Catholics Return Check From Lawmaker Over Gay Marriage Vote

By Jack Jenkins
Religion News Service

(RNS) A New York lawmaker has found himself at odds with the Roman Catholic Church after a parish school refused a $50 donation because of his vote in favor of same-sex marriage.

Assemblyman Joseph Lentol, a Democrat, sent a $50 check to honor a student at Our Lady of Mount Carmel School in Brooklyn's Williamsburg neighborhood only to have it returned uncashed.

The rejected check was attached to a letter from Monsignor Joseph Calise, the church's priest, who said Brooklyn Bishop Nicholas DiMarzio "requested that all gifts received from politicians supporting same-sex marriage legislation be refused."

The snub left Lentol flummoxed, he said, especially after the parish asked him to continue his 25 years of donations.

"I was very surprised and kind of puzzled," Lentol said. "I didn't know how (the bishop's statement) applied to me. ... It was something they asked for, not something I chose to honor any student with."

DiMarzio strongly criticized the New York legislature for passing legislation to legalize same-sex marriage, accusing lawmakers who voted in favor of having "curried favor with wealthy donors ... in order to advance their own careers and futures."

As a result, DiMarzio directed all Catholic schools "to refuse any distinction or honors bestowed upon them this year by the governor or any member of the legislature who voted to support this legislation," and said lawmakers who voted for the bill should not "speak or be present at any parish or school celebration."

Comments

[Michele Somerville]

11:42 AM on 07/14/2011

If you're Catholic and support same sex marriage, DiMarzio doesn't want your money.

http://tinyurl.com/34nz4zn

[santadio20]

11:09 PM on 07/13/2011

Billy the Kid and Blackbeard will be happy living in this century because liberties reign supreme from gay marriages to ungodliness. May they would have gotten their chance to table their line of work for legalization by senate.

[Untainted Love]

09:34 AM on 07/14/2011

Ask 1000 people what constitutes ungodliness and you'll get at least 999 different lists. Institutionalized bigotry against gay people is near the top of mine. In Iran they're still hunted down, their genitals are cut off and force fed to them. The RCC has the same position only the bashing is legal, civil and emotional instead of physical.

[KeepLeft]

01:53 PM on 07/13/2011

Well this was unexpected:

http://www.theonion.com/articles/vatican-reverses-stance-on-gay-marriage-after-meet,20912/

;)

[roblabrousse]

11:00 AM on 07/13/2011

Catholics, Smatholics they don't practice what their "leader" Jesus says period.

[downunder237]

03:34 PM on 07/13/2011

That is the problem. We donnot have Christ the King as the head of the Church anymore.

The cult of the individual reigns.

[asta1968]

10:21 AM on 07/13/2011

The church discriminates against two consenting adults, but ignore it if one of the parties is a helpless child. That is fact.

[downunder237]

02:35 PM on 07/13/2011

Just like the Boy Scouts.

[asta1968]

03:03 PM on 07/13/2011

Exactly why I wouldn't let my boy join the American version of the Bund.

[eskatyt]

10:15 AM on 07/13/2011

I'm not a fan of religions in general, but I'll say one thing for Mormons--when they're proved wrong, they scramble like heck to come up with a new theory that works with the facts.

The RCC could take a page from the Book of Mormon.

Science has proved that homosexuality is innate. Not a choice. If you're religious, that means god intended it to be this way. It's time for religions to reconcile this with their dogma.

[downunder237]

02:34 PM on 07/13/2011

Science has not proven that.

There is a clear debate within that community on that very issue.
There is no “gay gene.” That is simply propaganda.
They tried to find one, but they did not actually do it.

[eskatyt]

03:59 PM on 07/13/2011

"Science has not proven that."

Actually, yes, it has.

True, they have not as yet identified a "gay gene", so far as we know. I doubt they will find one gene that does it the trick. Sexuality is a bit more complicated than hair color.

Not everything in science is about genes. There are other things we are born with that cannot be traced thus far to specific genes. Like intelligence and temperament.

But there are experiments that have shown that sexual orientation develops in utero. Which means a) it is something you're born with and b) you have no choice in the matter.

You don't have to believe me. Google it.

If you're on the Internet, you have no excuse for not knowing anymore.

[pbarba1969]

08:59 AM on 07/13/2011

As a Roman Catholic who is for same sex civil unions, I won't be in any rush to write out any checks especially since the Church seems to pick and choose selectively what constitutes a good Catholic.

But they will continue to take them from people who were for the war in Iraq, cutting aid for children and the elderly and would regard Christ if he came back as a "socialist" ( not sure how that whole message of a rich man getting into heaven like a camel walking thru the eye of a needle would play out today)

As a life long Roman Catholic and a 3rd degree member of the Knights of Columbus, I'm feeling more and more unwelcome in my Church. I love my Church I just don't love some of the people who are running it. Sorry to vent but when you hear about this as well as guys like Rudy G, John Kerry and Andrew Cuomo being denied Holy Communion as well, it just makes you wonder.

[downunder237]

09:50 AM on 07/13/2011

Christ the socialist?

Maybe, if you embrace that Pier Palo Passolini film version of Christ. For sure, a lot of Catholics want that. But Christ was never that sort of leader. That sort of leader came around in the 19th century.

From reading your post, you are angry that the Church seems to say you are not a good Catholic because you support civil unions. I do also. I do not particularly want to, but I think the constitution is very clear. But what I say (and this always makes some people very angry) is that the Church, officially, no longer embraces the idea of Catholic states and supports religious liberty. The Church wants to have things both ways.

[asta1968]

10:20 AM on 07/13/2011

Christ (I believe he existed historically) and his message are socialist. And somehow the fringe element perverted his message. Greed and me first isn't written anywhere in the bible that I've read.

btw, I was raised in a staunchly conservative Catholic house, that explains why I'm an Atheist today.

[ez duz it]

10:11 AM on 07/13/2011

Hi, pbarba1969--

You seem like a good guy who is devoted to, yet concerned with, the Church's anti-Gay position and its censure of the Catholic politicians who support us.

Because of its hostile stance against Gay people, I submitted my "Formal Declaration of Defection from the Catholic Church" in 2009. As a former Dominican friar, it was one of the most difficult, but freeing moments in my life.

Personally, I am for civil marriage equality. It safeguards the legal interests of the couple, regardless of their genders and does nothing to infringe on faith communities to set limits on whom they choose to grant religious matrimony.

I will not visit my local K of C hall for fund-raising benefits, bingo, trivia, or Friday fish fries (a favorite since my childhood 45+ years ago) because it lobbies so aggressively against Gay people and civil marriage equality.

The "Knights of Columbus gave a whopping $1.4 million in 2009 to the National Organization for Marriage, probably the most notable organization in the country fighting against the civil rights of LGBT people. That $1.4 million donation? According to Zwick, it eclipses the entire amount that the Knights of Columbus gave to fund other charitable efforts, like supporting food banks and food drives." [1]

I wish you all the best in your journey, though...

--ez
--------------------------------
Michael Jones (2010) http://news.change.org/stories/the-knights-of-columbus-spends-more-fighting-gays-than-supporting-food-banks

[vadogrescue]

07:27 AM on 07/13/2011

Being gay isn't a choice, but being a Catholic is. Any Catholic with any integrity would leave that cult.

[Jimmy 61762]

12:25 PM on 07/13/2011

Churches are all cults,each one will tell you that of other churches.

[vadogrescue]

02:22 PM on 07/13/2011

Amen to that, Brother Jimmy. You are preaching to the choir, so to speak.

[santadio20]

10:55 PM on 07/13/2011

being gay is a choice because humans by nature don't reproduce asexual and basic reason for animals biological coming together is to procreate.
All of this will pass.

[Untainted Love]

09:42 AM on 07/14/2011

For 3000 years gay people have been lynched, stoned and beaten to death, boiled alive in oil, the Nazis even tried mass extermination, and for 3000 years nature has continued making 10% of us gay. When I say the current Ratzinger "objective evil" nonsense is the moral equivalent of beating up disabled people simply for being disabled, I mean it literally. His position is immoral and evil, not to mention dishonest and incomprehensibly hypocritical considering the makeup of his own clergy, and the sooner he abandons it the sooner this issue will be resolved.

[parrishable]

02:59 AM on 07/13/2011

Writing as a Catholic priest myself, I wish my brothers and sisters of Faith of whatever denomination or tradition, would remember that "Marriage," strictly speaking, is a civil process that belongs to the State. "Matrimony", as in the Catholic Sacrament of Holy Matrimony, is of a strictly religious nature. In the United States, most -- if not all -- states subcontract, as it were, the officiating so that a religious ceremony serves as the civil ceremony. However, civil paperwork must still be completed and the couple is not married in the eyes of the law until the officiant signs the marriage certificate. In many other countries, couples are required to go before a judge or what we used to call "justices of the peace" to have a state-recognized civil ceremony and are perfect free to go to their religious community for the religious matrimony ceremony -- or not. The religious ceremony does not enjoy the force of law and the couple is not married as a matter of law until they plait their troths before the civil minister of marriage. Civil marriage is an exclusive contract between two consenting adults who both possess the faculty to give consent. Religious matrimony is something else.

[Ethicsprof]

06:02 AM on 07/13/2011

As a former RC priest, and as a professor of ethics, I was very happy to read your post. I attempt to explain the difference between "marriage" and "matrimony" to my students. Many agree, but many simply refuse to see the difference. When we cannot understand the meaning of words it is hard to have an intelligent debate.

[parrishable]

01:00 AM on 07/14/2011

Dear Father, (once a priest, always a priest... that darned "indelible character" has a way of raising it's head, doesn't it?) :D

You nailed the problem right on the head and called out the most fundamental step in philosophy: You absolutely have to constantly define your terms so your listeners/readers understand the way the words are being used (to say nothing of their true meaning). I don't envy you working in academia where Hegelianism is rampant, and most students believe Utilitarianism to be a viable ethical/moral system. Hegel was an idiot: the individual has value only insofar as he(/she) has some utility to the State which is the only possessor of Geist. Alas, for Hegel, his Geist came from Prussia, a State that no longer exists. And one can easily take (Rule) Utilitarianism to its logical extreme whereby the color of the socks I choose to wear somehow matters.

[Ioan Lightoller]

06:31 AM on 07/13/2011

Fanned and faved. Father thank you for taking the time to point out the difference. In at least some cases that may clear up the conundrum for opponents of marriage equalit. That really is the bottom line--the marriage is not legal in the eyes of the state unless the civil document is signed.

[roscoewpa]

12:55 AM on 07/13/2011

I say if their god is so mighty we all throw our money in the air. If his god catches it the church gets to keep it if not it goes back to the people and the chuch pays tax.

[sahk3]

12:48 AM on 07/13/2011

Wonder if he said the same thing about legislators who supported the unprovoked attack on Iraq

[downunder237]

12:02 AM on 07/13/2011

A courageous act by His Excellency.

But, when the Church recognizes religious liberty it is at odds with itself on this issue. Gay marriage is only a natural progression of the problem of this recognition from Vatican II. The individual reigns (even in the Church) while Christ the King has been dethroned.

[Ioan Lightoller]

06:34 AM on 07/13/2011

So sorry that you cannot distinguish civil marriage from religious. The Roman Catholic Church has no business interfering in the civil arena. That includes marriage. You can be as narrow-minded and reactionary and bigoted as you wish in your churches. The state is separate from the Church in this country, so the churches can keep their greedy fingers off civil marriage.

[downunder237]

09:18 AM on 07/13/2011

No.

What I said was that the Church, at Vatican II, embraced the concept of religious liberty.

Therefore, it is going against itself. It is self-defeating. Once the Church officially embraced this policy (no matter how many road blocks it has tried to set-up) it will continue. That is the natural progression (e.g. without the Reformation, there would have been no Enlightenment) of policies that try to “update” the Faith. Don’t get me wrong. Vatican II was “high-jacked” by certain people in the Church who wanted to change it into something worse than watered-down Anglicanism. That is the core of the crisis in the Church.

All politicians, who are Roman Catholic, who voted for this incur excommunication automatically if they know (and understand) the Church’s full teachings on marriage. What is a tragedy is that the Holy Father will not make it official (he has that power).

Because of the U.S. Constitution, the case for civil unions (for ALL people) is very clear. They should (and will) happen.

[JacksonHts]

11:21 PM on 07/12/2011

Archbishop Dimarzio is attempting to intimidate and humiliate a State Assemblyman for voting his conscience against the stated position of the Catholic Church Hierarchy in New York. I will remember Archbishop Dimarzio's action next time I receive the annual appeal for donations from the Brooklyn Diocese.

[Moose Luck 99]

10:58 PM on 07/12/2011

The Fascist Roman Catholic List

Bill O Reilly most watched most popular Catholic.
Sean Hannity
Paul Lepage
Chris Christie
John Lynch
Laura Ingraham
Andrew Breitbart
Rush Limplogg
Peter King
John Cornyn
Nancy Pelosi
Newt Gingrich
Antonin Scalia
Anthony M. Kennedy
Sonia Sotomayor
Clarence Thomas
Samuel Alito
Rick Santorumn
Darryl Issa
Thaddeus McCotter
Donald Trump
John A. Boehner
Joe Biden
Tony Blair
Tom Coburn
John Ensign
Ken Blackman
Rudy Giuliani

Is the pope the anti-christ? Kytekutter

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ck02k6d-_nI

[garycooper12]

11:56 PM on 07/12/2011

Wow, Nancy Pelosi, Joe Biden, Newt Gingrich and the Donald all denounced in the same posting? You're an equal opportunity hate-spewer, aren't ya? May you be be trampled by a herd of cattle on their way to the slaughterhouse and your remains soaked up in the juices of a porterhouse steak! Just kiddin' Moose Luck vegan, you sound like a perfectly reasonable and rational human being.

[Moose Luck 99]

12:12 AM on 07/13/2011

Hi gary cooper 12,
I am a vegan I have 4 stomachs to prove it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CZ06xT_vFao

[downunder237]

02:07 AM on 07/13/2011

Just curious which translation of Holy Scripture you are using to answer your questions?

[Untainted Love]

09:39 PM on 07/12/2011

What's the sound of 4 million people being declared fully human? Here's your answer:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LPibXaC0kO0