Bishop Morlino: Can government change the definition of marriage?

Very timely observation from a holy Bishop.

Madison Catholic Herald:

For this week’s column, allow me to pose the question, “Does any civil government have the authority to change the definition of marriage, either directly or indirectly?”

To change the definition of marriage directly would mean to call “marriage” any union apart from: one-man, one-woman, one-lifetime, with openness to children. It would mean to call “marriage” any other sort of union than the historical, traditional definition, articulated above.

Indirectly to change the definition of marriage would mean to establish by law certain institutions, civil-unions or otherwise, attempting to give them the same value as marriage, while never addressing the true meaning of marriage.

More and more, this indirect change is being proposed by clever politicians who say, “Well, I believe in marriage between a man and a woman myself, but society, at large, is leaning toward the acceptability of civil unions, so maybe this is a compromise?”

This indirect approach to redefining marriage seems very comfortable for the Catholic who deceives him or herself into thinking that he or she has one conscience for personal matters and another conscience for matters pertaining to the state. But, the Lord has given each human being, Catholic and otherwise, one conscience only.

The origins of marriage

What are the origins of marriage? Marriage was created by God at the very beginning, with the gift of Eve to Adam, and their natural marital bond, from which issued forth Cain and Abel.

Thus, the first societal grouping present in the world, long prior to the establishment of any civil government whatsoever, was marriage. Marriage as the basic unit of society was to be the place of mutual love, as well as the procreation and education of children, so that the other developments of societal structure would have marriage to build on, and as a necessary condition of their existence.

The principle of subsidiarity reminds us that problems of civil importance should be resolved at the lowest possible societal level. Thus, national governments should yield to the state where possible, the state should yield to local municipalities where possible, and local municipalities should yield to the natural family where possible. For example, it is clear that natural parents are the first and primary educators of their own children, a role never to be usurped unjustly by the state.

Read the rest here.

Glitter flies at Minnesota State Fair over marriage amendment

Twin Cities Pioneer Press:

Four people showered the Minnesota for Marriage booth with the shiny stuff as they passed overhead on the Sky Glider ride about 5 p.m., protesting what group organizer Nick Espinosa said was preferential treatment by Fair officials. Espinosa's group said the Fair declined registration attempts by the gay-marriage-rights group Minnesotans United for All Families.

Both sides have descended on the Fair to stake sides on a 2012 constitutional amendment proposal to define marriage as an institution between a man and a woman.

"Where's our booth? Equality for all!" shouted the unidentified people in a video posted on YouTube.

Espinosa, whose group claims previously throwing glitter on presidential candidates Michele Bachmann and Newt Gingrich, said the Fair initially declined registration attempts by both Minnesota for Marriage and Minnesotans United for All Families. That changed just after the Fair opened when Minnesota for Marriage announced that it had a spot.

Espinosa said the release came as a "shock."

"We think that's preferential treatment, and we are pushing, advocating for equality," said Espinosa, of Minneapolis.

Both groups initially called to get a booth and were told none was available. But apparently only Minnesota for Marriage registered for a booth in the event one opened up.

Read the rest here. That last paragraph is an important clarification -- both groups called about a booth, were told none were available, and one of the groups registered in the event a booth opened up... and a booth did open up.

Anti- Marriage Amendment op-ed targeting Catholic voters in MN

Born in rural Minnesota and raised on a dairy farm, I grew up in a devout Catholic family.

While attending St. John's Prep School in Collegeville, I confessed to a priest that I was attracted to another boy who slept across from me. The priest responded that if I ever acted on that, I would go to hell.

As a sincere Catholic teen, I did not act on my attraction but started a harmful journey of self-loathing and personal destruction. I didn't know what "homosexual" or "gay" were, but I understand "queer" and thought it was evil and perverted.

I did not date girls in high school and dated only a couple in college. One of them became a good friend, so I did what all the rest in my family had done: I got married, the summer after graduating from college. I loved all my nieces and nephews and wanted to become a teacher and a father.

With a major in elementary education from St. Cloud State and later a master's as a reading specialist, I taught successfully for 40 years in public education in several Minnesota towns. My marriage never worked.

The sexuality was mostly repulsive, and that was communicated indirectly to my ex-wife. That is the most unfair part. She was one of the innocent victims in the masquerade of "I'm straight."

For years and years, I would prostrate myself on the floor and ask God to change me. Maybe if I just pray more, fast more, do more "works of charity," the male attraction will go away.

After more than 30 years of trying to "burn" the evil out of me, I finally came out at age fifty four. God finally broke through to my heart of hearts and said, "I love you just as you are. You are praying for healing, but you are not sick!"

Our God does not change. God is God always. And God was with me always. After all the self-hatred and foibles of life, God was still there waiting for me.

At that moment, the shame and guilt I had felt for years left -- once and for always. If Pope Benedict had been standing right there to tell me I was "disordered," I would have said to him, "You are wrong. God made me and loves me just as I am."

continue at Star Tribune


This is the same argument you will get at many Catholic colleges actually.  Don't forget Daniel Maguire,
a Marquette professor, has been advocating for gay marriage inside and outside the Church in Minnesota and spoke in Minneapolis last October.  Catholics are being lead astray by wolves, tenured wolves.

I haven't been posting all the news but there's are boat loads of money being shipped into Minnesota to break marriage.  It would seem that getting a Midwestern state to pass gay marriage could be a striking point then for the rest of the country.  Iowa doesn't really count since the activist judges got the boot for their hijinks.

One nice thing about the homosexual act getting shoved in everyone's faces is that the Church finally has an effective way to minister to those with same sex attraction with compassionate and effective pastoral care(even amongst Her own clergy).  It's no longer seen as a "just don't do that" thing.  The human experience can be complex and bludgeoning with hell isn't always the most effective way to change or heal a heart (don't get me wrong, it certainly can be effective in certain circumstances - but not all).

That said, he's blaming traditional marriage and the Church for his decision to leave his wife and children...  Let's all say a prayer for this guy.

HT Bliss

Vatican Aims to ‘Weed Out Dissenting Voices’ from Journal at Marquette Univ.

The National Catholic Reporter reports that sources have said that the Vatican began pressuring policy changes at the Jesuit journal Theological Studies with aims to “weed out dissenting voices” and “stick more closely to official church teachings” not long after a controversial 2004 essay arguing for “a change in church teachings on divorce and remarriage.”  The journal Theological Studies is hosted by Jesuit Marquette University and its authors are very frequently Catholic university professors.

NCR indicated that Fr. David Schultenover, SJ, editor of Theological Studies and theology professor at Marquette, wrote in his editor’s column last year that when “theses that contravene official church” are in the journal “our policy will be to alert readers and clearly state the current authoritative church teaching”.

more at Cardinal Newman Society

Minnesota for Marriage

The debate over the definition of marriage has unfolded across America and at the federal level for the past several years, and is the subject of the proposed amendment on the November 2012 ballot to preserve marriage in Minnesota.

But what is the debate really about, how does it affect society and what is at stake in the outcome of the amendment vote?

Many people mistakenly believe that proposals to allow so-called “same-sex” marriage are about allowing a new, different and separate form of marriage to coexist alongside traditional man/woman marriage. They envision it as a different expression of the same marriage institution they have always known.

However, that is a fundamental misunderstanding of the legal issues involved in the debate, and with the proposed constitutional amendment in Minnesota.

Learn more at Minnesota for Marriage

Mixed message in a bottle

Mark F. Johnson

HT Marquette Warrior