Letters to the Editor

Your views in 200 words or less

MARRIAGE: Archbishop doing the Vatican’s bidding

Letter by Genny Odegard, Puyallup on April 20, 2012 at 4:35 pm with 23 Comments »
April 23, 2012 10:15 am

Re: “Catholic leader gets it wrong” (letter, 4-18).

As a very senior citizen and lifelong Catholic, I learned from an early age that the church governs only in a matter of faith and morals. When the letter writer speaks of the Seattle archbishop urging Catholics to vote against same-sex marriage, this was not just the position of the archbishop but the position of the Vatican.

Signing the Referendum 74 petition would not make me homophobic. I have a good friend who is a lesbian, and I would defend her right to choose whomever she pleases to make life-and-death decisions for her.

If the letter writer wants to pick and choose certain tenets of his faith, he should consider a different faith community.

Leave a comment Comments → 23
  1. aislander says:

    Who chose the headline for this letter? I’m sure it wasn’t the letter’s author.

    Some editorial commentary on the part of the Trib’s staff?

  2. Genny – as a lifelong Catholic you should be aware of the Church’s teaching on following your personal conscience. The Catholic Church has always held to the primacy of conscience and taught that individuals must follow their consciences even when they are wrong. (Vatican II, On Religious Liberty (1965), §2)

    Essentially, in order to be a good Catholic you MUST pick and choose certain tenets of the Church’s teachings IF you have given significant attention and consideration to those teachings and still concluded that to not follow them fulfills the demand of one’s conscience.

  3. Separation of church and state is essential to keep this nation free.

  4. cadana1961 says:

    “Signing the Referendum 74 petition would not make me homophobic. I have a good friend who is a lesbian, and I would defend her right to choose whomever she pleases to make life-and-death decisions for her.”

    With all due respect, How would signing Ref 74 petition NOT make you homophobic? Your example (my good friend who is a lesbian) truly doesn’t support your reasoning for signing Ref 74 … Don’t you believe that Marriage is more than life and death decisions – it’s finding a soulmate, someone you want to share life with? Don’t simplify it to only gender restrictions and end of life decisions …

    Unfortunately, the church isn’t the subject matter expert of morals and faith, and recent examples of swayed individuals may be pulled directly from the headlines … Personally, I believe it’s time to TAX the church – all of them …

  5. Your pedophile priest is against same sex marriage.

  6. LornaDoone says:

    kluwer – isn’t it interesting how the same church that is so diameterically opposed to gay marriage provided a safe haven for pedophiliacs to avoid the law?

    I’d love to see what the “lifelong Catholics” think should be done in terms of that situation. Usually people who assist criminals in avoiding apprehension are charged with a crime. We’re still waiting for the Pope to be prosecuted.

  7. RLangdon says:

    beerBoy, could you please educate your friend LornaDoone about The Catholic Church and it’s pedophilia issues as you did philichi in the previous topic? Lorna seems as ignorant of the subject matter as you have observed philichi to be.

  8. Here are the questions I would like to ask Genny. By her letter, I am really not sure how she woud respond.

    1. Is it OK for the Vatican to dictate to its members how to vote on secular issues, like whether marriage is legal or not?
    (I think it is fine for the Vatican to tell its churches not to marry people they don’t believe should be married and even tell people they are not members in good standing if they violate these rules. But….)

    2. Should the Vatican control what non church members are able to do in a free society?

    (By signing the petition and voting against gay marriage and doing it based on Vatican orders instead of what is best for US and Washington citizens and the Constitution, then isn’t that exerting control over non-members’ rights?)

    3. You say your lesbian friend has a “right to choose”, but isn’t a vote against gay marriage denying that right to choose?

  9. LornaDoone says:

    Ah yes, the old passive agressive approach.

  10. LornaDoone says:

    oops…typo….aggressive.

    We must be accurate!

  11. LornaDoone says:

    About all I need to know is right here:

    In addition to cases of abuse, much of the scandal has focused around members of the Catholic hierarchy who did not report abuse allegations to the civil authorities. In many cases they reassigned those accused to other locations where they continued to have contact with minors.[3] In defending their actions, some bishops and psychiatrists contended that the prevailing psychology of the times suggested that people could be cured of such behavior through counseling.[4][5] Members of the church hierarchy have argued that media coverage has been excessive.[6] In response to the widening scandal, Pope John Paul II emphasized the spiritual nature of the offenses. He declared in 2001 that “a sin against the Sixth Commandment of the Decalogue by a cleric with a minor under 18 years of age is to be considered a grave sin, or delictum gravius.”[7] With the approval of the Vatican, the hierarchy of the church in the United States said that it instituted reforms to prevent future abuse including requiring background checks for Church employees and volunteers, while opposing extensions of the statutes of limitations in sex abuse cases.[8]

  12. In August Pope Benedict was personally accused in a lawsuit of conspiring to cover up the molestation of three boys in Texas by Juan Carlos Patino-Arango in Archdiocese of Galveston-Houston. He sought and obtained immunity from prosecution as head of state of the Holy See.[101] Some have claimed that this immunity was granted after intervention by then US President George W. Bush.[102] The Department of State “recognize[d] and allow[ed] the immunity of Pope Benedict XVI from this suit.”

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_sex_abuse_cases#cite_note-AP_immunity-100

  13. Then Bishop Roger Mahony who was the guy in charge when known child rapist Oliver O’Grady was reassigned to several different California parishes to prey on more children in Mahony’s diocese. Mahony was promoted to Cardinal.

  14. Bishop Robert W. Finn of Kansas City-St. Joseph has agreed to meet monthly for the next five years with a county prosecutor to avoid a possible criminal misdemeanor indictment for failing to report a priest suspected of child abuse.

    http://catholicreview.org/article/work/law-secular/bishop-finn-avoids-indictment-signs-agreement-with-county-prosecutor

    There are many more but, if these don’t convince you, more will just be a waste of time.

  15. While the Archbishop is following the party line, he is violating American Law in doing so.

    “a good friend who is a lesbian” – that used to be ‘a good friend who is black’ – and it rings as false today as it did back then.

    The question of who has the authority to hold court on priests accused of secular crimes goes back at least to the reign of Henry II (1154 – 1189).

    For those who do not remember the 1960 Presidential Election, the republicans raised the issure that if JFK were elected he would govern in accordance with dictates from the Pope.

  16. aislander says:

    beerBoy: Italy doesn’t have a First Amendment. Taxing a church is limiting free exercise. I know that because the taxes I pay limit my ability to fully exercise the benefits of the money I make…

  17. and we all know you think your words are holy scripture….

  18. “Taxing a church is limiting free exercise. I know that because the taxes I pay limit my ability to fully exercise the benefits of the money I make…”

    Dumbest statement ever written thus far…..

  19. Dumbest statement ever written thus far…..

    ….on this thread, but not on this subject.

  20. aislander says:

    Sumone always claims sarcasm when caught in a inanity, but doesn’t recognize a sardonic comment when it actually exists.

    I would have expected better from you, beers…

  21. I base my reaction to posts by the previous output of the author. Given the content of your previous posts I had no way of knowing that you meant that sarcastically.

*
We welcome comments. Please keep them civil, short and to the point. ALL CAPS, spam, obscene, profane, abusive and off topic comments will be deleted. Repeat offenders will be blocked. Thanks for taking part and abiding by these simple rules.

JavaScript is required to post comments.

Follow the comments on this post with RSS 2.0