• Bruce
    June 21, 2011 Reply

    Yes, Archbishop. It’s amazing how many get it wrong when it comes to the the love of God. I too have been silent in prayer in the midst of the Body of Christ, thousands standing vigilant, waiting for social injustices of marriage inequality to be corrected. The Body of Christ suffers when its gay and lesbian members are open to flagrant discrimination, or when their civil liberties are denied in the courts of our state capitol. May our common mediation in the presence of the Blessed Sacrament bring justice to all members of our world, regardless of their race, creed, or sexual orientation.

  • Marya
    June 21, 2011 Reply

    The Walk

    O precious Lord, O Love Divine
    Present among us in what seems mere bread and wine
    The faith you give tells us it’s more
    And so we have the heart to kneel and to adore

    You walked the roads of Palestine
    You went unnoticed we were blind
    Now as we walk up to receive
    May we take and eat
    May we see you Lord
    Present here as bread and wine

    O Precious Lord Fill up our souls
    Never allow our hearts to ever become cold
    To you we give our very lives
    Joined heart to heart we too become your sacrifice


    This Mystery beyond our minds
    reminds us just how often we have become blind
    May we recall you deemed to come
    Upon the earth as one of us, O holy One!
    O Precious Lord, O Love Divine
    You walked unnoticed on the roads of Palestine
    You walked unnoticed on the roads of Palestine

  • Peggy Lavery
    June 21, 2011 Reply

    Archbishop Dolan, Please give direction and guidance to all regarding Fr. John Corapi. I truly believe this is the time for something like this to be before all of us Catholics….and you are the one to give it voice…you have the tools from above to network and bridge the polarization and to advance the new springtime. Your blog today dated June 21, 2011 confirms it in my mind. Thank you!

  • Lady.Rosary
    June 22, 2011 Reply

    That’s quite a funy scene 😀 Well, from an outsider, it does seem like doing nothing, but for us, it obviously means so much more especially for our faith!

  • Anne Bender
    June 22, 2011 Reply

    What a beautiful sight that must have been and how pleased our Lord must be to see so many holy men bowed down in silent adoration before Him!

  • Will
    June 22, 2011 Reply

    Thank you Your Excellency, a Blessed Feast of Corpus Christi to you too! I love the Blessed Sacrament too, and I am so thankful that we can visit the blessed body of Jesus in person! I for one am certainly not worthy of such a Presence, and it is just one of many reminders that God truly loves us 🙂

  • AndyP/Doria2
    June 22, 2011 Reply

    And the early Church had much to say on this. From the Catholic Answers website:

    Christ in the Eucharist

    Protestant attacks on the Catholic Church often focus on the Eucharist. This demonstrates that opponents of the Church—mainly Evangelicals and Fundamentalists—recognize one of Catholicism’s core doctrines. What’s more, the attacks show that Fundamentalists are not always literalists. This is seen in their interpretation of the key biblical passage, chapter six of John’s Gospel, in which Christ speaks about the sacrament that will be instituted at the Last Supper. This tract examines the last half of that chapter.

    John 6:30 begins a colloquy that took place in the synagogue at Capernaum. The Jews asked Jesus what sign he could perform so that they might believe in him. As a challenge, they noted that “our ancestors ate manna in the desert.” Could Jesus top that? He told them the real bread from heaven comes from the Father. “Give us this bread always,” they said. Jesus replied, “I am the bread of life; whoever comes to me will never hunger, and whoever believes in me will never thirst.” At this point the Jews understood him to be speaking metaphorically.

    Again and Again
    Jesus first repeated what he said, then summarized: “‘I am the living bread which came down from heaven; if any one eats of this bread, he will live for ever; and the bread which I shall give for the life of the world is my flesh.’ The Jews then disputed among themselves, saying, ‘How can this man give us his flesh to eat?’” (John 6:51–52). His listeners were stupefied because now they understood Jesus literally—and correctly. He again repeated his words, but with even greater emphasis, and introduced the statement about drinking his blood: “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you have no life in you; he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. He who eats my flesh and drinks my blood abides in me, and I in him” (John 6:53–56).

    No Corrections
    Notice that Jesus made no attempt to soften what he said, no attempt to correct “misunderstandings,” for there were none. Our Lord’s listeners understood him perfectly well. They no longer thought he was speaking metaphorically. If they had, if they mistook what he said, why no correction? On other occasions when there was confusion, Christ explained just what he meant (cf. Matt. 16:5–12). Here, where any misunderstanding would be fatal, there was no effort by Jesus to correct. Instead, he repeated himself for greater emphasis. In John 6:60 we read: “Many of his disciples, when they heard it, said, ‘This is a hard saying; who can listen to it?’” These were his disciples, people used to his remarkable ways. He warned them not to think carnally, but spiritually: “It is the Spirit that gives life, the flesh is of no avail; the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life” (John 6:63; cf. 1 Cor. 2:12–14). But he knew some did not believe. (It is here, in the rejection of the Eucharist, that Judas fell away; look at John 6:64.) “After this, many of his disciples drew back and no longer went about with him” (John 6:66). This is the only record we have of any of Christ’s followers forsaking him for purely doctrinal reasons. If it had all been a misunderstanding, if they erred in taking a metaphor in a literal sense, why didn’t he call them back and straighten things out? Both the Jews, who were suspicious of him, and his disciples, who had accepted everything up to this point, would have remained with him had he said he was speaking only symbolically. But he did not correct these protesters. Twelve times he said he was the bread that came down from heaven; four times he said they would have “to eat my flesh and drink my blood.” John 6 was an extended promise of what would be instituted at the Last Supper—and it was a promise that could not be more explicit. Or so it would seem to a Catholic. But what do Fundamentalists say?

    Fundamentalist writers who comment on John 6 also assert that one can show Christ was speaking only metaphorically by comparing verses like John 10:9 (“I am the door”) and John 15:1 (“I am the true vine”). The problem is that there is not a connection to John 6:35, “I am the bread of life.” “I am the door” and “I am the vine” make sense as metaphors because Christ is like a door—we go to heaven through him—and he is also like a vine—we get our spiritual sap through him. But Christ takes John 6:35 far beyond symbolism by saying, “For my flesh is food indeed, and my blood is drink indeed” (John 6:55).

    He continues: “As the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father, so he who eats me will live because of me” (John 6:57). The Greek word used for “eats” (trogon) is very blunt and has the sense of “chewing” or “gnawing.” This is not the language of metaphor.

    Their Main Argument
    For Fundamentalist writers, the scriptural argument is capped by an appeal to John 6:63: “It is the spirit that gives life, the flesh is of no avail; the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life.” They say this means that eating real flesh is a waste. But does this make sense?

    Are we to understand that Christ had just commanded his disciples to eat his flesh, then said their doing so would be pointless? Is that what “the flesh is of no avail” means? “Eat my flesh, but you’ll find it’s a waste of time”—is that what he was saying? Hardly. The fact is that Christ’s flesh avails much! If it were of no avail, then the Son of God incarnated for no reason, he died for no reason, and he rose from the dead for no reason. Christ’s flesh profits us more than anyone else’s in the world. If it profits us nothing, so that the incarnation, death, and resurrection of Christ are of no avail, then “your faith is futile and you are still in your sins. Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ have perished” (1 Cor. 15:17b–18). In John 6:63 “flesh profits nothing” refers to mankind’s inclination to think using only what their natural human reason would tell them rather than what God would tell them. Thus in John 8:15–16 Jesus tells his opponents: “You judge according to the flesh, I judge no one. Yet even if I do judge, my judgment is true, for it is not I alone that judge, but I and he who sent me.” So natural human judgment, unaided by God’s grace, is unreliable; but God’s judgment is always true. And were the disciples to understand the line “The words I have spoken to you are spirit and life” as nothing but a circumlocution (and a very clumsy one at that) for “symbolic”? No one can come up with such interpretations unless he first holds to the Fundamentalist position and thinks it necessary to find a rationale, no matter how forced, for evading the Catholic interpretation. In John 6:63 “flesh” does not refer to Christ’s own flesh—the context makes this clear—but to mankind’s inclination to think on a natural, human level. “The words I have spoken to you are spirit” does not mean “What I have just said is symbolic.” The word “spirit” is never used that way in the Bible. The line means that what Christ has said will be understood only through faith; only by the power of the Spirit and the drawing of the Father (cf. John 6:37, 44–45, 65).

    Paul Confirms This
    Paul wrote to the Corinthians: “The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?” (1 Cor. 10:16). So when we receive Communion, we actually participate in the body and blood of Christ, not just eat symbols of them. Paul also said, “Therefore whoever eats the bread and drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily will have to answer for the body and blood of the Lord. . . . For any one who eats and drinks without discerning the body, eats and drinks judgment on himself” (1 Cor. 11:27, 29). “To answer for the body and blood” of someone meant to be guilty of a crime as serious as homicide. How could eating mere bread and wine “unworthily” be so serious? Paul’s comment makes sense only if the bread and wine became the real body and blood of Christ.

    What Did the First Christians Say?
    Anti-Catholics also claim the early Church took this chapter symbolically. Is that so? Let’s see what some early Christians thought, keeping in mind that we can learn much about how Scripture should be interpreted by examining the writings of early Christians. Ignatius of Antioch, who had been a disciple of the apostle John and who wrote a letter to the Smyrnaeans about A.D. 110, said, referring to “those who hold heterodox opinions,” that “they abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they do not confess that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, flesh which suffered for our sins and which the Father, in his goodness, raised up again” (6:2, 7:1). Forty years later, Justin Martyr, wrote, “Not as common bread or common drink do we receive these; but since Jesus Christ our Savior was made incarnate by the word of God and had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so too, as we have been taught, the food which has been made into the Eucharist by the Eucharistic prayer set down by him, and by the change of which our blood and flesh is nourished, . . . is both the flesh and the blood of that incarnated Jesus” (First Apology 66:1–20).
    Origen, in a homily written about A.D. 244, attested to belief in the Real Presence. “I wish to admonish you with examples from your religion. You are accustomed to take part in the divine mysteries, so you know how, when you have received the Body of the Lord, you reverently exercise every care lest a particle of it fall and lest anything of the consecrated gift perish. You account yourselves guilty, and rightly do you so believe, if any of it be lost through negligence” (Homilies on Exodus 13:3).
    Cyril of Jerusalem, in a catechetical lecture presented in the mid-300s, said, “Do not, therefore, regard the bread and wine as simply that, for they are, according to the Master’s declaration, the body and blood of Christ. Even though the senses suggest to you the other, let faith make you firm. Do not judge in this matter by taste, but be fully assured by faith, not doubting that you have been deemed worthy
    of the body and blood of Christ” (Catechetical Discourses: Mystagogic 4:22:9).

    In a fifth-century homily, Theodore of Mopsuestia seemed to be speaking to today’s Evangelicals and Fundamentalists: “When [Christ] gave the bread he did not say, ‘This is the symbol of my body,’ but, ‘This is my body.’ In the same way, when he gave the cup of his blood he did not say, ‘This is the symbol of my blood,’ but, ‘This is my blood,’ for he wanted us to look upon the [Eucharistic elements], after their reception of grace and the coming of the Holy Spirit, not according to their nature, but to receive them as they are, the body and blood of our Lord” (Catechetical Homilies 5:1).

    Unanimous Testimony

    Whatever else might be said, the early Church took John 6 literally. In fact, there is no record from the early centuries that implies Christians doubted the constant Catholic interpretation. There exists no document in which the literal interpretation is opposed and only the metaphorical accepted.

    Why do Fundamentalists and Evangelicals reject the plain, literal interpretation of John 6? For them, Catholic sacraments are out because they imply a spiritual reality—grace—being conveyed by means of matter. This seems to them to be a violation of the divine plan. For many Protestants, matter is not to be used, but overcome or avoided.

    One suspects, had they been asked by the Creator their opinion of how to bring about mankind’s salvation, Fundamentalists would have advised him to adopt a different approach. How much cleaner things would be if spirit never dirtied itself with matter! But God approves of matter—he approves of it because he created it—and he approves of it so much that he comes to us under the appearances of bread and wine, just as he does in the physical form of the Incarnate Christ.

    The Real Presence

    The doctrine of the Real Presence asserts that in the Holy Eucharist, Jesus is literally and wholly present—body and blood, soul and divinity—under the appearances of bread and wine. Evangelicals and Fundamentalists frequently attack this doctrine as “unbiblical,” but the Bible is forthright in declaring it (cf. 1 Cor. 10:16–17, 11:23–29; and, most forcefully, John 6:32–71).

    The early Church Fathers interpreted these passages literally. In summarizing the early Fathers’ teachings on Christ’s Real Presence, renowned Protestant historian of the early Church J. N. D. Kelly, writes: “Eucharistic teaching, it should be understood at the outset, was in general unquestioningly realist, i.e., the consecrated bread and wine were taken to be, and were treated and designated as, the Savior’s body and blood” (Early Christian Doctrines, 440).

    From the Church’s early days, the Fathers referred to Christ’s presence in the Eucharist. Kelly writes: “Ignatius roundly declares that . . . [t]he bread is the flesh of Jesus, the cup his blood. Clearly he intends this realism to be taken strictly, for he makes it the basis of his argument against the Docetists’ denial of the reality of Christ’s body. . . . Irenaeus teaches that the bread and wine are really the Lord’s body and blood. His witness is, indeed, all the more impressive because he produces it quite incidentally while refuting the Gnostic and Docetic rejection of the Lord’s real humanity” (ibid., 197–98).

    “Hippolytus speaks of ‘the body and the blood’ through which the Church is saved, and Tertullian regularly describes the bread as ‘the Lord’s body.’ The converted pagan, he remarks, ‘feeds on the richness of the Lord’s body, that is, on the Eucharist.’ The realism of his theology comes to light in the argument, based on the intimate relation of body and soul, that just as in baptism the body is washed with water so that the soul may be cleansed, so in the Eucharist ‘the flesh feeds upon Christ’s body and blood so that the soul may be filled with God.’ Clearly his assumption is that the Savior’s body and blood are as real as the baptismal water. Cyprian’s attitude is similar. Lapsed Christians who claim communion without doing penance, he declares, ‘do violence to his body and blood, a sin more heinous against the Lord with their hands and mouths than when they denied him.’ Later he expatiates on the terrifying consequences of profaning the sacrament, and the stories he tells confirm that he took the Real Presence literally” (ibid., 211–12).

    Ignatius of Antioch
    “I have no taste for corruptible food nor for the pleasures of this life. I desire the bread of God, which is the flesh of Jesus Christ, who was of the seed of David; and for drink I desire his blood, which is love incorruptible” (Letter to the Romans 7:3 [A.D. 110]).

    “Take note of those who hold heterodox opinions on the grace of Jesus Christ which has come to us, and see how contrary their opinions are to the mind of God. . . . They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer because they do not confess that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, flesh which suffered for our sins and which that Father, in his goodness, raised up again. They who deny the gift of God are perishing in their disputes” (Letter to the Smyrnaeans 6:2–7:1 [A.D. 110]).

    Justin Martyr
    “We call this food Eucharist, and no one else is permitted to partake of it, except one who believes our teaching to be true and who has been washed in the washing which is for the remission of sins and for regeneration [i.e., has received baptism] and is thereby living as Christ enjoined. For not as common bread nor common drink do we receive these; but since Jesus Christ our Savior was made incarnate by the word of God and had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so too, as we have been taught, the food which has been made into the Eucharist by the Eucharistic prayer set down by him, and by the change of which our blood and flesh is nurtured, is both the flesh and the blood of that incarnated Jesus” (First Apology 66 [A.D. 151]).

    “If the Lord were from other than the Father, how could he rightly take bread, which is of the same creation as our own, and confess it to be his body and affirm that the mixture in the cup is his blood?” (Against Heresies 4:33–32 [A.D. 189]).

    “He has declared the cup, a part of creation, to be his own blood, from which he causes our blood to flow; and the bread, a part of creation, he has established as his own body, from which he gives increase unto our bodies. When, therefore, the mixed cup [wine and water] and the baked bread receives the Word of God and becomes the Eucharist, the body of Christ, and from these the substance of our flesh is increased and supported, how can they say that the flesh is not capable of receiving the gift of God, which is eternal life—flesh which is nourished by the body and blood of the Lord, and is in fact a member of him?” (ibid., 5:2).

    “Formerly there was baptism in an obscure way . . . now, however, in full view, there is regeneration in water and in the Holy Spirit. Formerly, in an obscure way, there was manna for food; now, however, in full view, there is the true food, the flesh of the Word of God, as he himself says: ‘My flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink’ [John 6:55]” (Homilies on Numbers 7:2 [A.D. 248]).

    Cyprian of Carthage
    “He [Paul] threatens, moreover, the stubborn and forward, and denounces them, saying, ‘Whosoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily, is guilty of the body and blood of the Lord’ [1 Cor. 11:27]. All these warnings being scorned and contemned—[lapsed Christians will often take Communion] before their sin is expiated, before confession has been made of their crime, before their conscience has been purged by sacrifice and by the hand of the priest, before the offense of an angry and threatening Lord has been appeased, [and so] violence is done to his body and blood; and they sin now against their Lord more with their hand and mouth than when they denied their Lord” (The Lapsed 15–16 [A.D. 251]).

    Aphraahat the Persian Sage
    “After having spoken thus [at the Last Supper], the Lord rose up from the place where he had made the Passover and had given his body as food and his blood as drink, and he went with his disciples to the place where he was to be arrested. But he ate of his own body and drank of his own blood, while he was pondering on the dead. With his own hands the Lord presented his own body to be eaten, and before he was crucified he gave his blood as drink” (Treatises 12:6 [A.D. 340]).

    Cyril of Jerusalem
    “The bread and the wine of the Eucharist before the holy invocation of the adorable Trinity were simple bread and wine, but the invocation having been made, the bread becomes the body of Christ and the wine the blood of Christ” (Catechetical Lectures 19:7 [A.D. 350]).

    “Do not, therefore, regard the bread and wine as simply that; for they are, according to the Master’s declaration, the body and blood of Christ. Even though the senses suggest to you the other, let faith make you firm. Do not judge in this matter by taste, but be fully assured by the faith, not doubting that you have been deemed worthy of the body and blood of Christ. . . . [Since you are] fully convinced that the apparent bread is not bread, even though it is sensible to the taste, but the body of Christ, and that the apparent wine is not wine, even though the taste would have it so, . . . partake of that bread as something spiritual, and put a cheerful face on your soul” (ibid., 22:6, 9).

    Ambrose of Milan
    “Perhaps you may be saying, ‘I see something else; how can you assure me that I am receiving the body of Christ?’ It but remains for us to prove it. And how many are the examples we might use! . . . Christ is in that sacrament, because it is the body of Christ” (The Mysteries 9:50, 58 [A.D. 390]).

    “Christ was carried in his own hands when, referring to his own body, he said, ‘This is my body’ [Matt. 26:26]. For he carried that body in his hands” (Explanations of the Psalms 33:1:10 [A.D. 405]).

    “I promised you [new Christians], who have now been baptized, a sermon in which I would explain the sacrament of the Lord’s Table. . . . That bread which you see on the altar, having been sanctified by the word of God, is the body of Christ. That chalice, or rather, what is in that chalice, having been sanctified by the word of God, is the blood of Christ” (Sermons 227 [A.D. 411]).

    “What you see is the bread and the chalice; that is what your own eyes report to you. But what your faith obliges you to accept is that the bread is the body of Christ and the chalice is the blood of Christ. This has been said very briefly, which may perhaps be sufficient for faith; yet faith does not desire instruction” (ibid., 272).

    Council of Ephesus
    “We will necessarily add this also. Proclaiming the death, according to the flesh, of the only-begotten Son of God, that is Jesus Christ, confessing his resurrection from the dead, and his ascension into heaven, we offer the unbloody sacrifice in the churches, and so go on to the mystical thanksgivings, and are sanctified, having received his holy flesh and the precious blood of Christ the Savior of us all. And not as common flesh do we receive it; God forbid: nor as of a man sanctified and associated with the Word according to the unity of worth, or as having a divine indwelling, but as truly the life-giving and very flesh of the Word himself. For he is the life according to his nature as God, and when he became united to his flesh, he made it also to be life-giving” (Session 1, Letter of Cyril to Nestorius [A.D. 431]).

  • Ellen Moore
    June 22, 2011 Reply

    Dear Archbishop Dolan,

    I remember the first time that I saw you. I attended the first Mass that you served in St. Patrick’s Cathederal. When you walked up the aisle that I was sitting in I said to myself, we (the Catholic people of New York and on a global level) are safe. I went home and shared my thoughts with my family and friends.
    In the time that has transpired between then and now, I have grown terribly disappointed in you. Now as we stand on the thershold of legalizing gay marriage, I ask, where is your voice? Why are you not actively preaching on the sancity of the family and of the commitment of marriage between a man and a woman to proliferate the bearing and bringing forth of children in the way that God created and meant it to be. I am not just disappointed you in this area, but in general. My husband attended Mass at St. Patrick’s on a regular basis (we traveled from Long Island) to partake in Cardinal O’Connor’s Mass. We were never disappointed during his homilies, or in his mastery of leading and speaking out for his flock. Thank you for your time, Ellen Moore
    (I hope to hear a response from you).

  • Gertrude Fernandes
    June 22, 2011 Reply

    Blessed Feast of Corpus Christi!
    It is really, as you have said, truly we know deep in our hearts and believe that the second person of the Most Holy Trinity is present in the Holy Eucharist in Divinity, Body, & Blood. It is the most wonderful grace, privilege & opportunity to offer our ,
    hearts to Jesus to dwell in us. If only we believe from depth of our heart that when, Son of the Most High, Great Physician, ocean of love mercy lives in us, when things go wrong or in sickness we would lay our hands on our hearts, by faith touch Him with total faith & intimacy, we would be healed & enlightened. It is the greatest Mystery and truth, Three persons in Holy Trinity are inseparable, where God the Father is, there God the Son & Holy Spirit with Him, where God the Son is there God the Father & Holy Spirit with Him and so is where Holy Spirit is there God the Father & God the Son with Him. In truth in the Holy Eucharist we receive the Most Holy Trinity in one Unity.

    The above fact makes me happy and helps me in my trying time & dark moment to know the Holy Trinity dwells in me, I should not sin and shall hold on to them – the One Triune God.

    (pl. correct me if I am wrong – you may guide me)

    May the Holy Trinity withone Unity Bless you with all the Divine Blessings.

    Gertrude Fernandes

  • Jan
    June 23, 2011 Reply

    Dear Archbishop Dolan:

    Thank you for leading the way in holiness for your fellow bishops by making confession available at the conference, by availing yourself of its incredible power and mercy, and promoting it in such a refreshing manner. The huge spiritual responsibilities of the bishopric necessitate more frequent confession – allowing the Holy Spirit to be “all in” – especially in these tempestuous times when He is needed most to bestow the zeal for truth and courage to lead his flock. We really need our bishops to be strong and undeterred by worldly politics in their leadership, and I was so heartened in this regard by what I saw and heard in the airing of the Bishops Conference. We, of course, have most thankfully been witnesses of many bishops stepping up to do the needed and right things to lead us in retaining and establishing Christian values and practices in our land. I fervently hope all the bishops adopt similar confession schedules and the promotion of this crucial sacrament in their dioceses as you initiated for Lent in New York. Let the confession line be a new and blessed phenomenon.

    Jesus I trust in You


  • Anthony
    June 23, 2011 Reply

    Unfortunately this character, regardless of his homilies is just another closet gay priest. He doesn’t support gay marriage and yet half his order is probably gay. The fact that I am gay is precisely why I feel like the Catholic Church is right for me: I’m right at home with all these priests. It’s OK Bishop Dolan, just come out of the closet and join the cause. To think that the Catholic church is or has always been right is just not true: The Crusades, The Divine Right of Kings, Slavery, Women, Blacks, Jews……… You get my point. Wake up and smell the Eucharist my friend and recognize that Jesus is for everyone. God made us in his imagine. To think that such an imagine is the Nazi white man reflects an ignorance of God. He is capable of creating something more beautiful and more dynamic than what your little pea brain can imagine.

  • AndyP/Doria2
    June 24, 2011 Reply

    Sorry Archbishop, but my money was on this Archbishop to head the USCCB. I pray you follow his lead. AndtP/Doria2 HOSEA 4:6

    “The state has no right to interfere”

    Denver archbishop warns of growing government threat to Catholic institutions

    By Marianne Medlin

    Denver, Colo.(CNA/EWTN News) — Archbishop Charles J. Chaput of Denver has warned Catholic social workers against the danger of Church institutions losing their religious identity amidst increasing hostility from the government and society.

    “The more that Catholic universities or hospitals mute their religious identity; the more that Catholic social ministries weaken their religious character… the less useful to the Gospel they become,” he said.

    Archbishop Chaput delivered a dual message to Catholic social workers this week, urging them not to let their Christian identity wane and also stressing that the government has no right to impede the work of Catholic institutions.

    At a June 21 address to the Catholic Social Workers National Convention in Denver, he said that civil society consists “not just of autonomous individuals” but communities as well. “Those communities also have rights. Catholic institutions are extensions of the Catholic community and Catholic belief,” he emphasized.

    “The state has no right to interfere with their legitimate work, even when it claims to act in the name of individuals unhappy with Catholic teaching,” the archbishop said.

    Archbishop Chaput’s remarks were made against the backdrop of Catholic Charities in several dioceses across the U.S. shutting down adoption and foster care services after their local states enacted civil union laws.

    Despite these setbacks, however, the Denver archbishop said that Catholic ministries “have the duty to faithfully embody Catholic beliefs on marriage, the family, social justice, sexuality, abortion and other important issues.”

    “And if the state refuses to allow those Catholic ministries to be faithful in their services through legal or financial bullying,” he added, “then as a matter of integrity, they should end their services.”

    “Catholic social ministry begins and ends with Jesus Christ,” he said. “If it doesn’t, it isn’t Catholic.”

    “And if our social work isn’t deeply, confidently and explicitly Catholic in its identity, then we should stop using the word ‘Catholic,’” he said. “It’s that simple.”

    Archbishop Chaput warned that “a new kind of America” is emerging in the 21st century, one that is likely to be “much less friendly to religious faith than anything in the nation’s past.”

    The reason for this, he said, is that “America’s religious soul – its Christian subtext – has been weakening for decades.”

    The archbishop observed that religious communities have historically had a great deal of power in shaping attitudes and behavior in the U.S. “And that’s why, if you dislike religion or resent the Catholic Church, or just want to reshape American life into some new kind of experiment, you need to use the state to break the influence of the Church and her ministries.”

    He said that in the years ahead, the nation’s religious communities will encounter more attempts by civil authorities to interfere and will find less “unchallenged space” to carry out their work in the public square. “It’s already happening with Catholic hospitals and adoption agencies, and even in the hiring practices of organizations like Catholic Charities,” the archbishop said.

    He noted that this increasing hostility towards Catholicism shows how “no one in Catholic social work can afford to be lukewarm about his faith.”

    “Being faithful to Catholic teaching isn’t something optional for a Catholic social worker,” said Archbishop Chaput. “It’s basic to his or her identity,” adding that the faith “is much more than a list of dos and don’ts.”

    Rather, Catholic teaching is part “of a much larger view of the human person, human dignity and our eternal destiny,” he said. “The content of this teaching comes from God through his son Jesus Christ. It’s defined by the universal Church and then preached, taught and applied by the local bishop.”

    Archbishop Chaput concluded his remarks by saying he “painted a pretty stark picture of the America we may face in the next few decades.”

    “But we shouldn’t lose heart, even for a minute,” he said. “Our job is to let God change us, and then to help God, through our actions, to change the lives of others. That’s what we’ll be held accountable for, and it’s very much within our ability – if we remain faithful to who we are as believers.”

  • Brian Cook
    June 24, 2011 Reply

    Body and blood of Christ, love us, guide us to truth, heal and reconcile us all.

  • Jay Roget
    June 24, 2011 Reply

    You are a disgrace to all that you stand for for even daring to say that todays monumental vote in support of equal rights for all is “bad for society.” You, the church, and all that you stand against are what are bad for society.

  • Jesus
    June 25, 2011 Reply

    I am appalled at your position on marriage equality. You would think for a man of your position you would be more loving of God’s creation.

  • Peter
    June 25, 2011 Reply

    If people think Gay Marriage is not already causing problems. My three teenage children and their friends are totally and often angriliy for gay rights and gay marriage. Yet at the same time they and their friends make more anti gay jokes and get confused over who to ask out or date. Well he’s never gone on a date. “Tom says He’s gay.” Oh I heard he was bi” “no that was Cheryl she was “bi last year now she’s full gay but thinks she might be staright too” “Isn’t that bi” “No you can be gay and bi you just can’t be straight and bi” Oh so she goes out with Tom and Sue? Sometimes. Oh that’s weird. yeah but it’s HER right she didn’t choose to be that way she has the right to date whoever she likes. So do you? “A dude no way? That’s just gross” “Oh that’s so wrong you’re a homophobe someday you might decide your gay” “i thought it wasn’t a choice” Its not… geez…..
    Those are all real quotes I have heard. Our passports already say Parent 1 and Parent 2. In several generations how will we know who the children are biologically related? We’ll all have to take DNA tests to find out.
    But the Church is at fault. It lost its voice and credibility when it failed to address the pedophilia problem properly. Why on earth is Pedophilia and Child Abuse not an act that gets someone automatically excommunicated??? Now is the time for the Church to list that and gay marriage as acts of excommunication. Sorry the Church must take a harsh stand on this.

  • Pete
    June 25, 2011 Reply

    It takes alot of faith to believe that those hosts are really bread before consecration. There is nothing recognizable about them as a part of the “bread family” . I enjoy communion in a few parishes of the US, and more widely in eastern Europe, where one often sees real loves of bread consecrated then divided for distribution. I remember a priest in Philadelphia once making the same observation, and adding that the modern hosts are closer to fish food from the pet store than to bread.

  • Anthony
    June 25, 2011 Reply

    May God Bless your Mission in New York and America

    Archbishop, you remind us of God’s Laws, His teachings and his presence amongst us

    In the Holy Father’s Book, Jesus of Nazareth, he writes, If we get rid of God from society, there is no measuring rod above us; we ourselves are our only measure. The Vineyard (this world) belongs to us. What happens to man and the world next? We are already beginning to see it

    Please keep reminding us of what is moral and just and not what is convenient and if you get criticized remember what Jesus said, Blessed are you when others revile you and persecute you and utter all kinds of evil against you because of me (Matthew 5:11)
    May the Lord Bless your mission

  • Michael Sanchez
    June 25, 2011 Reply

    Dear Archbishop Dolan,

    The passage by the New York Legislature of the Marriage Equality bill alters radically and forever the Church’s historic ability to spread bigotry and hate. Rest assured, Marriage Equality will not undermine marriage or family. On the contrary, it will strengthen both. This will be crystal clear on 11.11.11 when my boyfriend and I are married in front of God and our families.

    I worry that your continued hyper-focus on the fight against equality allows the tragic sexual abuse of children by clergy members and the Church’s unforgivable cover-ups, to continue. Please stop wasting parishioners money on the unholy fight against equality and instead use the money to clean up the rotting mess in your own house.


    Michael Sanchez
    Los Angeles

  • AndyP/Doria2
    June 27, 2011 Reply

    I’ll say it again Your Excellency, if by these posts you do not see the damage that was done here in NY by feeding us milk instead of solid food over the last 50 years, I guess you will never see it. Many of these peope here think they are Catholic. Many of the politicians who voted in favor of this “abomination” think THEY are Catholic. Our apostate governor thinks HE is Catholic.

    And they keep receiving our Lord in the Most Holy Eucharist. Pro abortion, pro abomination and our leaders sit back and lament about “how sad” they are.

    Where is Cardinal Burke when America needs him most. Thank God for the Church in Africa and SE Asia for we are dying a slow painful death here in The West and our leaders do darn near close to nothing.


Error Please check your entries!