News Tips?
-- tips@phblend.com

PHB Mobile


33|175:175

About
-- The Blog
-- Pam | My home page
-- Autumn
-- Daimeon
-- Julien
-- "Radical" Russ
-- Terrance

Contact the Baristas

The Blend Blogrolls

Activism


Best of the Blend
Blog Posts

Special Events and Interviews

Blend-o-licious endorsements...



The Christian Civic League of Maine's Mike Hein calls Pam's House Blend:
"a leading source of radical homosexual propaganda, anti-Christian bigotry, and radical transgender advocacy."

He is "praying that Pam Spaulding will "turn away from her wicked and sinful promotion of homosexual behavior." (CCLM's web site, 10/15/07)


Ex-gay "Christian" activist James Hartline on Pam:
"I have been mocked over and over again by ungodly and unprincipled anti-christian lesbians."
(from "Six Years In Sodom: From The Journal Of James Hartline," 9/4/2006, written from the "homosexual stronghold" of Hillcrest in San Diego).

"Pam is a 'twisted lesbian sister' and an 'embittered lesbian' of the 'self-imposed gutteral experiences of the gay ghetto.'" -- 9/5/2008



Peter LaBarbera of Americans for Truth Against Homosexuality heartily endorses the Blend, calling Pam:

A "vicious anti-Christian lesbian activist."
(Concerned Women for America's radio show [9:15], 1/25/07)

"A nutty lesbian blogger."
(MassResistance radio show [16:25], 2/3/07)


Pam's House Blend always seems to find these sick f*cks. The area of the country she is in? The home state of her wife? I know, they are everywhere. Pam just does such a great job of bringing them out into the light.
--Impeach Bush


who monitors yours Bevis ?? Just thought I would drop you a line,so the rest of your life is not wasted.
--"Joe"

Content © 2004-2008
Pam Spaulding

House Blend logo © 2005
Melissa McEwan

Photo of Pam Spaulding
© Judy G. Rolfe
All Rights Reserved.


SITE TERMS AND CONDITIONS
Support the Blend




An Online Magazine in the Reality-Based Community.


CA: Fresno priest comes out against Prop 8 during Mass

by: Pam Spaulding

Mon Oct 06, 2008 at 07:30:00 AM EDT


Father Geoffrey Farrow of the Saint Paul Newman Center on the campus of the University of California (Fresno) is a brave man because he delivered what was likely his final Mass on Sunday -- a homily on love, acceptance and fellowship -- and spoke out against Proposition 8. He is bucking the recommendation of his bishop, placing 23 years of service to the church on the line. (ABC30, there is video):
"In directing the faithful to vote yes on proposition 8, the California Bishops are not only entering the political arena, they are ignoring the advances and insights of neurology, psychology and the very statements by the church itself that homosexual is innate," says Fr. Geoff.

The priest acknowledges his controversial comments will have consequences. "I know that these words of truth will cost me dearly. But to withhold them would be far more costly and I would become an accomplice to a moral evil that strips gay and lesbian couples, not only of their civil rights but of their human dignity as well."

And he was not finished.
We sat down with Father Geoff before mass, and he answered the question many are probably wondering... Is he gay? "It's a secondary issue. But yes, I am. And when I was a boy I asked God please make me normal and the prayer never got answered and I realized why. Because God would've made somebody else he wouldn't have made me."
There was a mixed reaction by parishioners to the homily (about half stood to give a standing ovation. There were also familiar protestations of "Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve." Bishop John Steinbock, the head of the Diocese of Fresno gave a limp answer, knowing that Farrow's public position will have grave consequences, saying "Proposition 8 is not a homosexuality issue rather about the institution of marriage which is the basis of our society."

Read the entire homily of Father Farrow -- it's below the fold.

Pam Spaulding :: CA: Fresno priest comes out against Prop 8 during Mass
The homily of Father geoffrey Farrow, Saint Paul Newman Center, October 5, 2008:
As most of you know, I was appointed pastor here at the Newman Center on April 15th of this year.  When I arrived, I set out to address a series of various projects to repair our facilities.  To date, most of these deferred maintenance items have been addressed.  In the middle of dealing with contractors, the parish finance committee, the building department of the diocese, neighbors, etc., I received a FAX from the bishop's office on the 30th of June. It was the bishop's pastoral letter for the month of July.

This single FAX threw my whole summer, and in fact, my whole life into a turmoil.  Recently, I was speaking with some of our parishioners who advocate for the ordination of women. In the course of our conversation, a question arose which has haunted me: "At what point do you cease to be an agent for healing and growth and become an accomplice of injustice?"  By asking all of the pastors of the Diocese of Fresno to promote Catholics to vote "Yes" on Proposition 8, the bishop has placed me in a moral predicament.

In his "Pastoral," the bishop states: "Marriage is much more than simply two persons loving each other.  Marriage is naturally, socially, and biologically, directed to bringing forth life."

Actually, there are TWO ends to marriage: 1) Unitive and 2) Procreative. The unitive end of marriage is simply a union of love and life.  The Procreative end is, of course, to create new life. It is important to understand that the unitive end of marriage is sufficient for a valid marriage. The Church sanctions, and considers a sacrament, the marriage of elderly heterosexual couples who are biologically incapable of reproduction.  So, if two people of different genders who are incapable of reproduction can enter into a valid marriage, then why is that two people of the same gender, who are incapable of reproduction, cannot enter into a valid marriage.

The objections which are raised at this point are taken from Sacred Scripture. Scripture scholars reveal the problematic nature of attempting to use passages from the Hebrew Scriptures as an argument against same gender relationships. Essentially, these scriptures are addressing the cultic practices in which sex with temple prostitutes was part of an act of worshiping Pagan gods.  With regard to the Pauline epistles, John J. McNeill, in his book: "The Church and the Homosexual," makes the following point: "The persons referred to in Romans 1:26 are probably not homosexuals that is, those who are psychologically inclined toward their own sex-since they are portrayed as 'abandoning their natural customs.'"  The Pauline epistles do not explicitly treat the question of homosexual activity between two persons who share a homosexual orientation, and as such cannot be read as explicitly condemning such behavior.  Therefore, same gender sex by two individuals with same sex orientation is not "abandoning their natural custom."

In 1973, as a result of a greater understanding of human psychology, the American Psychological Association declassified homosexuality as a mental illness.  In 1975, the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (the Church's watchdog for orthodoxy) produced a document entitled: "Declaration on Certain Questions Concerning Sexual Ethics."  In this document, they made the most remarkable statement.  They stated that there are "homosexuals who are such because of some kind of innate instinct."  While these statements are hardly glowing affirmations of gay and lesbian persons, they represent a watershed in human perception and understanding of gay and lesbian people.

These new insights have occurred as a result of the birth and development of the science of psychology and understanding of brain development in the 19th and 20th centuries.  The California Supreme Court cited and quoted an amicus brief filed by the APA in the Court's opinion issued on May 15, 2008 that struck down California's ban on same sex marriage. Specifically, the court relied on the APA's brief in concluding that the very nature of sexual orientation is related to the gender of partners to whom one is attracted, so that prohibiting same sex marriage discriminates on the basis of sexual orientation, rather than just imposing disparate burdens on gay people.

In directing the faithful to vote "Yes" on Proposition 8, the California Bishops are not merely entering the political arena, they are ignoring the advances and insights of neurology, psychology and the very statements made by the Church itself that homosexuality is innate (i.e. orientation).  In doing this, they are making a statement which has a direct, and damaging, effect on some of the people who may be sitting in the pews next to you today.  The statement made by the bishop reaffirms the feelings of exclusion and alienation that are suffered by individuals and their loved ones who have left the Church over this very issue.  Imagine what hearing such damaging words at Mass does to an adolescent who has just discovered that he/she is gay/lesbian?  What is the hierarchy saying to him/her? What are they demanding from that individual? What would it have meant to you personally to hear from the pulpit at church that you could never date?  Never fall in love, never kiss or hold hands with another person?  Never be able to marry?  How would you view yourself?  How would others hearing those same words be directed to view you?  How would you view your life and your future?  How would you feel when you saw a car with a "Yes on 8" bumper sticker?  When you overheard someone in a public place use the word "faggot?"

I remember the first time I heard that word, faggot, I was hanging out with my cousins.  They all played on the football team of the Catholic high school in our town.  One of them spat out the word in the form of a curse.  I was just a kid in the 5th grade, I'd never heard the word before, and so I asked: "What's a faggot?"  A faggot is a guy who likes other guys, was the curt reply.  Now pause.  Think.  What would those words mean to someone in junior high school who discovers that he/she is attracted to people of their same gender?  The greatest fear that he/she would have is that they would be rejected by the people they love the most-their family.  So, their solution is to try to pass as straight, deceive, and in effect-lie.  Of course, this leads ultimately to self loathing.  It should come as little surprise that gay teenagers have elevated suicide rates.  According to the Center for Disease Control's Youth Risk Behavior Survey (1999), 33% of gay youth will attempt suicide.

The bishop states: "The Church has spoken out constantly that those with a homosexual orientation must be respected with the dignity of every child of God.  Every individual is created in the image and likeness of God and should never be subjected to prejudice or hatred."  A pious thought uttered by a cleric, robbed of any substantive meaning, as the executioner begins his work.  Only a few select people actually read those documents.  What most Catholics hear about being gay or lesbian at their parish church is--silence.  A numbing silence, which slowly and insidiously tells them, "You don't belong here, this is not for you, and you are not welcome."  It is not the crude overt vulgarity of some churches.  But rather, it is the coldness of a maitre d' who simply won't seat you, or the club which has put you on a waiting list with no intention of allowing you to join.  And simply asks you to wait in polite almost, apologetic tones.

In effect, the bishops are asking gay and lesbian people to live their lives alone.  Why?  Who does this benefit?  How exactly is society helped by singling out a minority and excluding them from the union of love and life, which is marriage?  How is marriage protected by intimidating gay and lesbian people into loveless and lonely lives?  What is accomplished by this?  Worse still, is to intimidate a gay or lesbian person into a heterosexual marriage, which is doomed from its inception, and makes two victims instead of one by this hurtful "theology."  This "theology," which is parroted by clerics in polished tones from pulpits, produces the very prejudice and hatred in our society which they claim to abhor.

When the hierarchy prohibited artificial birth control, most of the faithful in the United States, Canada and Europe scratched their heads in wonderment and proceeded to ignore them.  There is an expression in theology: "the voice of the people is the voice of God."  If your son or daughter is gay/lesbian let them know that you love them unconditionally. Let them know that you are not ashamed or embarrassed by them. Guide them as you would your other children to finding true and abiding love.  Let them know that marriage is a union of love and life and is possible for them too.

I do not presume to tell you how to vote but I do ask that you pray to the Creator of us all.  Think and consider the effects of your vote on others, especially minorities in our society who are sitting next to you in church, and at work.  The act of casting a vote takes you a few minutes but it can cause other human beings untold happiness or sorrow for a lifetime.  It can grant them hope and acceptance, or it can cause them to lose civil rights.  It can be a rebuff to bigotry and hatred, or it can encourage bigotry and hatred.  Personally, I am morally compelled to vote "NO" on Proposition 8.  It is my hope that the people of California will join with those others around the world such as Canada, Europe and South Africa who welcome their gay and lesbian family members fully into society by granting them the civil right to marry.

I know these words of truth will cost me dearly.  But to withhold them, would be far more costly and I would become an accomplice to a moral evil that strips gay and lesbian people not only of their civil rights but of their human dignity as well.  Jesus said, "The truth will set you free."  He didn't promise that it would be easy or without personal cost to speak that truth.

Hat tip, Jeff Stork who emailed that Farrow is now staying with friends for the time being.
Tags: , , , (All Tags)
Bookmark and Share
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Hurting traditional marriage
We got married in Canada a few years ago and every now and then it still makes straight friends laugh when I ask them at dinner or brunch or after a movie or walking the dogs together "How is your marriage?  Has it suffered?  Do you feel endangered?"  But seriously, you hear the claim over and over that same-sex marriage undermines straight marriage. Show me statistics. Show me evidence.  Hell, show me one specific couple somewhere, anywhere, that can prove it.

"I believe that marriage is meant to be a sacred institution between two unwilling teenagers"--Tina Fey as Failin' Palin.

"In order to maintain an untenable position, you have to be actively ignorant."  The Colbert Report


Awesome!
Though we seem to have become accustomed to the horrors of the Roman Cahtolic Church, Fr. Farrow's homily proves that resistance and justice can thrive there, even at the risk of professional and pastoral abandonment.  To come out opposed to Prop 8 and as a Gay man takes more testicular fortitude than any hate-mongering homophobic politician could ever muster!  He shoots down the arguments of marriage equality opponents concisely and without compromise.  Bravo!

Good for him.
I went to school in Fresno, as did my folks before me, and it is a bastion of the right wing.  VERY conservative, and i am suprised that he came out in this manner against the proposition.  But good for him.  He put his morality above his wallet.

Oh and just an FYI, it's not the University of California, it's the California State University at Fresno.  There are two state University programs in California, the UC system and the Cal State System.  

The trollish sounding blogger formerly known as BURNSEY


Yes, the Fresno area is very conservative, but...
... it is encouraging that half the congregation stood and applauded.  I think that speaks well for the chances of defeating Proposition 8.

If you want allies, you have to be an ally.

[ Parent ]
You know, sometimes you just have to stand up...
...isn't that what all struggles against useless bigotry have always been about?

I'm very proud that he said what he said when he said it.  It took guts.

"To be nobody but yourself in a world which is doing its best day and night to make you like everybody else means to fight the hardest battle which any human being can fight and never stop fighting." -E.E. Cummings


Thanks PAM ..and to Father Farrow.
..forwarded on to a few. The tide is turning..inexhoerably and will roll over some who are mired in the past but will buoy up those who look forward to a more equal future.

It's the Hammer of JUSTICE,
It's the Bell of FREEDOM,
It's the Song about LOVE between,
my Brothers and my Sisters
...All over this Land.


Oh, I see
"Proposition 8 is not a homosexuality issue rather about the institution of marriage which is the basis of our society."

Prop 8 isn't a homosexuality issue, it just affects the lives of homosexuals.

Boy, I'm glad we got that cleared up.


If I was asked to name the basis of our society ...
... I'd probably start with something out of the Declaration of Independence or the Constitution.  I rather doubt any of the "protect marriage" folks would be happy about that, though.  There is something about language like "inalienable rights" and "equal protection of the laws" that just doesn't sit well with their, er, "arguments".

I concede that marriage - in all of its various forms - has played an important part in our society, but "the basis" seems like a hell of a stretch to me.


[ Parent ]
God luck to you in your next job, sir.
Because your days as a Catholic priest are OVER.

Clearly Father Farrow isn't a pedophile like the overwhelming majority of his fellow priests (I'm an ex-Catholic. I know the score. Most of you have NO IDEA!)

There's more where he came from, so WILL THE LAST PERSON TO LAVE THE CATHOLIC CHURCH PLEASE BLOW OUT THE CANDLES, LAURA!


Wow, I am blown away.
I'm not sure, as an atheist, I have standing to be proud of a Catholic priest.  But I am proud of him.  And I am proud to call him my brother.  Few people in positions of power and responsibility like he is are ever willing to sacrifice their own career or comfort for moral correctness.  If only more would conscientiously consider the question posed by Fr. Farrow, "At what point do you cease to be an agent for healing and growth and become an accomplice of injustice?"  The sad irony is that Fr. Farrow has demonstrated a rare ability to live his commitment to love and compassion.  He is the best amongst his peers, and is likely to be removed from the priesthood for it.

Thank you, Fr. Farrow.

Lurleen on Twitter


Wow, just wow.
Now we're talking.
Actually Fresno, because its small and conservative have a active and effective gay community.  I follow along because here in LA  there's really very little to complain about and I have business in the area...

I especially became interested during the first California Legislature vote because Fresno's Democrat Assemblyman was one of the few Democrats who voted No, against marriage equality first time around....the Fresno gay community stepped up there activities to pressure him, especially since his daughter was gay.  

http://www.gayfresno.com/  Ck 'em out. The top story is about Father Farrow.


Karen, Thanks for link...
To GayFresno...not a bad site at all, so whatever prompted the community to bond and support each other...hopefully they will all get GOOD News come Nov. 4...

It's the Hammer of JUSTICE,
It's the Bell of FREEDOM,
It's the Song about LOVE between,
my Brothers and my Sisters
...All over this Land.


[ Parent ]
In Support of Catholicism
Although I have not considered myself Catholic for quite some time for reasons too obvious to PHB readers to go into, there is one good thing about the Catholic Church: Priests can do what he did. He will not be removed from the priesthood.  Priests can be a tool toward social change and social justice and have been in some areas.  

What do you mean "Priests can do what he did"? Not with THIS Pope!
He's history.

Nope.
You don't know how the Catholic Church works.  Even with the current pope priests are allowed to speak as the "spirit" guides them.  He could, after a lengthy process, be censured and told not to talk like that anymore... but it is not grounds for removal from the priesthood.

[ Parent ]
Excommunication
Catholic priests are excommunicated all of the time.

They are still priests. However, they can no longer perform or receive the sacraments. That means they can't work as Catholic priests.

Excommunication can be pronounced on:

"Those who either publicly or privately teach or defend propositions condemned by the Holy See."

So, I don't know where you got this "speak as the 'spirit' guides them" stuff.

If a priest defends homosexuality, abortion, the priesthood for women, birth control, celebacy for priests, or anything else the Pope has condemned by canon law, he can be excommunicated.

If you are a Catholic, you can even be excommunicated for belonging to certain organizations such as Call to Action.

Farrow will certainly be excommunicated.

When you look for the bad in mankind, expecting to find it, you surely will.

- Abraham Lincoln.


[ Parent ]
Priest for life
Yes, the reception of what the Catholic Church calls Holy Orders creates an indelible mark on the soul of a priest - at least this is what Catholics are taught.  As punishment priests can be forbidden from public acting as a priest, but they remain priests in the technical sense.

On a side note, the organization Call to Action has disfavor in some dioceses, but tolerated in others.  Only in the diocese of Lincoln, Nebraska is membership grounds for excommunication.

If you want allies, you have to be an ally.


[ Parent ]
A laicized priest
can't perform the Sacraments. He could still serve as lay clergy, but barring a miracle he'll be defrocked stat. Indelible mark won't mean jackshit if he tries to serve within his order again after laicizing.

Father Geoff is exceptionally courageous. He refused to be among the good men who remained silent and indifferent, and thereby allowed evil to perpetuate itself in the world. He stood up for what is right. Blessings on him. Anyone who knows him, please convey my heartfelt thanks.

God save ornery old queens! - kevinchi


[ Parent ]
He's not history
David-

My friend Geoff is most certainly NOT history, he just isn't a priest anymore. But you'll be hearing plenty from him. Sometimes God calls people to serve in ways they never anticipated.

In his new role as an activist, he'll be campaigning against Proposition 8 inclding a fundraiser tonight.

Stay Tuned!

 


G-d bless him
there's something to be said about serving on the side of justice and righteousness - and Father Geoff does just that.  I'd rather go to hell with my integrity intact than go to heaven by beating down those I could have helped.

[ Parent ]
Fr. Farrow
What doesn't seem to be discussed here, is the MANNER in which Fr. Farrow chose to give the world his viewpoint. He had only been in this parish for 4 months. Had he chosen simply to let his congregation know how he felt, then asked them to vote their conscience, which is what the Church asks us all to do, that would be one thing.  Knowing it would create division, he should have chosen to "shepherd" his people, as he has taken vows to do, and stayed with them, through the turmoil he KNEW it would create, to help heal, and even perhaps bring about the very change he so desperately desires. Or, he could have chosen to voice his personal opinion to the media outside of mass, when other innocent bystanders would not be involved.  Instead, unbeknownst to his flock, he had already packed up his office and home, given an interview and invited the news media to be present for the "shocking revelation," and ceremoniously walked out. He went for maximum exposure on a political issue, and going against his own words about the bishop incorrectly using the pulpit for political means, did the very same thing. He USED the congregation to further his own agenda, without caring about the sword he had just thrust into their midst! Ironically, the Newman Center is known throughout the diocese for it's tolerance; had Fr. Farrow's motivations been selfless, this congregation would probably be the only one in the diocese to have stood behind him. Whether or not you agree with his viewpoint, (and I do), his actions were very selfish, petulant and hurtful to a lot of innocent people. His actions showed he did not care one iota about his congregation.  

do you really have enough information
to make that judgment?

Lurleen on Twitter

[ Parent ]
Correct, Lurleen...Who are we to Judge.

Knowing priests and their years of commitment and training, I have a feeling Fr. Farrow has considered and prayed many, many hours about what form his response to the May ruling and June letter should take.  As the campaign is winding down, I presurme there was some particular motivating factor that prompted this particular response... and no, I don't think it was a proposal, but possibly so, and that would be fine too as far as I am concerned. Many priests have left the priesthood to get married, why not one more!

A story to follow for sure. 



It's the Hammer of JUSTICE,
It's the Bell of FREEDOM,
It's the Song about LOVE between,
my Brothers and my Sisters
...All over this Land.


[ Parent ]
I know a man
who was an archaeology professor at a dig in Scotland. He was a Catholic priest. On this dig, he met a beautiful women. A year later he was an Episcopalian priest and they were married! 30 years later they're still married with several children, and he is still an Episcopalian priest. They laugh whenever they tell the story.

God save ornery old queens! - kevinchi

[ Parent ]
lol
Like fresnogal, like the Catholic church in general NEVER has used glbt peoples to demonize....like the Catholic Church has never THRUST the spiritual sword over and over again into the midst of glbt people..  like the actions of the Catholic church aren't selfish, petulant and hurtful to innocent glbt people.  Really now....

[ Parent ]
Yes, she likely does
Fresnogal's observations are, most unfortunately, spot on.
Anyone acquainted with the gentleman in the last two decades either personally or with his ecclesial history, knows that the intensity of his intellect, passion and charm are matched only by that of his internal conflicts regarding his vocation in the Roman Catholic Church. As sympathethic and charitable as one can be towards the portrayal of his understanding of Christian values and the workings of the Church inwhich he professed vows, his decision was a very calculated and purposefully timed one. His bishop and brother priests will have this week's retreat meetings mitigated by this blindside publicity broadside. And this action, rightly described as "selfish, petulant and hurtful to a lot of innocent people," was crafted by someone who has considerable dramatic skills. The Church of San Joaquin, and by that it is meant the Faithful not its heirarchy, will be greatly injured by this action.
Fr. Farrow was provided an opportunity to freely assess his calling and vocation and chose to remain within the church. What he has now done is take that vocation and committed the equivilent of "suicide by cops" with it.
Please notice nothing has been said here decrying his political or personal views. But his vows mandated that his duties remain consistent with his personal fealty.
There is no joy to be taken or celebrated in any aspect of this.

[ Parent ]
oh get off the cross, mary
"selfish, petulant and hurtful to a lot of innocent people," describes the roman catholic church to a "t".  and you're bellyaching because the weekend meetings of the local clergy will be upset?  get some perspective: if the church didn't decide to direct it's members to vote for the hate amendment, this guy would probably have left quietly.  if you want to point fingers, point them at your cardinal and archbishop, not to mention the pope who started an anti-gay pogrom as soon as he donned his ermine robes.

Lurleen on Twitter

[ Parent ]
This is a good point...
...wasn't it the Church that struck the first blow by telling the congregation which way they should vote in the first place?

Imagine if Farrow had just packed up his things and left quietly.  Someone else would have replaced him espousing the exact directive that the letter dictated.  Nothing would have changed.  The congregation that values its faith would have voted in the way they were told out of a sense of loyalty.

Yes, this act was dramatic as you say Jefferson, but so is claiming you're the son of God and dying on a cross.  That does not make the sacrifice any less important or necessary.  Had the media not been called, we wouldn't be commenting about this little incident.  No one outside of the church walls on that day would probably be aware of what happened.  Again, nothing would have changed.

I can imagine that many people in the congregation will feel elated that someone in authority stood up and said no so that everyone could hear it.  I am sure that the head honchos will think twice before issuing another decree equating a vote for equality with the "destruction" of society.

Now Farrow is out of a job in a profession that he loves -- probably never to don that position again in his lifetime.  He made a sacrifice.  He stood up publicly and refused to contribute to the beating down of a minority group.  And the only thing you can say to that is that he disrupted some future meetings and non-specifically "hurt" his flock?  You sound like a person sitting on the sidelines, commenting sarcastically, never making the sacrifice yourself.

"To be nobody but yourself in a world which is doing its best day and night to make you like everybody else means to fight the hardest battle which any human being can fight and never stop fighting." -E.E. Cummings


[ Parent ]
And just to add...
...I'm imagining the same type of person sitting in the temple when Jesus turned over all the tables because of the gambling done inside going...

"Oh, that Jesus, always making show.  Did he really have to turn over the tables?  Couldn't he have just NOT come into the temple if he didn't agree with gambling inside of God's house?  Now look at all the people who won't return to fill the coffers because he's made such a scene.  Poo-poo."

Or when he's on trial simply because he claimed to be the son of God....

"Oh My God!  Why won't he just say he's NOT the son of God.  Then we could all go home and forget about this.  Is the title REALLY that important?  Geez!  He's just doing it for the attention, you know."

"To be nobody but yourself in a world which is doing its best day and night to make you like everybody else means to fight the hardest battle which any human being can fight and never stop fighting." -E.E. Cummings


[ Parent ]
Damn skippy
Get off the cross, someone else needs the building material.

So a pastor made a dramatic exit from an institution that demonized and de-humanized him every chance it got. So he got free publicity for the cause of human rights and dignity while a bunch of bigots scrambled to do damage control. Whoopie do. I'll let you know when my heart starts bleeding.

Edmund Burke said, "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men to do nothing." It's nice to see a good man NOT doing nothing.

God save ornery old queens! - kevinchi


[ Parent ]
I just
want to give him a huge hug. Thank you, Father.

No matter how thin you slice it, it's still boloney.

Father Geoff Farrow
Well, i don't know how to begin. I am saddened at the events that are taking place. Fr. Farrow (and I will continue to refer to him as "father" because a priest is always a priest) seemingly made many people proud on Sunday. But he also saddened a lot of us Catholics who depended on him as a Priest and "shepherd" to lead us in the direction of the Church. I regret that nobody reached out to Fr. Farrow as a young boy, and I am praying for him. But I can't believe that as a Catholic Priest he would not only go against the Church's teaching, but lead others away from it. Now, i know many are calling what he did brave. But is it really brave to call tv cameras to Mass (something that is really not supposed to be done) and make your statements, and then run and hide. He led many people away from the Church's teaching, and then left them there without answers to their questions. The Church does not condemn gay people. It condemns the disorderly acts of homosexuality. And prop 8 is not meant to attack gays and lesbians, but meant to protect the sanctity of marriage, which God instituted to be between a man and a woman. Bottom Line. In Genesis, God says go forth and multiply. Only a sexual union between a MAN and a WOMAN can bear fruit. The sexual act represents the LIFE GIVING love of God's covenant with his people. That is why it produces human life. That is why contraception is wrong because it closes itself to life. And people who cannot bear children are still allowed to marry because of the POSSIBILITY that one day they can. A gay or lesbian couple will NEVER be able to NATURALLY conceive a child. The Sacred Institute of marriage is intended for a man and a woman. That's not to say that gays shouldn't have rights, because they should. And we are called to love them as Jesus Christ would love them... but we cannot redefine Marriage in doing so. The Church will never turn on itself, and will never change it's mind on this issue, or on women's ordination. Case Closed.

"And on this Rock I will build my Church, and the gate's of hell shall NOT prevail against it."

Mother Mary,
Pray for us and especially for Fr. Farrow

Amen.


I think you should check your definition...
..."go forth and multiply" has nothing to do with the institution of marriage.  If mankind were to cleave wholeheartedly to this "command" with such little regard to its actual meaning as you are displaying, no one would get married, everyone would screw like bunnies, and babies would be popping out with little regard to whether they could flourish or not.

People don't get married to exclusively have children -- there is no possibility for a chronically impotent man to bear fruit.  Stop deluding yourself.  Gay and lesbian people "naturally" conceive children all the time.  I would like you to point me to any instance where a woman did not "naturally" (as you say) conceive a child.  Wasn't there the union of an egg and sperm?  Didn't the child gestate for 9 months then shoot out of the birth canal?  Isn't that how all babies are brought into the world?  What are you talking about "naturally"?

Your ignorance astounds me.  The one thing we can agree on is that the Church as it is today will never change.  But as the great man Joseph Campbell pointed out, that will be the end of the Church.  As it stands now, it will fade into the background like so many mythological fairytales.  Not because the lessons it teaches aren't valuable and sacred, but because its stubborness in the face of discovery will make it irrelevant.  And I for one, cannot wait to see that day.

"To be nobody but yourself in a world which is doing its best day and night to make you like everybody else means to fight the hardest battle which any human being can fight and never stop fighting." -E.E. Cummings


[ Parent ]
Not quite
First welcome to the board. Now:

And prop 8 is not meant to attack gays and lesbians, but meant to protect the sanctity of marriage, which God instituted to be between a man and a woman.

If it wasn't meant to attack LGBT then it sure is succeeding at something it was not meant to do. It does nothing about "Protecting" squat. It ELIMINATES the right for same sex couples to recieve the same LEGAL benefits as heterosexual couples. THe CA supreme court already ruled to give them equal access and this Proposition would remove that right. And this has nothing to do with the religious ceremony. We are talking a legal contract. People marry all the time with out the church's involvement

Additionally:

The Church does not condemn gay people.

BUT IT DOES. By denying same-sex couples the same legal recognition as opposite-sex couples they are denied the protections and rights that those couples recieve. A very good friend of mine was condemned a few years back when his partner died suddenly of heart failure and the family took everything from him leaving him without a home, and without money. This would never have happened if the couple had been married.

If you want to "Protect the Sanctity of Marriage" then start by outlawing divorce. Divorce would be the number one cause of the of marriage. BUt tell you what if you want to use your religion to vote on my life, my family, and my rights, then fine, but I expect to be able to do the same to you.

watashi no yomeiri wa doko desu ka


[ Parent ]
oops,
number one cause of the END of marriage. LOL

watashi no yomeiri wa doko desu ka

[ Parent ]
Dear Popsiclestand and Belfrieboi
"Please notice nothing has been said here decrying his political or personal views. But his vows mandated that his duties remain consistent with his personal fealty.
There is no joy to be taken or celebrated in any aspect of this."

I cannot determine how the above self-quote "sounds" to you, but I can assure you I am not proffering sarcasm nor sitting on the sidelines. I am well-acquainted with these particular circumstances and situations, and that precisely means both the cultural/political realities of Prop.8 and the ecclesial and theological realities (which I suspect some here will dub oxymoronic) attendant to the matter of Holy Orders in the Roman Catholic Church.

"BUT IT DOES. By denying same-sex couples the same legal recognition as opposite-sex couples they are denied the protections and rights that those couples recieve. A very good friend of mine was condemned a few years back when his partner died suddenly of heart failure and the family took everything from him leaving him without a home, and without money. This would never have happened if the couple had been married. "

The Church only stands in witness to a sacramental commitment as she has formally and traditionally recognized it. That is the Church's perogative. The bride and groom enact that sacrament validly only under that acknowledgment. The Church's minister officially represents that witness. Only then can he affirm that witness civicly by signing the marriage license.
There is some measure of disingenuity in the above quote. Any same-sex couple has had the ability to enact a legal "Domestic Partnership Contract" in county offices since 1999. Then said couple can legally articulate financial, health and end of life issues that would, in most situations, prevent the scenario presented in the above anecdotal account. Granted, there are still issues that are difficult for "unmarried couples" to navigate, such as joint-name purchasing and taxation of property and such. But that condition is the same for heterosexual partners as well who are "unmarried."

That does, I admit, bring us back to square one, the political proposition. So, the democratic process must be played out. Not everybody plays fair. But it is not reasonable to expect the Catholic Church to, as was characterized, to sit on the sidelines on an issue that it holds sacrosanct. Nor does the constitution prevent the Church from voicing concerns about political matters that are co-mingled with its moral tenets. One can see the argument that this obscures the line between separation of church and state. But does it really?
If a same-sex couple desires an ecclesial recognition of a valid civil union, that couple can find a host of denominational churches that would welcome that ceremony. If that couple happened to be baptized Roman-Catholics seeking to sacramentally bond their union by formal petition, they would, de facto, already renounced their "communion" with their Church.

With respect,
Jefferson


Not exactly
There is some measure of disingenuity in the above quote. Any same-sex couple has had the ability to enact a legal "Domestic Partnership Contract" in county offices since 1999. Then said couple can legally articulate financial, health and end of life issues that would, in most situations, prevent the scenario presented in the above anecdotal account. Granted, there are still issues that are difficult for "unmarried couples" to navigate, such as joint-name purchasing and taxation of property and such. But that condition is the same for heterosexual partners as well who are "unmarried."

Not exactly. Some states refuse even to recognize Domestic Partnership Contracts, and even in states that do those are hardly the same as a Marriage. I don't hvae my book with me so I can't list all specifics, but a DP does not grant any the 1000+ federal rights and responsibilities of marriage, and grants only a small portion of state protections. (Even then there are still problems with the ones that are granted, but that story is not mine to tell) And yes the condition is the same for unmarried opposite-sex couples, but the difference is they have the OPTION to marry which is not offered to same-sex couples. Now since my state doesn't recognize same-sex relationships at all, I can go to an attorney and have paperwork drawn up to get some of those rights, but at incredible expense and wills are too easily contested. And that doesn't even touch on the social aspect of validating a relationship, "Yes I'm married, this is my husband." vs. "Yes I'm civily unioned, this is my same-sex domestic partner."

But it is not reasonable to expect the Catholic Church to, as was characterized, to sit on the sidelines on an issue that it holds sacrosanct. Nor does the constitution prevent the Church from voicing concerns about political matters that are co-mingled with its moral tenets. One can see the argument that this obscures the line between separation of church and state. But does it really?

Well, I'm not known to be reasonable, but I think that voicing concerns from the pulpit and tax exemption status shouldn't go hand in hand. Honestly though I don't care if the church voices an opinion or not. What I was saying that forcing a group of people into a second class citizen status is condeming. But it does blur the line between seperation of church and state by saying that "people, whom I probably don't know, shouldn't be allowed by law to have something that I already have because my religion tells me it's wrong." It's the same as saying "My religion says women shouldn't vote, so let's pass a proposition to eliminate their right vote." There is a difference between freedom to believe whatever religion you wish, and using that belief to deny another group of people access to the same rights, priviliges, and responsibilities as everyone else already has.

If a same-sex couple desires an ecclesial recognition of a valid civil union, that couple can find a host of denominational churches that would welcome that ceremony. If that couple happened to be baptized Roman-Catholics seeking to sacramentally bond their union by formal petition, they would, de facto, already renounced their "communion" with their Church.

I could go to my church right now and have a ceremony if I wished, but that is not the issue at all. The issue is the legal aspect between the couple and the fed and state. I don't ask the Catholic Church to accept me, nor to perform my wedding. I couldn't care less. What I do care about is that my family is treated legally as less than a family of said catholic church because the laws are discriminatory.  

watashi no yomeiri wa doko desu ka


[ Parent ]
WWJD?
 I can only imagine Jesus' outrage when He looks up from His table and sees smirking faces, as one in ten of His invited dinner guests quietly pushes back their chair from the table and prepares to leave without making a scene. Spoken and unspoken murmurings from several others have caused discomfort. Silent compliance by other guests has resulted in rejection.  Realizing that one of those who came now feels rejected and unwelcome though He'd called and invited them Himself, Jesus rises, pulls his chair back from the table and asks the rejected guest to sit down in His seat.  When His invitation is declined because the guest is now skeptical as to the integrity of his Host's invitation, what would Jesus say to the rejected one?  What would He say to the others, when He sees the hurt one depart because others, not the Christ, have excluded an invited guest from His Father's House?      

Our family made a video for NO ON 8!!
...feel free to share/upload/etc.  We're underfunded and behind in the latest polls (which came out today), so any help in spreading the word is great!  NO ON 8!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...

Thanks!!!


Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?


Report TOS Violations



Join the Blend Chat Room



Premium Sponsors



BlogAds






Search the Blend
Current site


PHB 2.0 Web
Search Blend 1.0 Archives
Ad Networks


BlogSheroes BlogAds


Miscellany

RSS Feeds

Subscribe with Bloglines

Visit NCBlogs


frontpage hit counter

Stats

Powered by: SoapBlox