederauer or Mr. Cahill will escape from the wrath of the Lord--who stressed that it was better for a man to put a millstone around his neck and jump than to scandalize a child. May God have mercy on the above men and their "all are welcome" allies in sinful tolerance.
Posted by: Laity1 -
Aug. 04, 2006 10:27 AM ET USA
see for yourselves: http://www.cccyo.org/3rdlevel/press_adoption.php
Posted by: Laity1 -
Aug. 04, 2006 10:11 AM ET USA
Pseudodionysius: as a Catholic, you should not materially cooperate with putting them on the rack. It would be far better for a possibility of remote cooperation through your indirect involvement.
Posted by: Pseudodionysius -
Aug. 04, 2006 9:40 AM ET USA
If the Globe story is true, then I would be glad to materially cooperate with putting both prelates on the rack. It seems to be the only way to get prelates who should know better to stretch their minds around the truth.