.
Feedback

Dear Cardinal George

My response to Cardinal George's letter to Catholics regarding gay marriage.

Dear Cardinal George,

My family and I will not be attending Mass this weekend, and our kids will not be attending Religious Ed.  I realize that a) you're probably not reading this and b) that our attendance can be rather spotty.  But this time, I'm not attending because of you.

Your letter to Catholics that you declared MUST be published in all parish bulletins in the Archdiocese of Chicago has way over stepped your bounds.  You, Cardinal George, do not get to tell me how to vote.  You, Cardinal George, do not get to dictate which citizens in the state of Illinois enjoy the civil benefits and responsibilities of marriage.  You get to refuse people the sacrament of marriage, but not the civil right to it.  Kindly respect the separation of Church and State.

I will not allow you to tell me that my dearest friend, who has had and held, in sickness and health, for richer or poorer, and cherished, forsaking all others the amazing partner that God sent him, does not have a "natural" love.

I will not allow you to tell my son that his friends, the most darling 7 year old twin girls, do not have a "natural" family because they have two loving moms.

I will not allow you to tell any of my friends who are still seeking their match that if God sends them someone of the same gender, it is not a "natural" love.

I will not allow a man, who has chosen a life without adult, romantic love and companionship, to define a marriage only as consummated by vaginal intercourse. 

I will not allow you to place more legitimacy on Kim Kardashian's 72 hour sham marriage than any gay couple who have been patiently waiting for a lifetime for their relationship to be recognized.

I will not allow you, Cardinal George, to define God as one who denies anyone the great love that He sends them. Your statements fly in the face of every teaching I have ever received from my Catholic education; that God is good, and loving and that His plan for us is a mystery and the love and people he sends us are the gifts that we are to receive graciously.  That God does not exclude or deny us good things.

Should the citizens of Illinois vote to recognize committed, loving homosexual relationships as the marriages they are, there is no statute requiring a religious organization to perform the marriage ceremony or recognize it as the sacrament of marriage.  It would simply confer the same rights I enjoy as a married person (tax benefits, inheritance privileges, recognizing a legal relationship) and responsibilities (alimony and child support in cases of divorce).  These laws are outside of your jurisdiction, Cardinal.

So my family will not be joining you this Sunday at Mass.  We will, however, keep you in our prayers that you realize the error of your statement.  We will pray that God sends you some sign that God has made us all different in His infinite Wisdom and that God, not a priest, bishop, cardinal or pope, creates a marriage.

"For whenever two or more of you are gathered in My Name, there is love"-- The Wedding Song (There is Love), Paul Stookey

Matt January 9, 2013 at 11:50 pm
I tried to make illustrate those two thoughts very concisly. God and evil cannot exist in the same place at the same time. Where God is satan cannot be. The Church will always be as it is the Church established at the Last Supper with the first Pope being Peter. It has always been lead by sinful, human men and women. The sins of the Church does not deminish Her teaching, nor does it give us a right to choose what we believe. As I said before, I have my own problems with the Church. Yet, I believe in Her teachings. No matter what evil, or sin committed by those leading her, the teachings of the Church are not deminished. We live in a cloudy world, we have belong to a Church that believes in objective, absolute truths in a subjective humanistic world. That is why I asked a few times what the requirements are for sex to be moral according to the Church. If we do not know that answer then this whole blog is pointless. Jen wrote it above. We cannot have a discussion about that which we do not know. I spent a few years in Seminary, studied moral theology, philosophy, and some canon law. Oh man, there were some real nuts in the Sem with us, but also some of the BEST MEN I have ever met. Ironically two of the BEST Priests I know are gay. Not open, but were before they realized that if there lives were bearing fruit they needed to be celibate and Priests. Because they know who they are, they are the best preachers and teachers I have ever ever seen.
Just Sayin January 9, 2013 at 11:56 pm
You people are 100% nuts. And Matt...I really hate to be the one to burst your delusional bubble but the church will not always survive. When the earth gets sucked into the nearest black hole...which,by the way, is a astronomical reality... not one church will survive. So...there you go...wrong about that...and everything religiously related.
Mike Wilson January 10, 2013 at 02:07 am
s just saying militant atheism is just as ridiculous as militant Catholicism,Muslims ,Judaism, and Hindi .your arguing over lack of belief on a page states that your not truly sure of your own theories .Im not saying anyone's beliefs is wrong my sister isn't either but religion and politics should never mix when it does you get Israel and Palestine murdering each other for land ,Iran ,multiple dictatorships ,and lest we forget the crusades .The teachings of all sorts of leaders and prophets will never go away they will be studied and learned from and we may add to it what will change I hope is intolerance and hatred will leave us .Matt I'm not saying all the church is bad I disagree with current leaders .I knew our previous cardinal i went on a trip to world youth day to see the pope ,john paul the 2nd ,ive read the bible in multiple formats ,Ive also discussed with other religions faith in more than us is universal science hasnt explained everything and it may never like love its not a choice its not an option who we pick but why is it politics because few who think pushing their veiw believes we all dont deserve equal rights not a sacrement but the rights as citizens that's what at stake religion should never have been brought in but they wanted attention he could've posted note without going to the new
Matt January 10, 2013 at 12:30 pm
Just Sayin, Mike Wilson is right. You are on the wrong blog thread. Arguing the existence of God, or the existence of the Unmoved Mover gets nowhere. If you are as firm in your beliefs that there are no beliefs, then you could be in front of Aquinas and not change your mind. We are all on a search for the Truth. In every action we take. So I truly hope and pray you find what is True. I really feel bad for people who believe that this is all there is.....
Matt January 10, 2013 at 04:40 pm
There is something called theology of the body. Pope John Paul II wrote a lot about it. This is just a short thought on what I have learned over the years, but bears expression at this point. Do those with same-sex attraction love one another? They can absolutely love one another. But there's love for all, and then there's the genital expression of love meant for man and woman as part of God's plan for bringing LIFE into the world. Is homosexual love in this sense even possible? No. The very act itself is an act that biologically doesn't work. No word, no agenda, no person can change that or should try to. Does this mean that people with homosexual inclinations are evil and are going to Hell? Hell... no.
Dan Johnson January 11, 2013 at 02:51 pm
The vast body of evidence since the early days of social science shows prejudice and legal discrimination cause harm in a wide variety of ways. Laws, social policies, social support systems that deny equality contribute to the social climate that results in harm. The resulting dehumanization and demonization is used to justify their behavior by those who bully, beat, torture, and kill. It also results in self destruction, both fast and slow. The same prejudice used to dehumanize us here is also used around the world to justify imprisonment, torture, and death. The only way to end prejudice is to expose it and the harm it causes, anywhere and everywhere it surfaces. Prejudice is a deadly disease that can only be cured through education and understanding. Let's remember Jesus told us the most important thing we need to know is; we should love God and love others the same. All other religions agree with that one idea. Now is the time to put it into practice.
Dan Johnson January 11, 2013 at 02:58 pm
Ability to procreate has never been a requirement of US law. People who are too old or otherwise sterile or simply choose not to have children, get married every day. This is one example of why no religious group, person, or text should determine the law for everyone else, especially when that belief is used to refuse to treat others the way you would yourself.
Dan Johnson January 11, 2013 at 03:08 pm
There is no reason to believe our constitutional guarantee of freedom of speech will change when we treat everyone equally under the law, including the laws of marriage. Hate crimes are not thought or speech crimes, but simply enhancements of crimes already on the books, based on motivation. Speech may or may not reveal the motivation for the crime, but the words alone are not a crime in the US. This is simply fear mongering to justify ignoring the Golden Rule.
Dan Johnson January 11, 2013 at 03:13 pm
And in Africa, those religious beliefs are being used to justify imprisonment, torture, and death for simply being a gay person.
Dan Johnson January 11, 2013 at 03:30 pm
While there are various explanations of natural law, one of the tenets that appears throughout the various versions, is the ethic of reciprocity and equality. That "no man require to reserve to himself any right, which he is not content should be reserved to every one of the rest".
Equal treatment of "all persons" under the law is also a promise of our founding doucments as well as a requirement of our constitution. There is no valid legal justification for refusing to treat others as you would yourself under the law.
Matt January 11, 2013 at 03:37 pm
You are right Dan about what Jesus said about love. If we sum up the Gospel in one word it is love. The Church does not discriminate against homosexuals. We addressed those issues in posts above. The issue being debated is whether or not the Cardinal has the right and or obligation to ask the faithful to contact their legislators to voice the Church's opposition to redefining marriage. There has been some debate about the theology of the body. Something common within the Catholic Church is that so many of us are not properly educated in the teachings of the Church which leads too all kinds of misunderstandings of Truth. Objective versus subjective truth, etc. I am not a sociologist so I cannot speak with any knowledge of the human aspect of sociology. However, I do know something about moral theology, theology of the body, as well as a bit of canon law. I also know that the Church does not dehumanize homosexuals, anymore then She dehumanizes hetero's having premarital sex. Homosexual sex and premarital sex are wrong for the very same reason.
IMHO January 11, 2013 at 03:44 pm
So why doesn't the Cardinal write a letter to his followers encouraging them to contact their elected officials demanding laws against pre-marital sex? Did I miss that memo?
IMHO January 11, 2013 at 03:50 pm
No one is trying to redefine marriage within the Church. Why do you keep skipping over that point? The Church does not make civil law in this country. That is called a theocracy, you know, like they have in Iran.
Matt January 11, 2013 at 04:05 pm
Right, which is why I am for equality under the law. I am for my cousin having the same legal right with his lover as I have with my wife. But not if it depends on redefining marriage under the law. Legal unions are not the same as redefining the meaning of marriage.
Jim January 11, 2013 at 04:10 pm
One comforting aspect of our current declining culture is that reality will manifest itself regardless of what laws or rules are put into place. Human nature will not change soon. "marriage" was licensed first just after THe Civil War when mixed racial unions were thought to be matters to require licensing. Before that it was all common law sometimes blessed by a church sometimes not. When "marriage" is redefined in whatever way becomes undesirable or somewhat of a social downer, people will define "marriage" in thier own way maybe as "committed union with legal implications with or without religious sanction" or perhaps as a "social and financial partnership" or some other way which will satisfy the participants. When "marriage" is no longer defines as a union between a man and a woman, then a union between a man and a woman will be called somrthing else. People will adjust to changes in ways which are not entirely predicable, sometimes good sometimes not so good.
Dan Johnson January 11, 2013 at 04:13 pm
Unfortunately, by saying all relationships that include a full expression of love are wrong for gay people, the Church does stigmatize and dehumanize all gay people. This becomes even more severe when they enshrine that belief in the law.
The difference with pre-marital sex is, they have a choice not allowed for gay people. They can get married, while equal treatment for gay people is denied. The only choice they allow for gay people is to live a life of denial of their humanity, including denial of what for many is the most important relationship a person can have with another human. This refusal to treat others as you would yourself under the law, says gay people are not worthy of equal treatment. This is stigmatizing and dehumanizing. It results in harm in a wide variety of ways, including needless suffering and death.
Dan Johnson January 11, 2013 at 04:20 pm
It should also be pointed out, allowing gay people to participate under the laws currently in effect for straight people, does not "redefine" marriage for straight people. Their marriages are not changed in any way. All of the same laws and rules remain in full force and effect. The only change is in who can participate, not what marriage is.
Dan Johnson January 11, 2013 at 04:36 pm
Matt. Using your reasoning, you must believe all marriages should be annulled when people reach the age they can no longer procreate. This would also require annulment if one party goes to prison or is involved in an accident that leaves them unable to have sex.
Dan Johnson January 11, 2013 at 04:40 pm
There is no redefinition beyond who can participate. The "what" remains the same.
Dan Johnson January 11, 2013 at 05:08 pm
I doubt many people will want a new term to describe their marriage. Despite the pejorative terminology, treating all persons equally under the law as required by the constitution is not an example of a "declining culture."
“Gay marriage would be a victory for the worthy ideas of tolerance and inclusion. It would likely decrease the number of those in society who tend to be viewed warily as ‘other’ and increase the number who are accepted as part of ‘us.’ In that respect, gay marriage would be a victory for, and another key expansion of, the American idea.” (Conservative, anti-marriage equality director of the Institute for American Values, David Blankenhorn, testimony in support of Prop 8.)
Dan Johnson January 11, 2013 at 05:27 pm
And Jesus is quite clear on divorce and remarriage, while he never said anything against gay people. Yet we don't see the Church trying to impose that belief through the law. They grant "annulments". A friend's husband had their marriage annulled after 15 years and three children, so he could marry the woman with whom he had been cheating for several years. Yet they want to prevent two gay people who have been together for 50 years from having equal treatment under the law.
Mary L. Ballard, MD January 13, 2013 at 02:24 am
Thank you Jennifer. I live in the Pacific Northwest now and write blogs for enumclaw.patch.com. I grew up in Skokie and attended St. Peter's Catholic Elementary School. Since then I graduated from the University of Notre Dame and eventually became a doctor. I now have a private medical practice in our small town. As you know, Washington state just easily passed their same-sex marriage bill. I was in 100% support of the initiative and felt like many that it was "about time." Here in Washington, we hope to be a model for the rest of the country of respecting people's right to be who they are. Your article is well written and comes from the heart. It is not disrespectful twoards Cardinal George in any way. Keep writing, you have a lot to say and you have a lot of people who want to listen!
Joan Kilpatrick, Phd January 14, 2013 at 03:47 pm
Mary,
Like you I went through 18+ years of Catholic schooling. My education includes Phds in Physics and Biomedical Engineering. Currently I am working on my law degree and hope to one day serve our country and our society as a Federal Judge. After reading your your post, I re-read Jennifer's letter and do not understand how you came to the conclusion that she did not disrespect the Cardinal. Her language is clearly condescending and aggressive in nature.
Jennifer Wilson January 14, 2013 at 08:52 pm
Joan Kilpatrick, PhD I certainly did not intend to be disrespectful or condescending (certainly no more than one who trots out her degrees and lofty ambitions in a conversation they have no bearing on). Nor do I feel my tone was "aggressive". I was assertive. I said not one thing I wouldn't personally say to Cardinal George if given the opportunity. I stand behind my statements. If you are looking for disrespect, I point you to the "good Catholics" who called me dumb, a heretic, a sinner and invited me to leave my faith.
Dan Johnson January 15, 2013 at 02:02 am
JP. Whether you consider the letter respectful or not, surely you recognize the Cardinal is not being respectful of the lives of millions of gay people when he calls for using to law to harm them and their families through denial of equal treatment under the law.
As someone who hopes to be a judge, would you use your religious beliefs to deny equal treatment as promised in our founding documents and required by the constitution, or would you uphold the spirit of equal treatment for "all persons" as required by the 5th and 14th amendments of the constitution?
Dan Johnson January 15, 2013 at 02:12 am
Jennifer. I neglected to thank you for standing up for equal rights and for speaking out against the harmful actions of a very powerful man representing a very powerful institution. Your brave efforts are greatly appreciated by many, including those who are directly harmed by denial of equal treatment under the law, those who care about them, and those who care about the belief we should treat others as we would ourselves under the law. Don't let the irrational prejudice get you down. We have come a long way, and now, the majority of fair minded people support full legal equality.
Dan Johnson January 15, 2013 at 02:18 am
Refusing to treat others as you would yourself under the law, causes harm in a wide variety of ways. You can find bible verses to support genocide, slavery, apartheid, segregation, crusades, inquisitions, and many other atrocities. They are currently being used to dehumanize and demonize gay people, even though there is no rational, reasonable, or scientific reason to treat gay people differently than you would want to be treated.
The only excuse for prejudice and discrimination remains in a few questionable religious texts, which have been misinterpreted and mistranslated over time, and which are contradicted by other verses including the most important one according to Jesus, namely that you love God and love others the same. Accepting alternate interpretations of those few verses that seem to condemn same sex love does not require abandoning your religious beliefs, only expanding them to include the idea that God created all things, including gay people, and He wants you to love them as you love Him, not judge and harm them.
Matt January 15, 2013 at 12:32 pm
Jennifer, I have too say, I NEVER saw anything that was condescending or aggressive in tone. Even though we dissagree on whether or not the Cardinal has the right and obligation to ask the faithful to contact our legislatures, I have not seen anything from you that would be considered arrogant or aggressive. Most of us had a very good discussion. There have been some people who have been aggressive. I enjoy our discussion. Even though we have agrued over some of the issues we have gone over, and probably will continue, I have to stick up for you here. You have not been a bully in anyway. You have not been aggressive, or condescending. I think His Emminence, Cardinal George would agree and even have welcomed this conversation and agruments on this blog. So lets keep going...
Mary J February 3, 2013 at 06:09 pm
Jenifer, I am south of you in Illinois but your words reflected how I feel. Thank you for having the courage and words to state what other Catholics feel. I hope you do not mind but I shared this on fb.
Melanie February 18, 2013 at 07:05 pm
Thank you Jennifer, for expressing so well what so many of us believe.

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from Evanston Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something
Regional Spelling Bee winners.
Gretchen Brewster June 19, 2013 at 10:34 am
I believe that you have the names of the winner reversed. Bruce Hirsch is on the front left.Read More Gretchen Brewster
Lisa S. June 12, 2013 at 04:52 pm
Can you post the contact information so we can make reservations? Also, any idea what the glutenRead More free menu will be or is it a surprise?
Festus McMoron June 12, 2013 at 04:09 pm
diane, i'm sick of all you peoples whining and crying that blacks are picked on. there are manyRead More great black families in evanston. you lump every black into one group. we want the gangbanger trouble-making thug out of evanston. do you feel safe living here. i don't step 2 feet outside my home without locking it. after this knifing incident, i'll have my windows rolled up and car doors locked when i see a black male. the thugs have ruined it for all the good ones.
Jordan S. Zoot June 13, 2013 at 02:07 pm
Festus....being a bigot and scared of your shadow doesn't accomplish anything....that's why theRead More newly passed concealed carry law ought help....dude pulls a knife he gets peekaboo at the barrel of a .45 and lets see how things turn out....I get cut and his pumpkin implodes......better guess he turns tail and runs...reenforcing the rule that you don't win when you bring a knife to a gun fight
Patch reinstates deleted accounts! June 12, 2013 at 02:48 pm
What? Based on your spelling, grammar & punctuation, are you old enough to be posting on Patch?Read More Just wondering...
Procrustes' Foil June 12, 2013 at 02:57 pm
You're right, Patch. This post is barely literate.
Jordan S. Zoot June 13, 2013 at 08:59 am
The writer of the post is illiterate....that is clear. The Evanston Police, in general, do a greatRead More job in this community. There ought be a new category created specifically for membership in a gang that has demonstrated committed acts of violence...it goes back to the first smart thing which Mark Kirk ever said which was locking up each and every one of the 18.5K members of the Gangster Disciples. The second thing that can be done is that each and every law abiding Evanston resident that is legally able to do so should avail themselves of the right to obtain a new Illinois Concealed Carry Permit for a handgun. An armed society is a polite society.
Brooke Roothaan June 11, 2013 at 01:19 pm
Starting June 20th, 2013 at 7pm. All welcome.
Ellen robinson June 14, 2013 at 06:31 pm
I would like to come but I am confused. It says Wednesday, but the 20th is Thursday. Which day isRead More it?
Brooke Roothaan June 15, 2013 at 10:52 pm
Thursday. Whoops. Thanks for catching this!
Ignatius Williams June 9, 2013 at 11:30 am
This post is borderline-illiterate. You also fail to say where these shows are going to be held.
Phil McGovern June 9, 2013 at 01:24 pm
thanks for the heads up. I thought most people would simply click on the link. little did I know....
Phil McGovern June 9, 2013 at 01:29 pm
Thanks for the heads up. Little did I know. Thought most people would simply click on the link !