Cardinal George explains how gay marriage is like Sharia Law




A 2014 column by Cardinal George has resurfaced, referring to gay marriage as a form of “Sharia Law.”

Cardinal George in 2014 explained that the gay marriage movement was similar to Sharia Law in some respects. The comparison is raised by the fact that gay marriage has been pushed by secular institutions. That pushing is similar to forced religious indoctrination.

Anyone who voices opposition to gay marriage risks shunning and other penalties. Some business owners have been driven out of business because they dared to speak their minds. Public servants have been subjected to harassment and even court proceedings on account of their religious objections.

The state is pushing a fundamentalist acceptance of gay marriage, allowing no dissent, no room for individual thought. This is similar to how Christians and Jews are persecuted in fundamentalist Islamic nations.

Cardinal George published his comments on September 7, 2014. Read them below and see how much has come to pass in just a few years’ time.

Once upon a time there was a church founded on God’s entering into human history in order to give humanity a path to eternal life and happiness with him. The Savior that God sent, his only-begotten Son, did not write a book but founded a community, a church, upon the witness and ministry of twelve apostles. He sent this church the gift of the Holy Spirit, the spirit of love between Father and Son, the Spirit of the truth that God had revealed about himself and humanity by breaking into the history of human sinfulness.

This church, a hierarchical communion, continued through history, living among different peoples and cultures, filled with sinners, but always guided in the essentials of her life and teaching by the Holy Spirit. She called herself “Catholic” because her purpose was to preach a universal faith and a universal morality, encompassing all peoples and cultures. This claim often invited conflict with the ruling classes of many countries. About 1,800 years into her often stormy history, this church found herself as a very small group in a new country in Eastern North America that promised to respect all religions because the State would not be confessional; it would not try to play the role of a religion.

This church knew that it was far from socially acceptable in this new country. One of the reasons the country was established was to protest the king of England’s permitting the public celebration of the Catholic Mass on the soil of the British Empire in the newly conquered Catholic territories of Canada. He had betrayed his coronation oath to combat Catholicism, defined as “America’s greatest enemy,” and protect Protestantism, bringing the pure religion of the colonists into danger and giving them the moral right to revolt and reject his rule.

Nonetheless, many Catholics in the American colonies thought their life might be better in the new country than under a regime whose ruling class had penalized and persecuted them since the mid-16th century. They made this new country their own and served her loyally. The social history was often contentious, but the State basically kept its promise to protect all religions and not become a rival to them, a fake church. Until recent years.

There was always a quasi-religious element in the public creed of the country. It lived off the myth of human progress, which had little place for dependence on divine providence. It tended to exploit the religiosity of the ordinary people by using religious language to co-opt them into the purposes of the ruling class. Forms of anti-Catholicism were part of its social DNA. It had encouraged its citizens to think of themselves as the creators of world history and the managers of nature, so that no source of truth outside of themselves needed to be consulted to check their collective purposes and desires. But it had never explicitly taken upon itself the mantle of a religion and officially told its citizens what they must personally think or what “values” they must personalize in order to deserve to be part of the country. Until recent years.

In recent years, society has brought social and legislative approval to all types of sexual relationships that used to be considered “sinful.” Since the biblical vision of what it means to be human tells us that not every friendship or love can be expressed in sexual relations, the church’s teaching on these issues is now evidence of intolerance for what the civil law upholds and even imposes. What was once a request to live and let live has now become a demand for approval. The “ruling class,” those who shape public opinion in politics, in education, in communications, in entertainment, is using the civil law to impose its own form of morality on everyone. We are told that, even in marriage itself, there is no difference between men and women, although nature and our very bodies clearly evidence that men and women are not interchangeable at will in forming a family. Nevertheless, those who do not conform to the official religion, we are warned, place their citizenship in danger.

When the recent case about religious objection to one provision of the Health Care Act was decided against the State religion, the Huffington Post (June 30, 2014) raised “concerns about the compatibility between being a Catholic and being a good citizen.” This is not the voice of the nativists who first fought against Catholic immigration in the 1830s. Nor is it the voice of those who burned convents and churches in Boston and Philadelphia a decade later. Neither is it the voice of the Know-Nothing Party of the 1840s and 1850s, nor of the Ku Klux Klan, which burned crosses before Catholic churches in the Midwest after the civil war. It is a voice more sophisticated than that of the American Protective Association, whose members promised never to vote for a Catholic for public office. This is, rather, the selfrighteous voice of some members of the American establishment today who regard themselves as “progressive” and “enlightened.”

The inevitable result is a crisis of belief for many Catholics. Throughout history, when Catholics and other believers in revealed religion have been forced to choose between being taught by God or instructed by politicians, professors, editors of major newspapers and entertainers, many have opted to go along with the powers that be. This reduces a great tension in their lives, although it also brings with it the worship of a false god. It takes no moral courage to conform to government and social pressure. It takes a deep faith to “swim against the tide,” as Pope Francis recently encouraged young people to do at last summer’s World Youth Day.

Swimming against the tide means limiting one’s access to positions of prestige and power in society. It means that those who choose to live by the Catholic faith will not be welcomed as political candidates to national office, will not sit on editorial boards of major newspapers, will not be at home on most university faculties, will not have successful careers as actors and entertainers. Nor will their children, who will also be suspect. Since all public institutions, no matter who owns or operates them, will be agents of the government and conform their activities to the demands of the official religion, the practice of medicine and law will become more difficult for faithful Catholics. It already means in some States that those who run businesses must conform their activities to the official religion or be fined, as Christians and Jews are fined for their religion in countries governed by Sharia law.

A reader of the tale of two churches, an outside observer, might note that American civil law has done much to weaken and destroy what is the basic unit of every human society, the family. With the weakening of the internal restraints that healthy family life teaches, the State will need to impose more and more external restraints on everyone’s activities. An outside observer might also note that the official religion’s imposing whatever its proponents currently desire on all citizens and even on the world at large inevitably generates resentment. An outside observer might point out that class plays a large role in determining the tenets of the official State religion. “Same-sex marriage,” as a case in point, is not an issue for the poor or those on the margins of society.

How does the tale end? We don’t know. The actual situation is, of course, far more complex than a story plot, and there are many actors and characters, even among the ruling class, who do not want their beloved country to transform itself into a fake church. It would be wrong to lose hope, since there are so many good and faithful people.

Catholics do know, with the certainty of faith, that, when Christ returns in glory to judge the living and the dead, the church, in some recognizable shape or form that is both Catholic and Apostolic, will be there to meet him. There is no such divine guarantee for any country, culture or society of this or any age.

 

By Marshall Connolly (CALIFORNIA NETWORK)

 





wpsd_autopost:
1

14 comments

  1. Tom Rafferty Reply

    “gay marriage has been pushed by secular institutions. That pushing is similar to forced religious indoctrination.” WHAT??!!!

    Talk about false equivalency. Gay marriage is the result of society’s progress in understanding reality through science: we KNOW now that sex and gender are not binary, but are on continuums. What the Catholic Church is doing is forcing dogma (belief without evidence from false authority’s indoctrination) on the US’s secular, constitutional society. You ignorant, deluded folks can believe anything you wish, however, you best not force it on society as a whole.

    1. Joe Reply

      Any good Christian knows that Gay Marriage is wrong! Do you believe that the Bible is Gods Word? If so remember this, God does not bend for man, man must bend for God. For far to long the silent majority has let the vocal minority push their agenda down our throats and now that we are speaking out they are threatened. You are either a Christian and believe in God and his words in the Bible or you are not. You can’t be both!

  2. Patrick Gannon Reply

    “Cardinal George in 2014 explained that the gay marriage movement was similar to Sharia Law in some respects. The comparison is raised by the fact that gay marriage has been pushed by secular institutions. That pushing is similar to forced religious indoctrination.”
    .
    That’s ridiculous. Sharia Law is what he wants. He wants to viciously punish gay people, as Sharia Law dictates. Gay marriage is a choice; forced indoctrination by its very nature is not a choice. Children have always been forcibly indoctrinated by Catholicism and other religions. The idea that lobbying for personal freedoms and liberties for those who are victims of the Church’s prejudice and bigotry, would be equated with Sharia Law, a Bronze Age system of justice, is absurd.

    1. Ronnie Buda (@rsjb63) Reply

      You two, Tom & Patrick, are cowards. You continually troll our Catholic website to give erroneous information against Truth. I call you cowards because you prey upon good-willed devout readers on this website. If you think your information is correct, why don’t you argue with “Catholic Answers” or “Called to Communion” shows on EWTN or Catholic Channel on Sirius radio (Channel 129 & 130). They request people who are anti-Catholic to call in with their issues. You are afraid to go up against Catholic apologists/scholars that know the truth.

      1. Tom Rafferty Reply

        “- – – good-willed devout readers – – -.” No doubt. We have no ill-will towards any of you. This site makes truth claims unsupported by evidence. We are challenging the claims, not the people who hold them. Regarding why we don’t “troll” on other Catholic sites, I have done that to the point where I think I have planted the seeds of reason and skepticism. On this site, no one is really answering our questions or engaging us reasonably. I will continue comment on false claims until I think I have done what I can do to change minds. If the moderators can’t handle us, then block us.

        1. Emilie Reply

          So what the text say is wrong but you are right….easy

          1. Tom Rafferty

            The texts were written by unknown authors in an era of ignorance and fear. They are clearly humans created God. Yes, I am correct.

      2. Larry Reply

        VERY welll said Ronnie ! !
        Our family(s) agree with you
        whole heartedly. We all know
        right from wrong. Only some
        of us have the resolve needed
        to defend morality

        1. Patrick Gannon Reply

          Refute our points if you can. Calling people names… well that says more about the name-caller than the person being denigrated. Nobody ever responded here to point out why we were cowards, or to refute any points we made.
          .
          You agree with Ronnie, who has insinuated that Catholics who participate here are too stupid and ill-informed to respond to those who question the posts here. You should feel more insulted by his posts, but since you don’t, I guess that confirms that he’s right. You’re unable to respond intelligently, so you just criticize us. Very Christian of you, by the way…
          .
          You say you know right from wrong. In the Old Testament King David takes a census and for some strange reason this really gets Yahweh angry and in response he kills 70,000 completely innocent people. Is that right or wrong? Of course you’ve probably never actually read the bible, and probably have no idea of what I’m talking about – but take a few minutes to look it up. Note that the 70,000 just refers to the men killed by the pestilence sent by Yahweh. Women and children didn’t count, so the number of innocents he killed was actually much larger.

  3. CatholicsWillWin Reply

    You two, Tom & Patrick, are cowards. You continually troll our Catholic website to give erroneous information against Truth. I call you cowards because you prey upon good-willed devout readers on this website. If you think your information is correct, why don’t you take your argument to “Catholic Answers” or “Called to Communion” shows on EWTN or Catholic Channel on Sirius radio (Channel 129 & 130). They request people who are anti-Catholic to call in with their issues. You are afraid to go up against Catholic apologists/scholars that know the truth.

    1. Patrick Gannon Reply

      It occurs to me that your post is a bit demeaning to the other readers here. You insist that we should take our arguments to Answers (which I do from time to time), but in so doing, you seem to be implying that nobody contributing here is capable of responding to us. Is that your point? Are you saying nobody here is knowledgeable enough to respond? I’ve seen some reasoned responses in some other threads. I don’t think everyone here is ignorant. Do you?

  4. Ronnie Buda (@rsjb63) Reply

    You two, Tom & Patrick, are cowards. You continually troll our Catholic website to give erroneous information against Truth. I call you cowards because you prey upon good-willed devout readers on this website. If you think your information is correct, why don’t you argue with “Catholic Answers” or “Called to Communion” shows on EWTN or Catholic Channel on Sirius radio (Channel 129 & 130). They request people who are anti-Catholic to call in with their issues. You are afraid to go up against Catholic apologists/scholars that know the truth.

    1. Patrick Gannon Reply

      Ronnie do you know the definition? Coward: a person who lacks the courage to do or endure dangerous or unpleasant things.
      .
      In what way is courage lacking? It seems to me that it’s the other way around. Christians used to brag about being brave enough to go to the lions in the arena, but today they can’t even stand up to verbal/written challenges to their beliefs. I’d like to see some courage from the other side – someone willing to engage and tell us why our points are wrong.
      .
      If we’re providing “erroneous information” then why aren’t you calling us on it? In order for you to call it erroneous, you have to know that it’s wrong, so let’s hear it. I will apologize and accept blame for any erroneous information that I disseminate – and I do make a few errors from time to time. You provided no examples of erroneous information, but please do so if you can. Do some research. Prove we’re wrong! You have this magnificent tool at your fingertips; use it.
      .
      I do participate in Catholic Answers – in fact, regular author Karl Keating recently deleted 5 or 6 of my posts because I challenged him. It seemed some of the other participants were interested in what I had to say, they engaged me; he didn’t like that, so in a less than courageous manner, he deleted my posts, which was also disrespectful to the other bloggers who had engaged me. I had specifically followed the article he wrote, that I first read here, over to Answers in order to challenge him, because he raised a very intriguing and intellectual question, but it turned out that it was just “click-bait” something he included in order to draw attention to the article in order to debate a specific event rather than the more general (and more important) topic that I thought the article was about. If a subject comes up that I don’t know much about, or is interesting enough to debate with more practiced bloggers, then I go there, and sometimes learn something (usually that I was more right than I thought!). What good is it for me to go over to that site to have a more involved debate, if the people here are never going to see it? Why don’t you go there and ask for their help? Many of the articles start there, and then get posted here. You can go and see what they say and then respond to what we say here. You can even cut/paste and ask them, “How do I respond to this…” I only have so much time, and I can’t fully participate in both at the same time, as well as other sites I visit from time to time. If that makes me a coward – so be it.
      .
      Ronnie, you haven’t shown any courage in debating any points we’ve raised – you defaulted to personal attacks & name calling, and any seasoned debater knows that personal insults mean the opponent has thrown in the towel and they have nothing further to offer on the subject.
      .
      How about another shot at it? Tell me how indoctrination that teaches stoning someone to death for adultery is the equivalent of voluntarily entering into marriage with another person of the same sex. I cannot for the life of me, make that connection. Tell us what Tom and I are missing.

  5. Charles Reply

    God’s Word never change. People who would engage same sex relationship will face judgment. Those people who tolerate and ignorant will going to face a deep resentment when they realized and enlightened by the truth. No one even the most powerful man would raise same sex married to exist for their self favor at the end of the road they will end up to nothing. Our freeway – to deny or follow God’s commandment is a choice. When we meet God is another story to face!

    Prepare your destiny – shape up your life with worldly opinion or living under God’s Eternal Commandment.

Leave a Reply