Cleansing Fire

Defending Truth and Tradition in the Roman Catholic Church

Cardinal Dolan’s Blog and Errors

August 19th, 2013, Promulgated by Diane Harris

Cardinal DolanSince the promulgation of the HHS Mandate about 1 ½ years ago, there have been comments by laity about the lack of strong teaching from the pulpit against intrinsic evils.  The corollary criticism has been about too much commentary and directive, especially in the run-up to last November’s election, on matters to which the laity is entitled to form their own prudential judgments; i.e., on matters of opinion, or in which there is no specific Church Teaching.  Just because a member of the hierarchy writes his own opinions and calls them “Church Teaching,” does not make it so.

One such opinion, expressed by Cardinal Dolan, is egregiously off the mark regarding Catholic Teaching, i.e. his staunch support for gun control, explicitly stating it is Church Teaching, on the Archdiocese of New York website.  His not identifying the matter as a prudential judgment issue can manipulate the flock into thinking that in order to be faithful Catholics, they too must agree with His Eminence, or with his seeming praise for three politicians whose actions have been averse to the Catholic Church:  President Obama, NYS Governor Cuomo and NYC Mayor Bloomberg.

The entire text of Cardinal Dolan’s Blog and its comments can be read here:  , issued two months after the Newtown school killings, just before he boarded the plane to the Conclave in Rome.

Five Errors in Cardinal Dolan’s Gun Opinion as Church Teaching

Cardinal Dolan put forth his blog comments as Church Teaching.  It is full of errors, inaccuracies and twists of words which need further parsing.  When any member of the hierarchy cloaks his own opinion as Church Teaching, without explaining to the flock their own rights and duties, it can lead them and others astray, and seem to excuse them from the hard work of forming their own opinions, consciences and judgments.


1)      Cardinal Dolan characterized his blog proclamation as Church Teaching.  He never stated that it is his own opinion, or that “gun control” is a matter of prudential judgment.  He glossed over the right of his readers to form their own legitimate opinions, stating: “Advocating for gun control is not something new for the Church.  The Holy See has continuously been a strong voice in opposition to international arms trading, the world’s version of gun control….”  On its surface the sentence doesn’t even make sense.  Arms trading is a version of gun control?  There is no logical connection between the number of cartridges in a gun in the U.S. and international arms trading, and it is not right to say so.  International arms trading, which inevitably leads to child soldiers, and spending money on arms rather than food, has nothing to do with U.S. Second Amendment rights to protect oneself and family, or to be able to hunt, e.g.  By lumping weapons of self-defense with arms trafficking, Cardinal Dolan also ignores Catechism provisions, such as paragraph 2265, e.g.: “Legitimate Defense can not only be a right but a duty for one who is responsible for the lives of others.” 

2)      Cardinal Dolan states that gun control is the “official teaching of the Catholic faith” and cites paragraphs 2315 and 2316 “in particular.”  Again, those references are entirely about international accumulation of armaments as being an ineffective way to world peace, and correctly states that the arms race does not ensure peace, but relates to the relationships between nations.  It also says nothing about individuals and their right to self-protection, which can hardly be called an arms race.

3)      His Eminence continues with unclarified street jargon, unfortunately closely aligned with a liberal political position.  He writes:  “Here in the United States, the bishops have for decades supported measures to get handguns off the streets, and to ban assault weapons….we support measures that control the sale and use of firearms and make them safer….”  That “we” seems to imply that all the bishops of the US have agreed and are bound by this position, but the head of the USCCB cannot bind other bishops, nor can the USCCB itself.  Yet, such wording could easily indicate to the Catholic in the pew that his or her own bishop is of the same opinion as Cardinal Dolan.  When a Cardinal places his own opinions in such a context, he pre-empts the rights of other bishops.  One who sees the Second Amendment as the Law of the Land, in the light of history, may reasonably and in good conscience decide for gun rights rather than gun control.  The pronouncement is also disturbing as an example of leftist slang.   If taking “handguns off the streets” as a position statement is meant regarding illegal criminal use, the writer should say so, because law-abiding citizens have the right to walk down the street with a gun for protection.  There is tyranny in ambiguity, which can mean whatever the writer wants it to mean, and can deliberately mislead.  For example, use of the term “assault weapons” is very misleading and undefined.  It focuses on attack and ignores defense, and is susceptible to many and varied definitions, which impede communications.

4)      Cardinal Dolan continued his alignment with a US President antagonistic to the moral teaching of the Catholic Church by citing his “nodding in agreement” to Mr. Obama’s call for legislation which many good people have serious reasons to oppose.  Cardinal Dolan seems to have no understanding that there are plenty of gun laws on the books which aren’t even being enforced, and by his own admission states:  “I don’t pretend to be an expert on what should be in each specific bill, and I will never be an authority on the number of bullets that should be in an ammo clip, or the proper way to conduct background checks….”  In those words, he has spoken the truth, and condemned his own opinion as uninformed.  In those words, he exhibited woeful ignorance of the many complex facets of this matter.  Cardinal Dolan thus showed that he is not informed sufficiently to lead even himself in this prudential judgment issue, let alone to claim it under the umbrella of Catholic Teaching.  Rather he gives comfort to Obama, who has significantly opposed the conscience rights of Catholics, e.g. by inviting Obama to the prominence of the podium at the prestigious “Al Smith” Catholic Charities dinner in New York City, above the protests of the prelate’s own flock.  Such conflicting signals confuse and dismay the Faithful.  Such “nodding in agreement” strengthens a reckless and oppressive government.  Nothing good was accomplished by giving Mr. Obama a stage from which to speak in New York City, empowering him and aiding his re-election; similarly, nothing good can come from Cardinal Dolan’s public “nodding.”

5)      To the abortion-supporting, gay marriage advocating, self-proclaimed ‘Catholic’ governor of New York State, the Cardinal gives further encouragement with the words: “I was very much in favor a month ago when our own New York State legislature, heeding the call of Governor Cuomo, passed NY Safe (New York Secure Ammunition and Firearms Enforcement) Act, the most comprehensive gun control bill in the country.”  What he doesn’t mention is that the governor did it by violating the right of citizens to public comment, in a state that already had the most comprehensive gun control in the country.  And Cardinal Dolan doesn’t mention any of the statistics which show that the highest crime rates are in cities and states with strong “gun control.”  He doesn’t note that most of the sheriffs of NYS are opposed to the so-called “SAFE ACT.”  He fails to acknowledge that the people who “obey” stronger laws are the already law abiding citizens. Criminals don’t worry about reducing the number of bullets in their clip before shooting someone, but under Cuomo’s mis-named SAFE ACT, it will probably be the homeowner, protecting his life and that of his family, who reduces the number of bullets in his clip.

Cardinal Dolan Lacks Adequate Knowledge to Influence Formation of Gun Control Opinions 

Bob Dolan’s book about his own brother makes clear that the future Cardinal Dolan was no outdoors sportsman.  It shows.  For example, Cardinal Dolan writes in favor of a law which would keep a gun from being used by “anyone other than the owner.”  That is absurd.  A hunter can’t loan another hunter a shotgun?  Multiple guns can’t be shared in shooting competitions?  What about the ownership of the guns used in the winter Olympics triathlon?  What about a parent teaching a son or daughter how to use a weapon responsibly?  If each person were required to have his or her own gun, not used by anyone else, presumably not even a spouse, that would lead to more guns being bought, not fewer!  Sadly, although the Cardinal is ill-informed on the issues, it doesn’t prevent his having an opinion, and putting it forth as Catholic Church Teaching, causing confusion among the flock, and being a solace to certain political positions.

When Truth is damaged, so is Community

The reason why Cardinal Dolan’s behavior is so very damaging, is that true Church Teaching in matters of faith or doctrine or morals should unite Catholics in the Oneness of their faith (unless they have been so badly catechized that they don’t know their Faith).  Catholics should be united against intrinsic evils.  Rather, he offers opinions on prudential judgment issues and, in the matter of gun control, about half of Americans are on one side, and half on the other.  Good, church-going, moral Christians can legitimately support the Second Amendment to the Constitution, own and use guns, and not be in error or sin.  And the other half may believe in their own consciences that taking away someone’s gun rights and impairing his or her self-defense is permissible for a common good.  Yet, each may sit side by side in the pew on Sunday, and be one in Christ.  As Paul says in Galatians 3: 28:  “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.”  Quite simply, there is no need to introduce issues which divide Christians and which are not part of Church Teaching.  There is no need in a Year intended for a New Evangelization to put up barriers and stumbling blocks between people.  There is no need for people otherwise favorably disposed toward the Catholic Church to conclude:  “Oh, they are the gun control people.  I could never go there!”

Institutionalizing Opinion Causes Confusion  and Avoidance of Duty

Cardinal Dolan’s undue influence over the opinions and prudential judgments of other bishops and priests is to be criticized too.  These matters do not remain merely contained on an Archdiocesan blog.  The ramifications and expansion of the Cardinal’s words are far-reaching.  The liberal Jesuit magazine, America, jumped into action less than an hour after Cardinal Dolan’s blog was posted, spreading the news, not with excerpts and commentary, but with a rather faithful reproduction of the Cardinal’s blog.

Soon after Cardinal Dolan, President of the USCCB, returned from the Conclave in Rome, and coincident with the Senate’s consideration of a Democrat-sponsored gun control bill, the USCCB then also jumped on board and endorsed the partisan bill.  A letter addressed “Dear Senator” was sent by the USCCB to the U.S. Senate over the signature of the Bishop of Stockton, Stephen E. Blaire, who said in part, venturing into a domain which belongs to the laity:

“On behalf of the … USCCB, I urge you to support legislation that builds a culture of life by promoting policies that reduce gun violence and save people’s lives in homes and communities throughout our nation.  The provisions contained within S. 649 are a positive step in the right directions….require effective and enforceable universal background checks for all gun purchases … limit civilian access to hi-capacity  [whatever all this meant to Bishop Blaire] ammunition magazines, resist amendments that would expand… minimum mandatory sentences,…. [have] sensible regulation of handguns….” 

Another quite valid opinion is that if the laws already on the books were enforced, and violations of those laws appropriately prosecuted, including increased jail time for those using guns in committing a crime, that might facilitate reducing the use of guns in crimes and also reduce infringement on Second Amendment rights.  But Bishop Blare seems to have forestalled that solution with the words: resist amendments that would expand… minimum mandatory sentences.”  Why, we might ask ourselves, would Bishop Blare on behalf of the entire USCCB press forward in support of gun control a position which seems diametrically opposed to reducing gun violence?  One might think that an issue so important that Cardinals and Bishops want to diminish civil rights under the Second Amendment would at least lead them to consider the importance of effective sentencing.

Bishop Blaire also demonstrates no particular knowledge of gun ownership, just repeating leftist words like: “universal background checks,” “reduce gun violence” and “sensible regulation of hand guns,” without clarification, as if he knew what any of those terms meant, or would mean to his readers, as if there were already universal agreement on definitions.  His letter supports a particular Senate Bill draft from a single party agenda, with no demonstration of careful or reflective thinking on the true issues, and no attempt to accommodate genuine concerns of many sincere gun rights advocates.


Various media outlets touted how Cardinal Dolan and President Obama were now on the same side!  They seemed to forget that a man cannot serve two masters.  In Matthew 6:24 we read: “No one can serve two masters; for either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and mammon.”

Hidden in the hierarchy’s pushing a gun control agenda cloaked as Church Teaching, is the backlash from those who had been willing to defend both the First and Second amendments.  Now, it is no wonder some have exclaimed:  “Don’t ask me to support the First Amendment for you, if you have so little respect for our Bill of Rights that you are trashing the Second Amendment.”  The flood of prudential judgments and hierarchical opinions masquerading as Church Teaching is an unnecessary burden on the Faithful, who have a right to have their own shepherds teach fully and completely both Faith and Morals without distracting or dividing from Truth, and who have a right to carefully formulate in conscience their own prudential judgments, working to transform the dialogue and reality of the public square.


Tags: , , ,


24 Responses to “Cardinal Dolan’s Blog and Errors”

  1. Gretchen says:

    Thank you for this well-reasoned response to Cardinal Dolan’s blog post. By supporting the movement to remove guns from the hands of law-abiding citizens, the cardinal participates both in preventing us from defending our homes and families and promotes the government usurpation of other God-given rights.

    Cardinal Dolan is in dire need of our prayers. To put it bluntly, he is a liberal politician shrouded in priestly garments…and it shows.

  2. Jim says:

    Given that the “Culture of Death” has taken over our country, I would have to agree with one of the responses to Cardinal Dolan’s letter. It’s from a retired policeman: “Michael from Cincinnati”, who advocates that the bishops reinstate the reciting of the St. Michael’s Prayer after each daily and Sunday Mass.

  3. Richard Thomas says:

    I know it’s been stated in prior posts but I am sick of so many bishops and priests simply being hacks for the Democratic party, promoting almost every social justice position of the party, while woefully being silent from the pulpit on very important matters concerning sexual ethics and other aspects of morality.

    If there ever is a persecution of the Catholic Church in America, I wonder how these chamelions will behave. Will they act like many clerics in the Russian Orthodox Church who cooperated with the Communists when they were in power or will they be courageous and risk everything, including martyrdom?

  4. JLo says:

    Amen to all you say, Gretchen. +Dolan must really think we are all fooled by his loud, jolly laughter. Foolish man.

    As to your suggestion, Jim, I asked the pastor of Holy Cross if we could recite the St. Michael prayer after week-day Masses and after the celebrant leaves the altar (so there’s no mistaking it for being part of the Mass). I told him that Pope John Paul II had made the request and furnished those details. Father said that since it is not specified in the rubrics, his answer is “no”.

    As to your guess regarding the behavior of our shepherds as persecution comes, Richard, I don’t believe there are many men of courage among their ranks. I so wish to be wrong.

    Thank you, Diane, for necessary information, but it makes me feel so helpless in the face of all the misdirection and no direction from our priests and bishops. Our leaders continue to bring the world into our churches instead of the Church into our world. As you say, they place an “unnecessary burden on the Faithful.” But God is watching as we pray for His chosen shepherds and our country and its weak and even evil leaders. God knows these are hard times for His people. We need to smile as we stand and fight the tides with our own faithfulness to Truth and with our prayers, hopefully building our personal courage. CF gives some of us the courage to do so. Thank you. +JMJ

  5. Richard Thomas says:

    Amen JLo

  6. Hopefull says:

    @JLo: Suggest you ask the pastor if people’s casual (and often loud) conversations are in the rubrics or not. We know the answer. So stand in a casual group and instead of talking about the sales at Wegmans, simply say the St. Michael prayer aloud, together. (It is said aloud, btw, at the Carmel on Jefferson Rd. in the pews after the priest leaves the altar, and they are sticklers for the rubrics.)

  7. DanielKane says:

    This is the type of confusion that occurs when priests and the laity swap roles – the laity sanctifies the temporal order and the priests and bishops form the laity. What we see here are policy directives made by a Cardinal-Archbishop that has the air of Church policy.

    What the U.S. Church desperately needs is a theology of the personal use of weapons. Which is lacking. Where does the Church intersect with the natural law, revealed teaching, philosophy, etc. While one has a natural right to self-defense, where does it intersect with the turning of the other cheek? Where does intention play a role in the possession of a weapon whose main purpose is the killing of other humans? I do not know for certain the answers and for many countries (say England) where the possession of firearms is strictly prohibited; it is not necessary.

    What I hope the USCCB does is offer a theology of firearms and not poorly formed policy talking points couched in neither theology or the CCC. This was also a great opportunity to look to the failure of the treatment of the mentally ill.

    The Newtown tragedy is the fruit of a failed mental health system. The parents were multimillionaires and they still could not get the care their profoundly ill son needed.

  8. BigE says:

    It’s not just Dolan that has called for more gun control, it’s the USCCB. So when a bunch of Bishops teach something, when is it, and when is it not a “Church Teaching”?

  9. Diane Harris says:

    Big E — every single bishop in the US would have to agree in union with the Pope and not of course in contradiction with any other Church Teaching, in order to bind all the US Bishops. It is to protect the privileges, prerogatives, rights and obligations of the Sheperd or a diocese. When the USCCB enacted all their rules regarding the handling of abuse, Bishop Bruskewitz refused to sign. Good for him. It took a lot of courage to stand up against brother bishops. Even if he had agreed personally with what they were doing, his refusal protected the episcopal office.

  10. Scott W. says:

    It’s not just Dolan that has called for more gun control, it’s the USCCB. So when a bunch of Bishops teach something, when is it, and when is it not a “Church Teaching”?

    It really helps to actually read what Diane wrote. She covers the USCCB in point 3.

    The problem is that “gun control” is vague. So is “get handguns off the street” and “ban assault weapons” (it seems specific, but we have to remember that it is often hoplophobes dominating the discussion on what constitutes an assault weapon. We can only conjecture what Archbishop Dolan means by all this, but given his tendentious citation of the Catechism, it looks like our jolly archbishop is indulging safe and easy platitudes. Show me specific legislation that any bishop has bound his flock’s conscience to vote for and I’ll vote for it.

  11. JLo says:

    Hopeful, since I’ve already personally asked and been turned down, for me to do as you suggest would be disrespectful.

    We are late comers to HC (refugees of St. Thomas the Apostle), so it’s a whole new parish culture for such as I. They are proud of their laid back attitudes, familiarity with each other, and casual approach to Liturgy. One of the priests actually told me that I must be so much happier at HC, given that STA was such a buttoned-down culture and so to him it was not surprising it was doomed. I just quietly told him that he was mistaken, that I miss the reverence of that lovely parish. And I was a late comer to STA, too, but never experience as I do now, a feeling of being an ousider.

    So sad that high regard for orthodoxy and Tradition and community (as opposed to “club”) are disparaged, considered buttoned down. But it is what it is. I look at places like Iraq and Egypt and am grateful to still have a path to Holy Mass. As long as the Mass is the Mass, what I personally find lacking are things I can offer as personal suffering. Our steps are still being guided to Glory, so I’m grateful to be there! +JMJ

  12. BigE says:

    Aren’t you getting into the infallibility of a teaching? Can’t the church teach without the teaching having to be infallible?

  13. Jim says:

    To JLo: I go to daily Mass at Holy Cross at 5:20, and several times, at least someone in the church starts the St. Michael Prayer, as the priest is leaving the altar, and we’ve had no reprocussions so far. The pastor himself has celebrated and has heard it as he leaves the altar and has not said anything as of yet. Maybe he just gave in to the fact that the people are saying it. 🙂

  14. Ben Anderson says:

    Here’s the difference as I see it… Cardinal Dolan is quoting the CCC as if the CCC speaks directly to his position and speaks as if it’s a settled matter (that other bishops must/do agree). He’s certainly entitled to his opinion and as Catholics we should weigh that opinion heavily when prudentially considering our own. However, as a Catholic, I will also weigh the opinion of the tradition of the Church much higher than Cardinal Dolan’s opinion. So, I’d agree that disregarding non-infallible teachings of our bishops simply because they aren’t infallible (or because they don’t fall w/in the realm of churchy stuff) would be a mistake. However, it’s not the only thing I take into consideration as I use my conscience to prudently come to my own conclusion regarding “gun control”. Maybe if in your mind you prepend the term “Church teaching” in the original article with the modifier “settled”, that might make it a little more clear?

  15. JLo says:

    Hasn’t happened at the 7:30 a.m., Jim. Has that been going on for long at the afternoon Mass? My request/denial took place in February 2012. +JMJ

  16. Jim says:

    JLo…this has been happening for about a year or so…at least.

  17. DanielKane says:

    As to Church teaching, official Church teaching, infallible teachings…a blog posting is by far the lowest form of Church teaching short of having a few beers at happy hour or on a fishing trip with a Bishop. A teaching that is to be properly weighed, considered and pondered and is an authentic exercise of office is likely in the form of a pastoral letter promulgated formally with the usual canonical and theological vetting.

    His Eminence’s blog is just His Eminence’s blog where he muses, ponders and offers a point or two. Comments are opens so he can read the reviews, kudos and push backs. I would say that a blog is absolutely not Church Teaching (unless it is a restatement of Church teachings). Blogs at best are well intended essays and unfiltered personal musings.

  18. Diane Harris says:

    To better understand the negative impact of National Conferences of Bishops, read The Ratzinger Report. Here are some excerpts from page 60-61, the Chapter entitled “Among Priests and Bishops.”

    Quoting then Cardinal Ratzinger: “…he says, what is confirmed in the new Code of Canon Law, which prescribes the extent of the authority of the conferences, which cannot validly “act” in the name of all the bishops unless each and every bishop has given his consent,” unless it concerns “cases in which the common law prescribes it or a special mandate of the Apostolic See…determines it.”

    The book continues: “The collective, therefore, does not substitute for the persons of the bishops, who – recalls the Code, confirming the Council – are “the authentic teachers and instructors of the faith for the faithful entrusted to their care…. Ratzinger confirms: “No Episcopal conference, as such, has a teaching mission; its documents have no weight of their own save that of the consent given to them by the individual bishops.” The reason given by Cardinal Ratzinger for insisting on this point is “Because…it is a matter of safeguarding the very nature of the Catholic Church, which is based on an Episcopal structure and not on a kind of federation of national churches. The national level is not an ecclesial dimension….in each diocese there is only one shepherd and teacher of the faith in communion with the other pastors and teachers and with the Vicar of Christ. …. The Catholic Church is based on the balance between the community and the person, in this case between the community of individual particular churches united in the universal Church and the person of the responsible head of the diocese.”

    Cardinal Ratzinger’s quote continues: “It happens … that with some bishops there is a certain lack of a sense of individual responsibility, and the delegation of his inalienable powers as shepherd and teacher to the structures of the local conferences leads to letting what should remain very personal lapse into anonymity. The group of bishops united in the conferences depends in their decisions upon other groups, upon commissions that have been established to prepare draft proposals. It happens then that the search for agreement between the different tendencies and the effort at mediation often yield flattened documents in which decisive positions (where they might be necessary) are weakened.”

    Reflecting on what happened in Germany in the 1930’s, Cardinal Ratzinger stated: “Well, the really powerful documents against National Socialism were those that came from individual courageous bishops. The documents of the conference, on the contrary, were often rather wan and too weak with respect to what the tragedy called for.”

    Reflecting further on the danger of working in groups, that are only democratic in appearance, also operated during the Second Vatican Council. In a 1963 session when 2135 bishops on average participated in the meetings, only a little over 200 (10%) took the floor in the debate. The other 90% never spoke and limited themselves to listening and voting. Cardinal Ratzinger stated “…it is obvious that truth cannot be created through ballots. A statement is either true or false. Truth can only be found, not created.”

    Finally, I would like to personally reflect on the reality that at the time St. John Fisher was the bishop martyred under Henry VIII, it is remarkable that he was the only bishop to be martyred. The others apparently were able to find a “position statement” that enabled them to take the Oath of Succession, at the expense of their loyalty to the Pope.

    My personal belief is that we are in a dangerous time, foreseen by Cardinal Ratzinger (as he so well foresaw the tyranny of secularism), that the national conferences are susceptible to watered down solutions to real problems, and help prelates to co-exist with dubious secular powers and influences. I am saying, explicitly, that I believe statements like Bishop Blare’s on gun control, Abp. Gomez’s statement on immigration, and Bishop Robert E. Guglielmone’s Charleston, S.C., oversight to the statement that “’The head of the National Catholic Committee on Scouting said the Boy Scouts’ vote in May to admit homosexual youth into their ranks is “not in conflict with Catholic teaching,…’” exemplify a serious disservice to the Faithful and to the reputation of the Catholic Church. Moreover, these and many other statements also sometimes cross the line of separation of Church and State and violate rights of the laity in their sphere of influence, especially when national conferences (USCCB in the US) endorse particular partisan legislation.

  19. Richard Thomas says:

    They have been saying the St Michael prayer after all daily masses in Hornell for years.

    I have issues with bishops spending so much energy on this and social justice issues. Hacks for the Democratic Party. They pay lip service to homosexuality,birth control while at the same time are doing little if anything to preach about these issues and to mandate their priests to the same.

    Let’s not get into discussing gun control for it is not a teaching of the Church.

  20. DisturbedMary says:

    Gun control pales in comparison to the amnesty issue which the bishops are gearing up for.

    Here is a sample blog piece that Cardinal Dolan had in which he actually refers to Senator Schumer’s bravery!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! What fools these clerics be.

    What is to become of us when our shepherds are hopelessly entangled with secular religion.

  21. Diane Harris says:

    @Richard Thomas,
    I agree with your post above, except for the last line: “Let’s not get into discussing gun control for it is not a teaching of the Church.” I agree it is not a teaching of the Church, but when a Cardinal of the 2nd largest diocese in the US writes a column on the website of the Archdiocese of NY and calls it Church Teaching, I do think it is a valid subject for discussion here, just as abuses, heresies and bad priestly behavior are appropriate topics for discussion.

  22. Richard Thomas says:

    Hi Diane,

    I misplaced my point. I agree with you. I just had visions of a huge long topic on the morality of gun control and I wasn’t looking forward to it.

  23. Diane Harris says:

    Hi Richard,
    Oh, that point I completely understand. With a “Repeal the Safe Act” sign in my front yard, a true respect for the Church’s JUST WAR theory, and an article I’ve written (pending publication right now) on the Biblical Basis of Gun Rights, my blog post would probably be the wrong one to find much support for gun control. 🙂 d

  24. Diane Harris says:

    I thought this Cardinal Dolan article needed a picture but I couldn’t find one that seemed appropriate. Thanks, Ray, for sending me just the right picture to add to the post. Yikes!

Leave a Reply

Log in | Register

You must be logged in to post a comment.

-Return to main page-