Cleansing Fire

Defending Truth and Tradition in the Roman Catholic Church

No Civil “Right” to do “Wrong” — Part #1

June 8th, 2011, Promulgated by Diane Harris

“If it’s June, it must be ‘LGBT Pride Month'” was the headline on a story by Jody Brown in OneNewsNow on June 1, 2011.  She reported how the President of the US had just (again) proclaimed June as “LGBT” month (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender for those who would rather not clutter their minds with those acronyms.)  Maybe it should be co-opted as “Let’s Get Back to Truth,” but unfortunately even the concept would be less recognizable.

Notorious as is the country’s most pro-homosexual president in U.S. history, and outrageously proud of it, Obama basked in his own admiration for repeal of “don’t ask; don’t tell;” of his failure to fight for DOMA (Defense of Marriage Act), and his  wanton inability to even consider there are reasons other than “hate and homophobia” which drive people of conscience to oppose gay “marriage.”  There are two concepts he, and our own governor Cuomo don’t seem to get — the notions of conscience and of sin.  There can never be a “right” to do “wrong.”

But as the abortion agenda has shown, conscience is hardly any longer a recognized civil right, as doctors and nurses are forced to participate.  And conscience and the rights of parents will also be trampled in the stampede to brainwash children in schools with the homosexual agenda.  When persecution comes (and it very likely will) it will be the dismissal of conscience as just “opinion” which will pave the way.  Yet, these are elected officials and, if they are without conscience, they have vote getting as an excuse.  Not as a reason, just as an excuse.  So it is one thing to see such mindset in vote gleaners, but it is quite another thing to see it in the Catholic Church and in its hierarchy.

No wonder the elected officials are led astray, by silent or pandering so-called Catholics.  If a Church leader won’t stand up in matters of conscience, who will?  If he won’t call sin “sin,” who will?  If he won’t defend and enforce Church teaching, who will?  Certainly not elected officials who will be satisfied with any loosening of the moral fabric.  For after all, the word “pride” is indeed very telling.  It is not just about “let me do what I want to do,” but it is also about “and don’t criticize me for doing it,” and it is ESPECIALLY about: “Endorse me in my sin.”    It is nothing new that sinners crave being  endorsed by the very people who know they are sinning, as an anti-anxiety medication for the voice of conscience.  (That’s why  some Catholics shop around to find a priest who endorses contraception.)  To not speak for right and truth, for good and for Church teaching is a step on the way to the total unraveling of the moral fabric.  We are all responsible, but it should start with Church hierarchy as our models.

Now, with that backdrop, this post isn’t at all about the elected officials, or the gay pride agenda.  Rather it is about “If the hierarchy won’t do it, who will?”  Last summer it struck me that when Bishop Clark went on his usual month of July vacation, he left a column which appeared exactly when Gay Pride week started in Rochester.  Some who have followed other posts (Zeal and Shepherds Shearing Sheep) know that the Newsletter “It Really Matters” has carried some of these comments.  Several friends have encouraged a re-running of the July 2010 articles that dealt with the Bishop’s column.  Rather than re-interpreting or trying to condense what was written, it will stand as it first appeared, including again referring to the Catechism and the Bible, references others have posted in their blogs as well.   There will probably be about five posts in the series, but that might change. Here is page 2 from the July 2010 issue:

Tags: , ,


23 Responses to “No Civil “Right” to do “Wrong” — Part #1”

  1. Dr. K says:

    He really picks and chooses his citations!

  2. Dr. K says:


    Why won’t he “dwell here on the well-known teaching of the Catholic Church opposing same-sex marriage”? Given the ignorance among many Catholics who do not view gay marriage as a problem, I think we need to be reminded about what this teaching is!

  3. Sassy says:

    Thank you Diane for your research on this article!

  4. Bruce says:

    Well done, Diane!

  5. annonymouse says:

    Jesus said “if no one else judges you, neither do I.”

    Jesus then said “now go and sin no more.”

    Too many liberal leaders in our Church wish to focus only on the first saying of the Lord, and utterly neglect the second. We, as Church, are called to proclaim BOTH. Our most courageous leaders proclaim BOTH.

    What good are we as Church if we turn a blind eye to the presence of sin in the world? Isn’t that precisely what Satan wishes us to do?

    I suspect that those who deny the presence of sin in the world are also ones to deny the presence of sin in their own lives. Conversely, if I am (ever increasingly) aware of sin in my own life, how can I not call attention to, and reject! the presence of and effects of sin in the world around me?

  6. Bruce says:

    Mouse, well said too!

  7. A Catholic says:

    “A Matter of Concern” was well written in highlighting the problems with Bishop Clark’s approach to this issue. Bishop Clark, whether intentionally or not, leaves himself open to the charge that he doesn’t really believe what the Church teaches on homosexuality. Eternal life should be the goal of everyone in following Jesus, and that means rejecting all forms of immorality. In whatever way a person is tempted, shouldn’t the answer to trust Jesus and make use of the sacraments? Let’s continue to pray every day for Bishop Clark: I see him as someone who seems sincere but someone who perhaps was misled in the wake of Vatican II and all the moral confusion that has existed since then. Thank God for Blessed John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI who have more than amply confirmed that Vatican II in no way changed the Church’s consistant moral teaching on issues such as homosexuality.

  8. Thinkling says:

    Wonderful post A Catholic. Both in your charity to the Bishop and gratitude to our Pope and Bl JPII. I could not agree more.

  9. Bruce says:

    Agreed. There are some seriously good comments in this post! Well done, Fire “watchers”!

  10. JLo says:

    “A Catholic” may be showing admirable charity to Bishop Clark and I certainly agree with our praying for him, but as to the reasons “A Catholic cites”:

    “I see him as someone who seems sincere but someone who perhaps was misled in the wake of Vatican II and all the moral confusion that has existed since then.”

    Sorry, but I think that’s nonsense. A bishop confused about moral behavior? Really? I have heard many times the line of thought that it’s not his fault, that he has bad people surrounding him, that he’s just a really gentle and innocent, misled man, etc. I must discount all that, except that he surely IS misled, but it’s not the Holy Spirit doing the leading for him.

    Bishop Clark has been well schooled… he’s a bishop, for crying out loud and one of the chosen who were educated in Rome!! The man just accepts his own concepts over Holy Mother Church’s whenever and wherever HE disagrees… his own pope, so to speak. Problem is that it’s not just his own soul in danger; rather, he has the power to lead others to HIS perception of truth, which surely we can all agree is faulty.

    I pray for this bishop, but I’ll leave it to God to scope out the man’s reasons. All I know is that this shepherd leads his sheep astray. +JMJ

  11. Sassy says:

    I’m sorry if I’m being sassy here, but why does it seem that this bishop singles out this subgroup of people for being unjustly discriminated against? There are countless groups of people who are unjustly discriminated against. People with SSA don’t have a corner on that market. What about adults and children with special needs (autism, cerebral palsy, mental retardation, Downs syndrome, to name a few)? What about the unborn, who have no voice to defend themselves? What about the infirmed elderly who are taken advantage of because of their age and/or medical conditions. What about the legal immigrants who don’t have a good command of English? The point is that there seems to be extra special attention paid to this subgroup of people. Am I missing something?

  12. Eliza10 says:

    No, you are not missing anything. Bishop Clark is obsessed with homosexual permissions and entitlements. Its out of balance! Out of whack!

    A Catholic wrote: “Let’s continue to pray every day for Bishop Clark: I see him as someone who seems sincere but someone who perhaps was misled…”

    I agree with JLo. He lacks sincerity, IMO. Yes, he has a much-rehearsed public veneer of pleasantry. But he is a man with a mission, working steadily and without ceasing to impose his anti-Catholic ideology. Its not what he vowed to be obedient to. He lives off the Church while being derelict in his duty to shepherd the people.

    Yes, lets pray for Bishop Clark – because we imitate Christ – and how Christ loved His Apostle Judas Iscariot, and prayed unceasingly for him! Jesus will be so pleased if the end of Bishop Clark is better than the end of Judas, and He will truly thank us for our prayers.

  13. A Catholic says:

    Thanks, Thinkling, for your kind words.

    JLo and Eliza10- perhaps you are right and I’m just naive, who knows? At least we all agree that he needs our prayers.

    I won’t comment further on this thread since the moderators want to limit the back and forth. I do appreciate reading and learning from the postings of others on “Cleansing Fire”.

  14. Eliza10 says:

    Quoting Bishop Clark, [from above]:

    “Put simply, what I fear are getting lost in all of the lobbying and labeling going on these days are Catholic teachings that call us to love, respect and care for our sisters and brothers who are gay or lesbian. Rather than condemn, judge or discriminate against them, we are called to recognize that they, like the rest of us, are created and loved absolutely by a compassionate, merciful God.”

    It seems like this, above, and the other Clark snippet, cut out of the middle of the catechism’s teaching on the subject: “They must be accepted with respect, compassion and sensitivity” are all Bishop Clark says on the subject of homosexuality.

    Am I right??

    He is doing exactly what the KKK and the polygamists do with the Bible – they pull out specific verses as “proof” to show that their agenda is God’s agenda.

    Also, he is validating the lies of the gay activists who want to twist the truth and say that anyone not on board with approving their unchaste lifestyle lacks compassion, respect and sensitivity. Therefore, I say he is using his Holy Office to impose these lies on the faithful. And like the KKK and the Polygamists he is picking and choosing pieces and parts of teachings to forward his own ideology.

    A friend of mine told me recently that Rochester is the San Francisco of the east – that we have a large homosexual community.

    Has this community ever heard Bishop Clark say that homosexual acts are acts of grave depravity and are intrinsically disordered? Ever? I don’t think I have ever heard our Bishop utter these words. He is derelict in his duty. He meets with hurting parents of homosexuals. Does he tell the parents this? Does he tell them that homosexuals, like the rest of us, are called to chastity? Does he tell them that although God is asking much of the homosexuals, He gives Grace in abundance to do His will. Does he remind them that Christ told us that His burden is easy, and His yoke is light?

    I am afraid he doesn’t do this. He is not a Catholic shepherd to them. His commiseration is USELESS! He is, again, derelict in his duty to these hurting people. The truth will set them free. Its his duty to tell it! Withholding it, he is keeping them enslaved.

    I have never heard Bishop Clark teach this. He is silent on the truth. We live in a sexually unchaste society, and the homosexual activists promote a sexually unchaste lifestyle. Clark is silent.

    His silence gives consent.

    Rochester Catholics need a CATHOLIC bishop!

  15. Sassy says:

    What he does tell parents, at least the ones I know, well, let’s just say that he affirms all the junk you read in FF. I have never heard that he’s spoken out against the cow manure that FF feeds its members. And this is going back to the early days of FF, before the website, the publications and the joining up with like-minded dissenting organizations. Trust me when I say that I pray for them daily.

  16. snowshoes says:

    Excellent summary of the sad situation, Eliza10! And the last poster exemplifies another bad fruit of such false teaching: those many little sheep who drink the Kool-Aid, who are bamboozled into believing the lies instead of the Truths of the Catholic Faith, and who are blinded by their emotional attachments. It breaks my heart. Our Lord wept over Jerusalem… Oremus! St. Ephrem, pray for us!

  17. Eliza10 says:

    Thanks. I didn’t read what Anonymous 130153 wrote before it got deleted. As far as supporting an unchaste lifestyle because of your emotional attachment to the person involved in it, I think that’s a pretty shallow emotional attachment. If you truly love the person you are involved with, you should want their eternal best, and you should desire their true happiness on earth. Otherwise, your love just isn’t deep enough, or, you are just using them.

    Sassy – I don’t know what FF is!

  18. Sassy says:

    Eliza, sorry about the jargon. Fortunate Families (FF) is a dissenting Catholic-in-name-only pro SSM organization founded in Rochester.

  19. Eliza10 says:

    Now I remember! What an unfortunate organization! Something Bishop Clark would unfortunately support, too.

    What about Courage? Does Courage get plenty of support and generous encouragement from our Bishop? If we have a large gay community, it should!

    I have read some wonderful stories online about people who have been blessed immensely by the support of Courage. There was one memorable story about a longtime male gay couple. They seemed to have an unselfish love for each other and a true and respectful friendship. Both, separately, felt sorry about their sexual relations. The one writing the story got support from Courage literature, and after talking to a holy Priest and spending time in Adoration, decided they just couldn’t continue that part of their relationship. A wonderful grace was his partner decided the same thing at the same time. When he wrote the story, they were still living together, as chaste friends, and both feeling such peace and joy and blessing because of their chastity. That may not always work, but it did for them, for that time anyway.
    God does ask so much of homosexuals, but God gives more grace – lots and lots more grace, for harder things. Isn’t that true?

    But you never learn that if you are not willing to take the step in obedience to His will. You can instead spend all your time resenting what God’s will is, arguing it, reminiscing with people that its unfair and can’t be what God REALLY says.

    And that would be really wrong for a Bishop to do!

  20. Raymond Rice says:

    The program Courage is not permitted in the diocese of Rochester.

  21. Bruce says:

    Permitted elsewhere in the Church, but not in the DoR. Gee…what a surprise. 400 days!

  22. Eliza10 says:

    Well that is one very sorry situation indeed. Only it gives me hope that the Vatican sees how very badly we need a compassionate, respectful, caring and Catholic Bishop, since the DoR bishop’s office has been lacking all those qualities for over 30 years. Oh, to have a bishop who loves God and loves the people!

Leave a Reply

Log in | Register

You must be logged in to post a comment.

-Return to main page-