Comments on: Disturbing news about marriage, ordaining three Jesuit priests and praying the rosary at the Fatima Shrine

By: Karen

Karen — Fri, 13 Jul 2007 17:33:37 +0000

Thank you so much for the time and effort you put into this gorgeous blog. It is a treasure. I especially enjoyed your homily to the newly ordained Jesuits. I have studied and written about the Jesuits for almost two decades and I have many dear Jesuit friends, and I often feel the order — as much as I love it — needs to be reminded of St. Ignatius’ original intentions and his devotion to the Church. You did that with great skill and compassion, and then tossed in a little Pedro Arrupe for good measure. The homily was pragmatic and uplifting and I am very grateful that you shared it with us.

By: GB

GB — Fri, 22 Jun 2007 18:24:03 +0000

Cardinal sean, After reading this thread, I’m unsure whether to be more distressed over the fact that the MA Legislature is treating your state like Communist China (“No, the people aren’t allowed to vote”) OR the fact that people in your own diocese are so disrepectful of you & your office in their comments! I promise, if the Holy Father will transfer you to our diocese, the rhetoric won’t be that offensive.

By: Kenny

Kenny — Fri, 22 Jun 2007 12:29:04 +0000

Dear Cardinal Sean,

I am Catholic writing from Sri Lanka. By chance, I bounced into your site (Thank God I did) and find it very very interesting to read your posts. It is a great way to connect with the young people, and I salute your efforts in reaching the flock through such communication.

I wish and pray that most Chief Shepard�s in Dioceses across globe reach out to the young flock through such mediums and with such enthusiasm.

Please keep up the good work and God Bless you in all your efforts.

Kenny

By: Mary Jo Rabe

Mary Jo Rabe — Thu, 21 Jun 2007 08:31:06 +0000

How do you reconcile your support of marriage with the reputation the Archdiocese of Boston has for granting swift annulments to the rich and powerful (see news of the Vatican’s overturning the annulment of Joseph P. Kennedy and subsequent commentary in newspapers and online news sources)?

By: Kelly Clark

Kelly Clark — Thu, 21 Jun 2007 02:24:44 +0000

The Massachusetts Constitution protects against the tyranny of the majority.

It certainly does. So does the Catholic Church.

We’re on opposite sides of the pole here, David, but one thing I do agree with you on…this is not a “let the people vote” issue.

Nor, if I may add, is it a “court” issue. (Remember Dred Scott?)

Nope. This is a moral issue, plain and simple. The Church tells us that homosexual activity is wrong. The Holy Spirit, we believe, moves the Church.

I ask you to please reread your letter with the eyes and ears of those who after last week�s vote, feel a greater safety and protection for themselves, their family members and strangers they do not even know.

“Safety and protection?” In this world, perhaps. But it’s a false sense of security.

There’s a grave, I believe, danger in “feeling” safe and protected and actually being safe and protected. It is not the responsibility of our bishops to make sure their sheep “feel” good.

It is, on the other hand, their duty to insure that they are protected from sin, and that the faithful are afforded every opportunity to share in the Eternal Kingdom of Heaven.

“Letting the people vote” doesn’t cut it. Identifying, with love and compassion, sin? That comes a heck of a lot closer.

May God bless you.

By: David O'Malley

David O'Malley — Wed, 20 Jun 2007 22:09:03 +0000

Greetings and Peace to you Cardinal O’Malley,
I pray for your witness of the Gospel of Christ. My heart is broken by the tone of your recent letter regarding the outcome of the constitutional convention and the marriage amendment. Though I do not believe it is your intention, I believe your letter fosters spiritual degradation. It seems to imply that the constitutional process was short circuited and that legislators did not vote their consciences. Your words seem to unfairly judge members of the legislature who prayerfully and thoughtfully considered the significance of their vote in representing their constituents and the commonwealth. While we may or may not agree with a legislator’s vote, can’t we believe that many did do their head, heart and homework? The Massachusetts Constitution protects against the tyranny of the majority. It also provides for a representative governmental process which was followed. Can we imagine if the issues of slavery, school desegregation, women’s suffrage, rights of the disabled, interracial/interreligious marriages and religious establishment had been put to a public vote of all citizens in years past? What would our society look like? Some might have preferred the continued privilege and advantage of those who were white, wealthy, able-bodied, Protestant Christian, English or male. Those of us with Catholic heritage might particularly be grateful for our constitutional process given the history of the commonwealth and country which were particularly anti-Catholic. The Holy Spirit moves in history in ways that may not be what we expect or how the majority would vote. Is it possible that the Holy Spirit is at work in this process and that God’s justice is being worked out? Are we willing to witness and support the discrimination against the protection of those who follow us? Do we want a precedent where our constitution excludes the protection of individuals and groups? As a member of a family which includes people of many faiths, races and religions including the Roman Catholic faith, I pray that we will consider carefully how our positions and words serve to unite or divide all the people of God. I ask you to please reread your letter with the eyes and ears of those who after last week’s vote, feel a greater safety and protection for themselves, their family members and strangers they do not even know. Please reconsider the effect of your letter on individuals, families, the Church and our larger community. I appreciate your prayerful listening and continued dialogue with those of us who may prayerfully disagree on this issue.

By: Joan L.

Joan L. — Wed, 20 Jun 2007 18:40:08 +0000

Thank you again for your openness about your life and your ministry. You are truly a holy man – and a pretty neat guy! I love your opinion on the ads for the Jesuits. I agree with you and think the ad from the movie, The Mission, is closer to the truly radical call priests are called to. I think a guy in a sportshirt with good teeth with a lukewarm question is sort of like saying, this is just another option to consider, rather than the heroic nature of what the call to the priesthood is.

By: B

Wed, 20 Jun 2007 02:24:49 +0000

Your Eminence,

It is time to remilitarize the knights of Malta and protect the Assyrian Catholics in Iraq. The Holy Father, both John Paul the Great and Benedict have spoken against this war, it is not their doing, but we should protect our brothers and sisters in Iraq now that it has started.

By: Rev. Austin Fleming

Rev. Austin Fleming — Tue, 19 Jun 2007 19:58:43 +0000

While I’m glad that a variety of opinions can be posted in Cardinal Sean’s combox, I find the comments in no. 7 above to be ad hominem and disrespectful. It would be impossible to know how many thousands of lives have been blessed by Fr. Ron Coyne’s ministry over the past 34 years. I cannot claim to be completely objective here: Ron Coyne is my ordination classmate. But what I may lack in objectivity is compensated for by knowledge of this man’s priestly integrity.

By: Gerald

Gerald — Tue, 19 Jun 2007 13:38:55 +0000

I was so happy to read in the Pilot recently that Fr. David Shoemaker was going to preach at Fr. Blaney’s first Mass. I understand he has been out on a medical leave and am happy that he is back in ministry. We missed him and we need him and we hope he is fully recovered. Where is he assigned now? God bless you.

By: Margaret

Margaret — Mon, 18 Jun 2007 15:57:07 +0000

Dear Cardinal Sean,
Thank you for your comments on marriage. But, having Peter Meade on an archdiocesan advisory council makes it all the more confusing as to the importance you feel we should place on the matter.
Sincerely,
Margaret

By: Shirley St.John

Shirley St.John — Sun, 17 Jun 2007 14:14:41 +0000

Dear Cardinal Sean, First, allow me to thank you for your prayers on my behalf which I requested about 2 weeks ago. They worked, and I made it thru surgery just fine. I am home recuperating now. I am also sorry the legislation did not go forward for us to vote on same sex marriage in the fall. I am completely in favor of one man , one woman make a marriage. We will keep on trying! Take care and God Bless, Shirley

By: Nathan

Nathan — Sun, 17 Jun 2007 06:38:04 +0000

Your Eminence,

While I find your blog to be excellent each and every week, I found your homily to the new Jesuit priests to be outstanding! Truly inspirational even for a lay person.

Last week you said you would take a question, so here’s an easy one: given that it’s summer and most all of us plan get-aways, do you ever have time to vacation? Since you have started your blog in Septemeber, I don’t recall one mention of you taking a brief break from your duties. I know you deserve one! Please allow me to suggest a visit to Kansas.

Thank you for your blog, Cardinal Sean, and I look forward to reading more from here in Wichita.

By: Freddy

Freddy — Sun, 17 Jun 2007 01:23:52 +0000

Cardinal Sean,
I’m sorry that the marriage amendment failed this time. We’ll have to work harder next time we get an opportunity.
But it’s hard to talk about integrity in a Sacrament when I read in the Pilot that Father Ron Coyne has once again been put in charge of a Parish in the diocese. How can we talk about integrity when you yourself allow someone so opposed to the Church lead a parish? His presence in my town of Weymouth has caused damage that will take generations to overcome. It seems that there needs to be some integrity in the decision making of the Archdiocese of Boston if we can ever have the ability to lead in other areas. Clearly, there is a lack of thoughtfulness in whatever process brought Father Coyne back to a Parish. I find it harder and harder to take a stand when our own leadership seems afraid to run their own house.

By: Mary

Mary — Sun, 17 Jun 2007 00:26:49 +0000

Dear Cardinal Sean, I applaud your comments on marriage. I was disturbed to see Peter Meade, who is on an archdiocesan advisory council, publish an editorial in the Boston Herald (along with his wife) that totally contradicts Catholic teaching on this essential matter.

By: Edwin Edward

Edwin Edward — Sat, 16 Jun 2007 20:22:26 +0000

His name will be glorified.

By: Jennifer

Jennifer — Sat, 16 Jun 2007 15:51:08 +0000

It’s heartbreaking, both for the Sanctity of Marriage and for Democracy, that a few folks would stop such a vote from happening.

God Bless you in your efforts! You’re an inspiration, even to those all the way in Dallas, TX

By: md

md — Sat, 16 Jun 2007 15:08:16 +0000

“Extreme individualism and pressure tactics engineered to insure that the will of the people would not prevail.”

Whether it’s one person or a people, it’s mind-boggling, isn’t it?

I guess our lives are a journey that can at times lead in unexpected directions, such can also be the case with our experiences in the Church. What is constant and unchanging in the midst of all our experiences is the presence of Jesus Christ and his promise to be with us always.

I will continue my efforts to defend the integrity of marriage as the union between one man and one woman

May God’s blessings be upon you…

By: BCatholic

BCatholic — Sat, 16 Jun 2007 14:00:09 +0000

8? Cardinal Sean, it was more like 13…Father Tony and I were trying to count after the event…it truly was beautiful

1. English
2. French
3. Spanish
4. Portuguese
5. Italian
6. Latin
7. Creole
8. Swahili
9. A Chinese language
10. Vietnamese
11/12 Two different Indian languages
13. Gaelic

By: Cyphase

Cyphase — Sat, 16 Jun 2007 08:01:54 +0000

I haven’t read your entire post, just the first 2 paragraphs about the gay marriage vote. I want to ask you, as a Cardinal of the Catholic Church.. why do you want the government to be involved in marriage at all? You obviously believe that marriage is a sacred institution. Shouldn’t marriage be a contract between the people being married and God? Why do you want this group of strangers called government to be a party to this contract? Why should people have to (depending on the state) pay a fee/take a class/etc to marry each other? And what if a group of gay people wanted to open “The Church of the Gays” and wanted to have a ceremony called a wedding where people exchange rings and are given a certificate showing that this gay church approves their marriage? Do you want to ban that?

I support you’re right, as the Catholic Church, as a Cardinal, as a person, to not associate yourself in anyway with gay people. But I also believe that the government shouldn’t be involved in marriage in any way. Do you? If so, why?