“It’s all about the human person…”

Old news, yet eerily relevant.

Overruling [a parish priest], _________B__________ has permitted a homosexual in a registered domestic partnership to serve on a parish council.

… [The] parish priest [X] of a small parish in the archdiocese, had refused to allow _________Z_________ to serve on the council. _________Z_________ , who is disabled, had obtained 96 out of 142 votes in a recent parish council election.

The archdiocese had initially backed _______X_______, releasing a statement that living in a domestic partnership precludes one from serving on a parish council.

_________B__________ said that he had initially intended to uphold [X’s] decision–but then, he said, “I ask myself in these situations: How did Jesus act? He first saw the human being.”

Calling his decision “a decision for human beings,” [B] recounted that he invited _________Z_________ and his partner to lunch and understood “why the community had given him the most votes, because he is really impressive.

“This man is at the right place,” [B] said of [Z].

Stay tuned.

Advertisements

About The Codgitator (a cadgertator)

Catholic convert. Quasi-Zorbatic. Freelance interpreter, translator, and web marketer. Former ESL teacher in Taiwan (2003-2012) and former public high school teacher (2012-2014). Married father of three. Multilingual, would-be scholar, and fairly consistent fitness monkey. My research interests include: the interface of religion and science, the history and philosophy of science and technology, ancient and medieval philosophy, and cognitive neuroscience. Please pray for me.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to “It’s all about the human person…”

  1. Crude says:

    See, that’s a different story. I know which Cardinal did that, and I think it was utterly wrong.

    There’s a big gulf between ‘We should not shun sinners in dialogue’, and ‘We should not keep sinners from being part of the community’, and still another huge gulf between that and ‘We should allow people in an openly sinful relationship take a leadership position in the local church because they are popular’.

    Now, I could be wrong. If this is something like, ‘They’re celibate, they have no sex, it’s a “gay couple” but it’s completely nonsexual, nor are they pro-gay-marriage or pro-sodomy’, then okay. But that’s not what it was reported as.

  2. I’m just interested in the ripple effects. We’ve got German bishops bucking against the strictures on remarriage and communion, all in the name of considering “the human person,” so I wouldn’t be surprised if we see more such “pastoral” tactics as Schoenborn practiced. Indeed, I took down the “Weather Update” from yesterday and will be posting a greatly expanded version of it in order to explore this ascendant “human” fixation in Catholic spirituality. Something kept bothering me about the Pope’s message to those nuns, and I finally figured out what it was.

  3. Pingback: So, let me get this straight… | FideCogitActio : "Omnis per gratiam" fidescogitactio @ gmail . com

Be kind, be (relatively) brief, be clear...

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s