AP: "New Buffalo Bishop Leading Fight Against Gay Marriage"


The AP:

A procession of priests, cardinals, archbishops and bishops will lead off the official installation of the new Roman Catholic bishop of Buffalo.

The installation Mass for Bishop Richard Malone is scheduled for Friday at St. Joseph Cathedral.

The 66-year-old Malone spent eight years as bishop in Portland, Maine. Pope Benedict XVI selected him in May to succeed retiring Buffalo Bishop Edward Kmiec (KIHM'-mick).

Malone will stay active in Portland for now as apostolic administrator for the diocese while the Vatican searches for a new bishop there. The appointment will allow Malone to continue to lead the church's fight against the legalization of gay marriage in Maine. A statewide referendum on same-sex marriage is scheduled for Nov. 6.



  1. Rich
    Posted August 15, 2012 at 2:55 pm | Permalink

    Bishop Malone stated early on that the Church would not be a leader this time around in opposition to the referendum. He stated that he intends to work within his Church to educate his parishoners. He has lost fully 30,000 parishoners, or more, in Maine since he came on board. I think the Church knows the referendum is lost to them.

  2. Daughter of Eve
    Posted August 15, 2012 at 4:57 pm | Permalink

    An apostate people does not mean a doctrine is incorrect; it simply means the people are runniung from the protection of the Shepherd. While the wolves stand waiting....

  3. Little Man
    Posted August 15, 2012 at 7:41 pm | Permalink

    Against Gay Marriage or Against Same-Sex Marriage? AP send our a subliminal message. . . How quickly it becomes anti-'gay' supposedly, when we can't determine scientifically who is or not 'gay'. . . Let's start at the beginning.

  4. Little Man
    Posted August 15, 2012 at 7:41 pm | Permalink

    errata: AP sends out a subliminal message.

  5. Little Man
    Posted August 15, 2012 at 8:12 pm | Permalink

    A church, a press (that doesn't use a press anymore to publish), a government and a science.

    These are the components affecting the civil-marriage debate.

    A long-time member of a church feels sorry for his son, who couldn't get any young girl to fall in love with him, and asks the minister of the church to marry him to a same-sex partner (a friend). This scenario seems to have a simple solution - perform the marriage sacrament as a matter of empathy.

    But it isn't as simple as it might seems at first. Marriage in the Christian doctrine has always (100%) been a rite of passage to sexual intimacy with abandon. Not even the possibility (probability) of the woman getting pregnant stands in the way. The church body agrees that such union has the freedom to sexual intimacy in their own privacy, with no one else permitted or condoned to disrupt or meddle in that permitted and also blessed sexual intimacy.

    It's a powerful ritual within a closely knitted group of people or congregation which is meant to protect women from sexual subtle attacks by men, and any engendered children from a father who would opt to irresponsibly disappear.

    Therefore, same-sex marriage in a church (sacred marriage) and perhaps tied to civil marriage (per the marriage license, if applicable) is a powerful endorsement of a couple's sexual intimacy, all done with symbols:

    A white dress for virginity (the man can dress in black, who cares),

    a beautiful wedding cake symbolizing celebration, luxury, fellowship and the special moment,

    special music to drive the spirit of the party,

    the families on separate sides of the isle symbolizing two families coming together in support of the to be wedded couple,

    the rings symbolizing the perpetuity of the marriage vows

    All these endorse, condone, encourage, promote the protected sexual intimacy of the pair. And it is not done properly with sexual innuendos (the wedding shower is). It's not so much about the sex, as it is about the context and protection of the sexual intimacy. This is major - one of the last remaining, respected, rituals in American society.

    And so, . . . same-sex marriage, whether civil or sacred (either can occur without the other) automatically condones, promotes, and encourages same-sex sexual intimacy with all the privileges of society. A total reversal of ideology. Opposite-sex sexual intimacy is left as nothing special.

    It wasn't as simple as at first thought by that father who wanted the church to marry his supposedly 'gay' son, who couldn't find a girlfriend.

Comments are temporarily disabled. Please try back later.