2004 LETTERS
December
November
October
September
July/August
June
May
April
March
February
January

Little Notes

Confessions
Talk About Movies
Roamin' Catholic
Follow Me




Contents © 2004
by Jim Holman.
All rights reserved.

LETTERS
October 2004

---

It took courage for Steve Yuhas to publish his "gay social conservative views" in the Union-Tribune opposing the gay pride events held in Hillcrest this summer. I admire his honesty in September's San Diego News Notes interview ("Gay Conservative Writer Disgusted By Gay Pride," September 2004)for not justifying his sexual behavior as something other than sin, and hope that soon his "long-term relationship with an active-duty Marine" will evolve into a relationship more pleasing to God.

Theresa Ellis
San Diego

YUHAS REFRESHING

James McCoy's interview with Steve Yuhas was very informative and brought to life clearly that there are gay conservatives.

Steve Yuhas' quote that "my sin of being gay is the same as any other sin" was refreshing to read. I can see why Mr. Yuhas is at odds with the gay agenda because he has the nerve to call being gay a sin and Mr. Yuhas puts a damper on the gay parade!

Craig Galik
Duquesne, Pennsylvania

McCOY SOFTBALLED YUHAS

I think that most people who watch T.V. (we, in my household, no longer do) are familiar with the program "Hardball," with Chris Matthews. Well, I think that we should call this article: "Softball -- no curves thrown to Steve Yuhas," by James McCoy.

It is certainly a sign of the times when (just another branch of the local, liberal media?) News Notes lowers itself to mainstream a certain, shall we say, "lifestyle" of homosexuality. Why was this done? Because of the "uniqueness" of a homosexual who claims to be a "conservative"? And just what does "conservative" mean these days anyway?

Mr. McCoy let many opportunities escape in nailing down the abomination of what homosexuality is -- regardless if one is "conservative" or whatever. (And, by the way, I refuse to use the word "gay" in describing the homosexual; just call me insensitive!). Instead, we have the first question that Mr. McCoy asks Mr. Yuhas: "Although Jewish, you went to a Catholic college; how did it influence you?"

Mr. Yuhas's answer is stunning, he says: "...St. John's University ... it solidified my belief in God -- not a particular religion, mind you...." So much for "St. John's being "Catholic." There aren't any "Catholic" universities left in the entire nation, save one or two. This, of course, is part of the "new spring-time," the "new Pentecost," that "breath of fresh air" that was let into the Church by the Second Vatican Council. It was more like poison gas that entered through that broken window! With those (and many "Catholics" included) now believing that one "religion" is as good as another.

Your "conservative" homosexual says this regarding sin: "...mainstream religions believe homosexuality is a sin, but will all those without sin please stand up?" How trite! Again, we practicing Catholics all know who was without sin: Christ (who never compromised on sin, and His Most Blessed Mother).

Mr. Yuhas further states: "I don't subscribe to the notion of a sliding scale of sin, so my sin of being gay is just the same as any other sin -- the only difference is, that for some reason, many believe mine to be worse than theirs." At this point, Mr. McCoy should have hammered his "conservative gay," but he didn't. I have a question: is Mr. McCoy Catholic? If he is, then that is another proof of the "new springtime"! But as to Mr. Yuhas's belief that his sin is not worse than any other, take heed: it is one of the four sins that cries to Heaven for vengeance! Read the Bible, Mr. Yuhas!

Mr. Yuhas is then caught in his own ignorance and hypocrisy by first mocking "religions" regarding sin, but then uses those very same "religions" to suit his twisted thinking by saying: "Marriage is a union between a man and a woman and has been -- religiously and traditionally -- for thousands of years." Mr. McCoy; where were you?

And finally, Mr. Yuhas says this regarding the rights of society: "Either society has a right to set limits and standards on marriage or it doesn't." I would ask: and what about the abomination of homosexuality? Does not society get its "rights" and power to make and enforce laws from God on High? And does God give equal "rights" to evil as well as to good? The answer -- if I may be so bold as to "speak" for the Almighty -- No, He does not!

Mr. McCoy, you had an opportunity to show the false premise that Mr. Yuhas was coming from and you failed in your duty as a reporter and journalist. But this is just one more example of the lack of clarity and direction in the secularized, man-centered American Catholic Church these days. Shame on you Mr. McCoy! And, as I do for all homosexuals, I will pray for Mr. Yuhas to return to that natural state that God intended for men and women. With God, all things are possible.

Eugene De Lalla
Troy, New Hampshire

IN PRAISE OF ST. JOSEPH'S CATHEDRAL

This is a long overdue letter in response to a cover story in the March 2004 News Notes, "Where are the Catholic Leaders?" The article reported on the January 22 pro-life candlelight vigil held in front of the Planned Parenthood abortion mill in downtown San Diego, to mark the anniversary of the infamous Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion-on-demand in 1973. In one of the interviews with participants, a Catholic lamented that, at her parish, St. Joseph's Cathedral, "during the intercessions they will say a prayer for the unborn and for the people who perform abortions, but that's it. To me, that is very minimal."

The purpose of my letter is not to criticize this great pro-life Catholic who cared enough to publicly oppose abortion on a cold winter night. I certainly understand her frustration at the frequent lack of substantive pro-life efforts on the parish level, but I am also obliged to praise St. Joseph's Cathedral. Having attended a fair number of Masses at various parishes in this diocese and being a frequent attendee at the Cathedral, I have the impression that St. Joseph's is one of the very few parishes that, at almost every Mass, includes prayers that explicitly address the scourge of abortion in its general intercessions after the recitation of the Creed. I am told that Masses at Our Lady of the Rosary Church also frequently include references to abortion. This is a critically important effort. By so doing, the parish consistently reminds the parishioners that abortion is evil and most of all, harnesses the spiritual power of the entire congregation praying in unison for these intentions. All Catholic parishes worldwide should be doing so at every Mass and it costs a parish nothing to do this (except perhaps a few donations from pro-abortion Catholics, but I firmly believe that the Lord will make up for this by increasing donations from parishioners who appreciate the parish's fidelity to the truth). Yet it is astounding and appalling that so few parishes will do even this, not even by including very generally worded petitions such as "We pray that all human life would be cherished and respected from conception to natural death." No, not even that, except perhaps a couple of times in October, Respect Life or close to the January 22 anniversary. Indeed, at most parishes there seems to be a scrupulous effort to avoid mention of anything controversial during the prayer of the faithful, forgetting, of course, that Our Lord Himself said many controversial things; that's why He was crucified. No wonder so many Catholics continue to vote for pro-abortion politicians and make excuses for pro-abortion Catholic politicians when they are so infrequently, if ever, reminded of the issue at their parishes.

True, there is always room for more pro-life activity at the parish level. Due to the priest shortage and the resulting time constraints on our clergy, it is frequently up to interested parishioners to take the initiative here if they have a supportive pastor. In the meantime, collective prayers for the sanctity of human life at Mass are indispensable and lay an excellent foundation for other pro-life initiatives in the parish. So, God bless St. Joseph's Cathedral and Our Lady of the Rosary and any other parishes who include pro-life petitions in their Masses; may they always continue them and may other pastors follow their good example. This is one of several factors that keep me returning and donating to the Cathedral, even though I live far outside the parish's geographical boundaries.

Anne Knight
San Diego

ASHAMED TO BE CATHOLIC

This is a copy of a letter I addressed to Mary Star of the Sea and the San Diego Diocese.

Today, I am ashamed to be a Catholic, and it is not the first time. On Saturday, September 4, I attended Mass at Mary Star of the Sea in La Jolla. I listened to a long list of prayer invocations for all possible reasons, yet I did not hear a single request for the repose of 400 souls of which 200 were children, massacred in Russia after 3 days of horrible abuse and depravation, the details of which are unspeakable. Nor was there a prayer request for 800 women and children lying in the hospital, some between life and death. Since I was a child and I started to listen to the story of Christ, the episode of the Massacre of the Innocents was to me the most shocking after the Crucifixion. Starting with the emergence of Christian art such episodes inspired some of the most powerful and tragic creations of art (The Pisanos' Pulpit of Pisa and Pistoia are only two celebrated examples.) The Catholic Church should stand up for the Innocent and assist them with their prayers. Today, as a Catholic, I am ashamed that you failed to do so.

Luisa Vergani
La Jolla

CATHOLIC ANSWERS OR CATHOLIC CENSORS?

On July 6, 2004 I called Catholic Answers, a national Catholic apologetics radio program, to ask Archbishop Michael Sheehan of Santa Fe, New Mexico, about the John Jay report on clergy sex abuse in the Catholic Church. Jerry Usher was the moderator. My question to the screener was expressed generally about the gender distribution of victims. According to the John Jay college report statistics, 81 percent of the victims were young boys and young men preyed upon by clergy, including bishops. Because of the large number of male victims, the report emphasized the homosexual nature of the problem.

I began by reminding the Archbishop and Mr. Usher that the problem is still current, citing the federal probe of the parish priest at Saint Charles Borromeo parish and recent allegation of homosexual misconduct at a seminary near Vienna, Austria. I heard Mr. Usher groan when mentioning the boy pornography investigation. I asked Archbishop Sheehan about the 81% male victims and whether he agreed that this is primarily a homosexual problem; if so, why do dioceses like San Diego continue to ordain disordered homosexual men as priests in direct violation of Canon Law Digest 1961.

Archbishop Sheehan responded smoothly and glibly that it was not a homosexual problem but a problem of chastity and celibacy. This facile answer indicated that top church leaders are in a classic state of denial of the facts of the case against the church leaders. Their eyes are blinded by the twin cataracts of pernicious politics and political correctness, which threaten the Roman Catholic Church with moral collapse. This is the standard response of most Catholic bishops who are trapped by forty years of the ignoring Vatican directives like Canon Law Digest 1961. These have repeatedly directed that only men with a masculine identity be ordained as priests. It is estimated that as many as one-third of ordained diocesan and order priests, and by extrapolation, the bishops themselves chosen from the pool of ordained priests, are disordered homosexuals. The church will have a plentiful supply of disordered priests if it continues to ordain disordered men.

But this is not the end of the story. The next Catholic Answers program featured Canon Lawyer and San Diego Auxiliary Bishop Salvatore Cordileone. I again called with the question: can laity use canon law procedures to require the bishops to adhere to canon law? Although my question was received by the call screener, I was later told that the moderator, Mr. Usher, had banned me from the program because of my question about the John Jay report findings the week before! Naturally I was incredulous until I realized that the diocese of San Diego had probably contacted Usher about the unflattering (but true) references to the diocese and its ordination practices and the ongoing child pornography investigation of one of its parish priests. Of course, Catholic Answers relies on the goodwill of the bishop. But my experience of censorship raises the question: Should the program be called Catholic Answers, or, more accurately, Catholic Censors?

Ralph Ballmer
Escondido

TOP