Saturday, June 27, 2015

From 2013: G. K. Chesterton: It’s Not Gay, and It’s Not Marriage

by Dale Alquist, The Amerian Chesterton Society


One of the pressing issues of Chesterton’s time was “birth control.” He not only objected to the idea, he objected to the very term because it meant the opposite of what it said. It meant no birth and no control. I can only imagine he would have the same objections about “gay marriage.” The idea is wrong, but so is the name. It is not gay and it is not marriage.

Chesterton was so consistently right in his pronouncements and prophecies because he understood that anything that attacked the family was bad for society. That is why he spoke out against eugenics and contraception, against divorce and “free love” (another term he disliked because of its dishonesty), but also against wage slavery and compulsory state-sponsored education and mothers hiring other people to do what mothers were designed to do themselves.

It is safe to say that Chesterton stood up against every trend and fad that plagues us today because every one of those trends and fads undermines the family. Big Government tries to replace the family’s authority, and Big Business tries to replace the family’s autonomy. There is a constant commercial and cultural pressure on father, mother, and child. They are minimized and marginalized and, yes, mocked. But as Chesterton says, “This triangle of truisms, of father, mother and child, cannot be destroyed; it can only destroy those civilizations which disregard it.”

This latest attack on the family is neither the latest nor the worst. But it has a shock value to it, in spite of the process of de-sensitization that the information and entertainment industries have been putting us through the past several years. Those who have tried to speak out against the normalization of the abnormal have been met with “either slanging or silence,” as Chesterton was when he attempted to argue against the faddish philosophies that were promoted by the major newspapers in his day.

In 1926, he warned, “The next great heresy will be an attack on morality, especially sexual morality.” His warning has gone unheeded, and sexual morality has decayed progressively. But let us remember that it began with birth control, which is an attempt to create sex for sex’s sake, changing the act of love into an act of selfishness. The promotion and acceptance of lifeless, barren, selfish sex has logically progressed to homosexuality.

Chesterton shows that the problem of homosexuality as an enemy of civilization is quite old. In The Everlasting Man, he describes the nature-worship and “mere mythology” that produced a perversion among the Greeks. “Just as they became unnatural by worshiping nature, so they actually became unmanly by worshiping man.” Any young man, he says, “who has the luck to grow up sane and simple” is naturally repulsed by homosexuality because “it is not true to human nature or to common sense.” He argues that if we attempt to act indifferent about it, we are fooling ourselves. It is “the illusion of familiarity,” when “a perversion become[s] a convention.”

In Heretics, Chesterton almost makes a prophecy of the misuse of the word “gay.” He writes of “the very powerful and very desolate philosophy of Oscar Wilde. It is the carpe diem religion.” Carpe diem means “seize the day,” do whatever you want and don’t think about the consequences, live only for the moment. “But the carpe diem religion is not the religion of happy people, but of very unhappy people.” There is a hopelessness as well as a haplessness to it.

When sex is only a momentary pleasure, when it offers nothing beyond itself, it brings no fulfillment. It is literally lifeless. And as Chesterton writes in his book St. Francis of Assisi, the minute sex ceases to be a servant, it becomes a tyrant. This is perhaps the most profound analysis of the problem of homosexuals: they are slaves to sex. They are trying to “pervert the future and unmake the past.” They need to be set free.

Sin has consequences. Yet Chesterton always maintains that we must condemn the sin and not the sinner. And no one shows more compassion for the fallen than G.K. Chesterton. Of Oscar Wilde, whom he calls “the Chief of the Decadents,” he says that Wilde committed “a monstrous wrong” but also suffered monstrously for it, going to an awful prison, where he was forgotten by all the people who had earlier toasted his cavalier rebelliousness. “His was a complete life, in that awful sense in which your life and mine are incomplete; since we have not yet paid for our sins. In that sense one might call it a perfect life, as one speaks of a perfect equation; it cancels out. On the one hand we have the healthy horror of the evil; on the other the healthy horror of the punishment.”

Chesterton referred to Wilde’s homosexual behavior as a “highly civilized” sin, something that was a worse affliction among the wealthy and cultured classes. It was a sin that was never a temptation for Chesterton, and he says that it is no great virtue for us never to commit a sin for which we are not tempted. That is another reason we must treat our homosexual brothers and sisters with compassion.

We know our own sins and weaknesses well enough. Philo of Alexandria said, “Be kind. Everyone you meet is fighting a terrible battle.” But compassion must never compromise with evil. Chesterton points out that balance that our truth must not be pitiless, but neither can our pity be untruthful.

Homosexuality is a disorder. It is contrary to order. Homosexual acts are sinful, that is, they are contrary to God’s order. They can never be normal. And worse yet, they can never even be even. As Chesterton’s great detective Father Brown says:  “Men may keep a sort of level of good, but no man has ever been able to keep on one level of evil. That road goes down and down.”

Marriage is between a man and a woman. That is the order. And the Catholic Church teaches that it is a sacramental order, with divine implications. The world has made a mockery of marriage that has now culminated with homosexual unions.

But it was heterosexual men and women who paved the way to this decay. Divorce, which is an abnormal thing, is now treated as normal. Contraception, another abnormal thing, is now treated as normal. Abortion is still not normal, but it is legal. Making homosexual “marriage” legal will not make it normal, but it will add to the confusion of the times. And it will add to the downward spiral of our civilization.

But Chesterton’s prophecy remains: We will not be able to destroy the family. We will merely destroy ourselves by disregarding the family.

Worship Director named for Archdiocese of Portland

Jesson Mata



The Archdiocese of Portland has a new director for the Office of Divine Worship. Jesson Mata, former director of liturgy and music at Blessed Sacrament Parish in Seattle, has accepted the position.

“Divine worship is at the heart of everything we do as the People of God in western Oregon,” says Archbishop Alexander Sample.

The archbishop calls Mata “an exceptional candidate” with the background, knowledge, talent and excellent communication skills needed to be successful.

“His thorough knowledge of and passion for the sacred liturgy will be a tremendous support to me and our pastors and parishes,” the archbishop says, asking that people keep the office in their prayers.

Mata will start work at the pastoral center on July 7. 

A native of the Philippines, Mata was raised in a Catholic household and came to the United States with his family at age 9. He quickly learned English and became fascinated with American culture and politics.

He studied political science and philosophy at Seattle University and later continued his studies in philosophy and theology at the Dominican School of Philosophy and Theology at the Graduate Theological Union in Berkeley.

Mata directed liturgy and music for 10 years at Blessed Sacrament, where he developed liturgical and musical programs aimed at centralizing the focus of worship on the Eucharist. He worked with hundreds of volunteers and taught and trained liturgical and music ministers.

As a former seminarian with the Dominican Order, Mata developed a love for prayer and a devotion to the Eucharist. He focused study and prayer on the liturgy, particularly on the development of the celebration of the Mass as well as the Divine Office. He gives talks on the topics.

Mata’s devotion to the Eucharist originated from his work with Mother Teresa’s Missionaries of Charity in Calcutta, India, where he volunteered alongside the Sisters to attend to the poor, dying, and orphaned. He prayed the Mass with the sisters each morning and ended the day with adoration. He also spent many hours praying at Mother Teresa’s tomb.

Mata says he is most excited to share his faith and pray with the people of the Archdiocese of Portland. He is looking forward to meeting clergy and the lay faithful and hopes to deepen their love of the sacred liturgy.

Mata says he plans to hike and enjoy the beauty of the outdoors. He is an avid gardener, a health and fitness enthusiast, and a photographer.

Friday, June 26, 2015

"Just who do we think we are?" How the Supreme Court’s conservatives explained their votes against "gay marriage".

 From Quartz.com an interesting article on why these Supreme Court Justices voted against this decision.  Their decisions on maintaining the status quo for the common good is excellent reading.



The Supreme Court’s landmark ruling legalizing gay marriage throughout the US split along familiar lines, with the nine-member court’s four most conservative justices voting against a nationwide right to homosexual unions.

Chief justice John Roberts joined justices Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas, and Samuel Alito in opposing the majority’s opinion on the case brought by Ohio resident James Obergefell, whose 2013 marriage to his now-deceased partner was not recognized by the state.

Here are excerpts from the four dissenting opinions (pdf) the naysaying justices filed.  From page 41 of this pdf you will find the complete arguments against this decision.

Go to page 41 of the pdf attachment for the whole text.  There's so much good reading.

Chief Justice John Roberts

Although the policy arguments for extending marriage to same-sex couples may be compelling, the legal arguments for requiring such an extension are not. The fundamental right to marry does not include a right to make a State change its definition of marriage. And a State’s decision to maintain the meaning of marriage that has persisted in every culture throughout human history can hardly be called irrational. In short, our Constitution does not enact any one theory of marriage. The people of a State are free to expand marriage to include same-sex couples, or to retain the historic definition.

Justice Antonin Scalia

It is not of special importance to me what the law says about marriage. It is of overwhelming importance, however, who it is that rules me. Today’s decree says that my Ruler, and the Ruler of 320 million Americans coast-to-coast, is a majority of the nine lawyers on the Supreme Court. The opinion in these cases is the furthest extension in fact— and the furthest extension one can even imagine—of the Court’s claimed power to create “liberties” that the Constitution and its Amendments neglect to mention.

Justice Clarence Thomas

The majority invokes our Constitution in the name of a “liberty” that the Framers would not have recognized, to the detriment of the liberty they sought to protect. Along the way, it rejects the idea—captured in our Declaration of Independence—that human dignity is innate and suggests instead that it comes from the Government. This distortion of our Constitution not only ignores the text, it inverts the relationship between the individual and the state in our Republic. I cannot agree with it.

Justice Samuel Alito

The Constitution says nothing about a right to same-sex marriage, but the Court holds that the term “liberty” in the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment encompasses this right. Our Nation was founded upon the principle that every person has the unalienable right to liberty, but liberty is a term of many meanings. For classical liberals, it may include economic rights now limited by government regulation. For social democrats, it may include the right to a variety of government benefits. For today’s majority, it has a distinctively postmodern meaning. To prevent five unelected Justices from imposing their personal vision of liberty upon the American people, the Court has held that “liberty” under the Due Process Clause should be understood to protect only those rights that are “‘deeply rooted in this Nation’s history and tradition.’” … And it is beyond dispute that the right to same-sex marriage is not among those rights.

USCCB on SCOTUS Obergefell v. Hodges – “tragic error”

WASHINGTON—The U.S. Supreme Court decision, June 26, interpreting the U.S. Constitution to require all states to license and recognize same-sex “marriage” “is a tragic error that harms the common good and most vulnerable among us,” said Archbishop Joseph E. Kurtz of Louisville, Kentucky, president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB).



The full statement follows:

"Regardless of what a narrow majority of the Supreme Court may declare at this moment in history, the nature of the human person and marriage remains unchanged and unchangeable. Just as Roe v. Wade did not settle the question of abortion over forty years ago, Obergefell v. Hodges does not settle the question of marriage today.

Neither decision is rooted in the truth, and as a result, both will eventually fail. Today the Court is wrong again. It is profoundly immoral and unjust for the government to declare that two people of the same sex can constitute a marriage.

The unique meaning of marriage as the union of one man and one woman is inscribed in our bodies as male and female. The protection of this meaning is a critical dimension of the “integral ecology” that Pope Francis has called us to promote.

Mandating marriage redefinition across the country is a tragic error that harms the common good and most vulnerable among us, especially children. The law has a duty to support every child’s basic right to be raised, where possible, by his or her married mother and father in a stable home.

Jesus Christ, with great love, taught unambiguously that from the beginning marriage is the lifelong union of one man and one woman. As Catholic bishops, we follow our Lord and will continue to teach and to act according to this truth.
I encourage Catholics to move forward with faith, hope, and love: faith in the unchanging truth about marriage, rooted in the immutable nature of the human person and confirmed by divine revelation; hope that these truths will once again prevail in our society, not only by their logic, but by their great beauty and manifest service to the common good; and love for all our neighbors, even those who hate us or would punish us for our faith and moral convictions.

Lastly, I call upon all people of good will to join us in proclaiming the goodness, truth, and beauty of marriage as rightly understood for millennia, and I ask all in positions of power and authority to respect the God-given freedom to seek, live by, and bear witness to the truth."

Wednesday, June 24, 2015

Archbishop Alexander Sample marks 25 years as a priest






6/23/2015 3:22:00 PM


Rick Keating/El Centinela
Archbishop Alexander Sample accepts a gift from Fátima Rodas at the St. Juan Diego Congress in Turner.

Ed Langlois
Of the Catholic Sentinel
Archbishop Alexander Sample says his 25th anniversary of ordination is no more important than anyone else’s.

“I could not be more grateful to Almighty God for the tremendous blessing he has bestowed on me during these past 25 years,” Archbishop Sample says. “One of the greatest blessings has been the many people he has placed in my life and allowed me to serve.”

He was raised in Nevada, the youngest of three. A teacher-priest told the 17-year-old he had a vocation to priesthood. But first, young Alex studied metallurgical engineering at Michigan Tech. Then, before pursuing a post-doctorate degree, he stunned professors by announcing plans for seminary.

He studied at the College of St. Thomas in St. Paul, Minn. and the Pontifical College Josephinum Seminary in Columbus, Ohio. After ordination for the Diocese of Marquette, he served as associate pastor of St. Peter Cathedral and then was pastor of area parishes. He studied canon law at the Pontifical University of St. Thomas Aquinas in Rome.

During his seven-year tenure as bishop of Marquette, 2006-2013, he wrote four pastoral letters, undertook a $10 million capital campaign, set in place a unified catechesis, and developed plans to secure Catholic schools.

He was named Archbishop of Portland in 2013. Here, he has identified pastoral priorities, visited parishes, prisons and migrant camps, spoken out against abortion and the death penalty and catechized on marriage. In homilies to new priests and deacons, Archbishop Sample says ministry is about Jesus, not gaining recognition.

“I feel a great and awesome holiness about him,” says Angie Doyen, secretary at St. Anthony Parish in Gwinn, Mich. “He has been a courageous priest who clearly desires to reach and inspire his flock through his powerful words and prayerful, humble actions.”

Denise Foye, director of faith formation for the Diocese of Marquette, calls him “truly a remarkable teacher of our beloved faith.” Her abiding memory is of the future archbishop teaching people who wanted to become Catholic.

“He is quite simply a fine pastor, full of compassion while upholding truth,” say Francis and Theresa Darr, who belong to St. Peter Cathedral Parish in Marquette.

“He is the kind of priest who boldly and unreservedly speaks the truth at all times, but always tempered with love,” say Todd and Susan Rapavi, members of St. Peter Cathedral.

Archbishop Sample cites a retreat director who told western Oregon clergy that priesthood is a mission worthy of their existence. “This is a great life!” Archbishop Sample says. “I hope many young men will respond to the Lord’s call to serve him as a priest.”