HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Topics » Religion & Spirituality » Religion (Group) » Minnesota Catholic teen d...

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 03:30 AM

Minnesota Catholic teen denied confirmation after pro-gay marriage Facebook post

A Catholic priest in northwest Minnesota is refusing to administer the sacrament of confirmation to a 17-year-old after the teen posted a photo on Facebook condemning the marriage amendment, according to a newspaper report.

The decision by the priest at Assumption Church in Barnesville, Minn., to deny confirmation to Lennon Cihak last month has surprised the teen’s family, The Forum reports:

“The Facebook post in question was a photo of Lennon in front of an altered political sign. Originally reading “Vote Yes” on the Minnesota Marriage Amendment, which would have changed the state’s constitution to define marriage as between one man and one woman, Lennon scribbled out the “yes” and replaced it with “NO!”

The teen’s mother says she was “called into a private conversation with the priest soon after the photo was discovered and was told her son wouldn’t be allowed to complete confirmation.”


http://www.startribune.com/local/blogs/179500861.html

That kid is lucky in my view. He now won't have to be confirmed into a church that stands against everything he stands for. My confirmation was nonsense and I hold it today as an utterly worthless act even though I remain a Christian (I was even baptized again back in February, now THAT meant something to me, not some boring junk I did when I was 13 to please my parents.) I've read elsewhere that the family has announced they won't be returning to that church ever again as they all have also been denied communion, which is the right thing to do as opposed to Catholics who continue to just keep going and keep giving while the leadership rails against and condemns them.

44 replies, 3535 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 44 replies Author Time Post
Reply Minnesota Catholic teen denied confirmation after pro-gay marriage Facebook post (Original post)
ButterflyBlood Nov 2012 OP
dimbear Nov 2012 #1
edhopper Nov 2012 #2
Angry Dragon Nov 2012 #19
edhopper Nov 2012 #36
hrmjustin Nov 2012 #18
rug Nov 2012 #3
skepticscott Nov 2012 #4
rug Nov 2012 #5
skepticscott Nov 2012 #6
rug Nov 2012 #7
skepticscott Nov 2012 #8
rug Nov 2012 #9
skepticscott Nov 2012 #10
rug Nov 2012 #11
skepticscott Nov 2012 #12
rug Nov 2012 #13
Angry Dragon Nov 2012 #20
rug Nov 2012 #21
Angry Dragon Nov 2012 #22
rug Nov 2012 #23
Angry Dragon Nov 2012 #24
rug Nov 2012 #25
Angry Dragon Nov 2012 #26
rug Nov 2012 #27
Angry Dragon Nov 2012 #28
rug Nov 2012 #29
Angry Dragon Nov 2012 #30
rug Nov 2012 #31
Angry Dragon Nov 2012 #32
rug Nov 2012 #33
Angry Dragon Nov 2012 #34
rug Nov 2012 #35
Fortinbras Armstrong Nov 2012 #41
Angry Dragon Nov 2012 #43
Fortinbras Armstrong Nov 2012 #44
Fortinbras Armstrong Nov 2012 #37
Angry Dragon Nov 2012 #40
Fortinbras Armstrong Nov 2012 #42
Fortinbras Armstrong Nov 2012 #38
rug Nov 2012 #39
cbayer Nov 2012 #14
Humanist_Activist Nov 2012 #15
cbayer Nov 2012 #16
Humanist_Activist Nov 2012 #17

Response to ButterflyBlood (Original post)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 04:41 AM

1. One of my onetime room-mates explained it to me as he learned it at Fordham:

There is room in the Catholic Church for dissent, but there is no room for error.

The RCC does not want liberals in its congregations. The doors lead out as well as in. Act accordingly.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dimbear (Reply #1)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 09:07 AM

2. Those that stay

will change it from within. It might take three or four centuries, but eventually the Church will joint the 21th Century.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to edhopper (Reply #2)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 09:13 PM

19. Then they will only be 2-3 centuries behind

Take the money and run for the church will follow

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Angry Dragon (Reply #19)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 09:48 AM

36. well they

are 5 - 6 hundred years behind now. So it's an improvement.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dimbear (Reply #1)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 08:43 PM

18. I left the Roman church when I was 18 years old and joined the Episcopal Church.

I never regretted that decision. It is just a shame what happened to the Roman church.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ButterflyBlood (Original post)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 09:15 AM

3. This makes an interesting case in Canon Law.

TITLE I.

THE OBLIGATIONS AND RIGHTS OF ALL THE CHRISTIAN FAITHFUL (Cann. 208 - 223)

Can. 208 From their rebirth in Christ, there exists among all the Christian faithful a true equality regarding dignity and action by which they all cooperate in the building up of the Body of Christ according to each one’s own condition and function.

Can. 209 §1. The Christian faithful, even in their own manner of acting, are always obliged to maintain communion with the Church.

§2. With great diligence they are to fulfill the duties which they owe to the universal Church and the particular church to which they belong according to the prescripts of the law.

Can. 210 All the Christian faithful must direct their efforts to lead a holy life and to promote the growth of the Church and its continual sanctification, according to their own condition.

Can. 211 All the Christian faithful have the duty and right to work so that the divine message of salvation more and more reaches all people in every age and in every land.

Can. 212 §1. Conscious of their own responsibility, the Christian faithful are bound to follow with Christian obedience those things which the sacred pastors, inasmuch as they represent Christ, declare as teachers of the faith or establish as rulers of the Church.

§2. The Christian faithful are free to make known to the pastors of the Church their needs, especially spiritual ones, and their desires.

§3. According to the knowledge, competence, and prestige which they possess, they have the right and even at times the duty to manifest to the sacred pastors their opinion on matters which pertain to the good of the Church and to make their opinion known to the rest of the Christian faithful, without prejudice to the integrity of faith and morals, with reverence toward their pastors, and attentive to common advantage and the dignity of persons.

Can. 213 The Christian faithful have the right to receive assistance from the sacred pastors out of the spiritual goods of the Church, especially the word of God and the sacraments.


Can. 214 The Christian faithful have the right to worship God according to the prescripts of their own rite approved by the legitimate pastors of the Church and to follow their own form of spiritual life so long as it is consonant with the doctrine of the Church.

Can. 215 The Christian faithful are at liberty freely to found and direct associations for purposes of charity or piety or for the promotion of the Christian vocation in the world and to hold meetings for the common pursuit of these purposes.

Can. 216 Since they participate in the mission of the Church, all the Christian faithful have the right to promote or sustain apostolic action even by their own undertakings, according to their own state and condition. Nevertheless, no undertaking is to claim the name Catholic without the consent of competent ecclesiastical authority.

Can. 217 Since they are called by baptism to lead a life in keeping with the teaching of the gospel, the Christian faithful have the right to a Christian education by which they are to be instructed properly to strive for the maturity of the human person and at the same time to know and live the mystery of salvation.

Can. 218 Those engaged in the sacred disciplines have a just freedom of inquiry and of expressing their opinion prudently on those matters in which they possess expertise, while observing the submission due to the magisterium of the Church.

Can. 219 All the Christian faithful have the right to be free from any kind of coercion in choosing a state of life.

Can. 220 No one is permitted to harm illegitimately the good reputation which a person possesses nor to injure the right of any person to protect his or her own privacy.

Can. 221 §1. The Christian faithful can legitimately vindicate and defend the rights which they possess in the Church in the competent ecclesiastical forum according to the norm of law.

§2. If they are summoned to a trial by a competent authority, the Christian faithful also have the right to be judged according to the prescripts of the law applied with equity.

§3. The Christian faithful have the right not to be punished with canonical penalties except according to the norm of law.

Can. 222 §1. The Christian faithful are obliged to assist with the needs of the Church so that the Church has what is necessary for divine worship, for the works of the apostolate and of charity, and for the decent support of ministers.

§2. They are also obliged to promote social justice and, mindful of the precept of the Lord, to assist the poor from their own resources.

Can. 223 §1. In exercising their rights, the Christian faithful, both as individuals and gathered together in associations, must take into account the common good of the Church, the rights of others, and their own duties toward others.

§2. In view of the common good, ecclesiastical authority can direct the exercise of rights which are proper to the Christian faithful.


He has a right to receive the sacraments. He also has a right, and obligation, to speak out on matters of social justice. The church has an obligation to provide the sacraments. The church has no particular competence to speak authoritatively on matters of civil law. To withhold a sacrament for a political opinion is gravely wrong.

BTW, when I read this earlier I sent the priest an email. Here's his reply:

RE: A message from your CatholicWeb.com Web site: Barnesville Assumption Church November 16, 2012 10:07 AM

From: Assumption Church "Assumption Church" <assumption@bvillemn.net>;

To: xxxx@ptd.net

No it is not.

"Let nothing disturb you, nothing frighten you, all things are passing, God
is unchanging. Patience gains all; nothing is lacking to those who have God:
God alone is sufficient." ~St. Teresa of Avila

-----Original Message-----
From: xxxx@ptd.net
Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2012 3:19 PM
To: assumption@bvillemn.net
Subject: A message from your CatholicWeb.com Web site: Barnesville
Assumption Church

xxxx <xxxx@ptd.net> has sent you the following message via your
CatholicWeb.com Web site:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Is this accurate?

http://www.startribune.com/local/blogs/179500861.html

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rug (Reply #3)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 09:25 AM

4. And we all know

that the RCC never could, ever would, do anything "gravely wrong".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to skepticscott (Reply #4)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 09:26 AM

5. You may know that. I know the exact opposite.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rug (Reply #5)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 09:34 AM

6. You're not a hobbit, are you?

Because everything seems to go right over your head.

You do understand irony, don't you? It's not a hard concept...it's just like goldy or bronzy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to skepticscott (Reply #6)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 09:38 AM

7. No, are you a troll?

And yes, I understand irony but I choose to ignore lame attempts at it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rug (Reply #7)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 09:59 AM

8. Interesting that

When other people use the term "deeply wrong" to refer to something the Catholic church has done, you label it as melodramatic nonsense, but now the term "gravely wrong" gets your full support ("To withhold a sacrament for a political opinion is gravely wrong").

And apparently when you claimed "If something is wrong, I don't take soundings", that was a lie, made up to bolster a failed argument. The latest in a long line

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to skepticscott (Reply #8)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 10:01 AM

9. Really? Do post the link to where that was said.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rug (Reply #9)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 10:06 AM

10. Here you go

http://www.democraticunderground.com/121852153#post37

Honestly, ruggie...do you really think the stuff you post just disappears into a black hole? Do you think nobody remembers your old lies and your flip-flopping?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to skepticscott (Reply #10)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 10:58 AM

11. Well, scottie, considering that thread was about sexism in the skeptic movement, your phrase

was indeed melodramatic. Do you think it's unnoticed that in your monomania against religion you perseverate in attempting to turn any topic into one about your favorite bogeyman?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rug (Reply #11)


Response to skepticscott (Reply #12)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 11:23 AM

13. Lol, as this subthread demonstrates, you are the master of distraction and deflection.

Speaking of a smelly pile of lies, I would, as you have, determinedly sift through your posts to make an extraneous point, but I just can't.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rug (Reply #3)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 09:33 PM

20. God has ten laws and the RCC finds it needs more laws than god ........ strange

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Angry Dragon (Reply #20)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 09:53 PM

21. So does Congress.

Not to mention the Code of Federal Regulations.

http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/

Don't download it, it will crash your computer.

Given the age of the institution, the Code of Canon Law is downright streamlined.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rug (Reply #21)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 10:57 PM

22. You will have to remind when Congress had anything to do with god

According to your church god has existed forever and he has only ten laws ... repeating again for your benefit


Your church is based on god yet they feel that god was wrong and they needed to add some more laws

Trying to equate Congressional Regulations with gods' laws is crap.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Angry Dragon (Reply #22)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 11:01 PM

23. Canon Law governs a 2,000 year old institution.

Does it surprise you that this institution has government or are you just picking a fight?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rug (Reply #23)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 11:13 PM

24. Are you saying the government controls the church??

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Angry Dragon (Reply #24)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 11:15 PM

25. Yes, have you heard of Vatican City?

Hint: it wrote the Code of Canon Law, not God.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rug (Reply #25)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 11:25 PM

26. Yes I have and the church is a city/state and a religious church

However you were the one that brought in Canon Law in a discussion about how a church in AMERICA should follow Canon Law ......... I fail to see how a foreign government has any say about what happens in churches in America

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Angry Dragon (Reply #26)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 11:29 PM

27. The Code of Canon Law is what governs the RCC throughout the world.

Neither the U.S. nor Minnesota have anything to say about whether this kid gets confirmed.

Really, these are elementary concepts.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rug (Reply #27)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 11:42 PM

28. He is better off not being confirmed in the Catholic Church

I never said they did

I have always found it odd that American Catholics fund a foreign government
I bet they are not told this in their churches.
And I find it odd that a foreign leader can tell Americans how to live their lives and that the leader thinks he can tell the American government what is best for this country. I find that a form of terrorism.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Angry Dragon (Reply #28)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 11:48 PM

29. Fortunately, your opinion on that matter is as irrelevant as the Church's opinion on civil law.

As to your last paragraph, it comes straight off the platform of the Know Nothing Party. Educate yourself. The nineteenth century is a long time ago.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Know_Nothing_Party

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rug (Reply #29)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 11:58 PM

30. You have a lot of words there and they still say nothing

I brought up points and you did not refute them

2000 years is even longer ago .........

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Angry Dragon (Reply #30)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 12:00 AM

31. See, the trick with words is one person types them but the other must still understand them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rug (Reply #31)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 12:04 AM

32. Perhaps you will learn to type so people can understand you

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Angry Dragon (Reply #32)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 12:23 AM

33. Yes, I'm sure it's my typing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rug (Reply #33)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 12:27 AM

34. I am glad we agree on something ...... there is hope for you yet

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Angry Dragon (Reply #34)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 12:30 AM

35. Oh, I'm so relieved.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Angry Dragon (Reply #26)

Mon Nov 19, 2012, 01:03 PM

41. Are you really that silly and/or uniformed?

Canon Law is the law governing the Catholic Church throughout the world. It is promulgated at the Vatican, which is where Church governance is done. Vatican City is an independent state for largely historical reasons (basically because Garibaldi wanted a wholly secular Italian state, without the Pope -- specifically Pius IX -- having a political role in it).

Your comment seems to be asking "why is the Pope allowed to govern the Catholic Church in the United States?" The answer is that the Pope is the head of the entire Catholic Church. If you don't want to be part of a Church governed by the Pope, then you will have to go elsewhere.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fortinbras Armstrong (Reply #41)

Mon Nov 19, 2012, 07:48 PM

43. Who heads Vatican City??

Where does the money come from to support Vatican City??
Does Vatican City issue diplomatic passports??

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Angry Dragon (Reply #43)

Tue Nov 20, 2012, 05:53 AM

44. I'm sure you know the answers to your questions, but I'll answer anyway

Last edited Wed Nov 21, 2012, 11:43 AM - Edit history (1)

Who heads Vatican City??: The Pope

Where does the money come from to support Vatican City??: Various sources, investments, contributions from Catholics, sales of stamps (largely to collectors), fees from admission to the various museums and so on. See https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/vt.html

Does Vatican City issue diplomatic passports??: Strictly speaking, no. The Holy See (i.e., the Pope as head of the Church) does. That's because papal diplomats are representatives of the Pope, not the Vatican City. The Vatican City does issue ordinary passports, but not very many.

Why do you ask?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Angry Dragon (Reply #20)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 12:56 PM

37. There are more than just ten "laws" in the Old Testament

According to Jewish tradition, there are 613 laws in the Torah. And considerably more than that in the Talmud. As well as volumes of commentary on the Talmud.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fortinbras Armstrong (Reply #37)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 02:25 PM

40. Of these 613 laws which came from god??

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Angry Dragon (Reply #40)

Mon Nov 19, 2012, 01:03 PM

42. According to Jewish tradition, all of them

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rug (Reply #3)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 01:11 PM

38. He did not really answer your question

When you asked him if the Star-Tribune story was accurate, he said just "no". He did not say how it was inaccurate.

BTW, it has been my experience that priests generally do not like it if the laity is familiar with Canon Law. I once angered my wife's former pastor by quoting Canon Law to him -- laymen are not supposed to argue their rights against the all-powerful pastor. Of course, all I had to do was threaten to complain to the bishop to make him fold.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fortinbras Armstrong (Reply #38)

Sun Nov 18, 2012, 01:28 PM

39. No he didn't. Now I know why.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ButterflyBlood (Original post)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 12:03 PM

14. There are active movements within the catholic church that support GLBT equality.

They were very involved in this campaign and in states that passed equality laws. He needs to find them and a more welcoming church.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cbayer (Reply #14)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 04:14 PM

15. I get the feeling the Church will start excommunicating these groups...

and local parishes, and then turn around and label them "schismatic", that makes them outsiders, not insiders. If he wants a more welcoming church, there are a few Catholic Churches that aren't Roman Catholic Churches anymore.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Humanist_Activist (Reply #15)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 04:20 PM

16. Can they ex-communicate groups formed for political activism if they

are not associated with specific parishes? I would think there is nothing they can do. Some of these groups are national.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cbayer (Reply #16)

Sat Nov 17, 2012, 06:17 PM

17. They can and have threatened the leaders of such groups before...

along with people who donate time or money to such organizations, like Catholics for Choice and similar groups. Usually its just hot air, and they don't go through with it, but if they decide to double down on the stupid, they may start doing it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread