12 Must-Read Quotes From Bishop Paprocki’s Same-Sex Marriage Exorcism

 

Paprocki3In a much-publicized event on Wednesday that coincided with Governor Pat Quinn signing gay marriage into law in Illinois, Bishop Thomas Paprocki of Springfield led the faithful in “Prayers of Supplication and Exorcism in Reparation for the Sin of Same-Sex Marriage.”

In his homily at the service, Bishop Paprocki demonstrated once again why he is emerging as one of the most articulate, steadfast, and intrepid defenders of marriage in the Catholic Church in America.

Bishop Paprocki’s entire homily is worth reading.  Here I’ve excerpted some of the highlights.

A few of the quotes are longer than others, but worth it.  Some contain quotes by Pope Francis, the Catechism, or Scripture.  Some of the quotes are poignant and direct.  Some are explanatory and edifying.  Some show Bishop Paprocki’s courage.  Others show his humility.  Others, his compassion.

They all show charity, and they all show a shepherd who loves Christ, the Church, and the souls he is charged with with apostolic zeal.

1.   I wish to preface my reflections by saying that I am conducting this prayer service and am speaking to you now with great reluctance. I did not seek to enter any controversy and I don’t relish being part of one. But I have given this matter a great deal of thought and prayer, which has led me to the conviction that God is calling me to speak out and conduct these prayers.

.

2.   Our prayers at this time are prompted by the fact that the Governor of Illinois today is signing into Illinois law the redefinition of civil marriage, introducing not only an unprecedented novelty into our state law, but also institutionalizing an objectively sinful reality.

.

3.   It is not hateful to say that an immoral action is sinful. On the contrary, the most compassionate thing we can do is help people to turn away from sin. To ignore another person’s wrongful actions is a sign of apathy or indifference, while fraternal correction is motivated by love for that person’s well-being, as can be seen by the fact that our Lord Jesus himself urged such correction. Indeed, the call to repentance is at the heart of the Gospel, as Jesus proclaimed, “The Kingdom of God is at hand. Repent and believe the Good News” (Mark 1:15).

.

4.   The Good News is that God’s mercy and forgiveness extend to those who repent. Mercy does not mean approving of something that is sinful, but does absolve the wrongdoer after a change of heart takes place in the sinner through the gift of God’s grace.

.

5.   I do not stand here before you as a self-righteous saint who has achieved spiritual perfection, but as a sinner who has received Jesus into his heart as his Lord and Savior.

.

6.   This is a key point which the secularists are missing: they think that stressing God’s mercy means that sins are no longer sins. On the contrary, God’s mercy is a great gift of grace precisely because sins are sins and they call for repentance and forgiveness.

.

7.   The fact is that a “minor exorcism” takes place in every Baptism and Confirmation ceremony when we renounce Satan and all his works and empty promises. This prayer service will be along those lines. I’m not saying that anyone involved in the redefinition of marriage is possessed by the devil, which, if that were the case, would require the remedy of a “Major Exorcism,” but all of us are certainly subject to the devil’s evil influences and in need of protection and deliverance from evil.

.

8.   Our prayer service today and my words are not meant to demonize anyone, but are intended to call attention to the diabolical influences of the devil that have penetrated our culture, both in the state and in the Church. These demonic influences are not readily apparent to the undiscerning eye, which is why they are so deceptive.

.

9.   The deception of the Devil in same-sex marriage may be understood by recalling the words of Pope Francis when he faced a similar situation as Archbishop of Buenos Aires in 2010. Regarding the proposed redefinition of civil marriage in Argentina, then-Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio wrote on June 22, 2010, “The Argentine people must face, in the next few weeks, a situation whose result may gravely harm the family. It is the bill on matrimony of persons of the same sex. The identity of the family, and its survival, are in jeopardy here: father, mother, and children. The life of so many children who will be discriminated beforehand due to the lack of human maturity that God willed them to have with a father and a mother is in jeopardy. A clear rejection of the law of God, engraved in our hearts, is in jeopardy. . . . Let us not be naive: it is not a simple political struggle; it is an intention [which is] destructive of the plan of God. It is not a mere legislative project (this is a mere instrument), but rather a ‘move’ of the father of lies who wishes to confuse and deceive the children of God.”   The Pope’s reference to the “father of lies” comes from the Gospel of John (8:44), where Jesus refers to the devil as “a liar and the father of lies.” So Pope Francis is saying that same-sex “marriage” comes from the devil and should be condemned as such.

.

10.   The work of discouragement by the Devil in same-sex marriage is apparent in the message being conveyed to defenders of traditional marriage that the universal redefinition of marriage is unstoppable, so we might as well just stop trying. But the legalization of abortion on demand forty years ago did not silence those who believe that abortion is contrary to God’s law. On the contrary, Roe v. Wade only heightened the need for more concerted efforts to protect all human life from conception to natural death. So, too, the legal redefinition of civil marriage does not put an end to the need for discourse and action to defend natural marriage in accord with God’s plan, but only serves to heighten the need for greater efforts in this regard.

.

11.   Politicians responsible for enacting civil same-sex marriage legislation are morally complicit as co-operators in facilitating this grave sin.

.

12.   We must also affirm the teaching of the Catholic Church that homosexual persons “must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God’s will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord’s Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.” The Church loves homosexual persons and looks upon them with compassion, offering assistance through support groups such as the Courage Apostolate to live in accord with the virtue of chastity. Indeed, all people all called to chastity, which for a man and woman united in matrimony means for the husband and wife to be faithful to each other.

.

69 thoughts on “12 Must-Read Quotes From Bishop Paprocki’s Same-Sex Marriage Exorcism

  1. Your Excellency,
    You articulated well and clearly what I know in my heart. We are in a spiritual battle and only the discerning eye and heart can recognize it. Thank you for not being afraid to speak up on this evil that has permeated our culture and destroying our young. God be merciful to us all.

  2. Julia says:

    3. It is not hateful to say that an immoral action is sinful. On the contrary, the most compassionate thing we can do is help people to turn away from sin. To ignore another person’s wrongful actions is a sign of apathy or indifference, while fraternal correction is motivated by love for that person’s well-being, as can be seen by the fact that our Lord Jesus himself urged such correction. Indeed, the call to repentance is at the heart of the Gospel, as Jesus proclaimed, “The Kingdom of God is at hand. Repent and believe the Good News” (Mark 1:15).
    This is the whole matter. We all struggle with sin, the gospel of Jesus Christ is the answer. Repent and be saved.

  3. john says:

    1) Since when is the state in a position to base subjective decisions on what constitutes sinful or immoral behavior? That is for people to decide based on their faith, life experience and other factors central to our formation.
    2) If children are entitled to a mother and a father, is the church morally complicit in “discriminating” against children when its adoption agencies place babies with single parents (which they do)?
    3) When will the bishop be holding an exorcism for the state “sin” of allowing divorced people to remarry without an annulment?

  4. GFC says:

    The link to the whole statement is not working.

  5. dismayed says:

    I once thought of becoming a Catholic but the blindness and hatred expressed by a man like this makes me so sad. “The greatest of these is love.” Being gay is who one is and loving who one needs to love is being who one is. Your Church must change or it will destroy itself. Open your eyes. Decent people see the wrongness.

    1. Erin says:

      This is the problem: so quick to judge somebody’s beliefs as “hatred.” the man said nothing hateful. Let me give you examples of hatred toward others: thinking they should die, wishing them physical injury, attacking them with a weapon, calling them names, making fun of them or their clothes or their friends or their problems.
      One can disagree without “hating” their opposition. Not letting people do whatever they want to do is not hatred; otherwise, a parent who disapproved of his/her 22 year old daughter’s boyfriend would be hateful. Disapproval does not equal hate. As a further example, I hate abortion itself. It is ending another life. But I certainly don’t have hatred for those who commit abortion – I pray for them, I feel sadness for them and for the things they are doing. I also don’t think they are motivated by a hatred of the unborn – even though they are killing them! They are simply misguided – very, very misguided, but I choose to believe that most of them are certainly not acting out of hatred for the unborn… just as the majority of those who disapprove of homosexual relationships are not doing so out of hatred.

      Let’s please watch our use of this loaded, overused, and inaccurate word when discussing this issue. Reserve it for true examples of hatred, like the Westboro church people, please.

    2. Albert says:

      Decent people see the wrongness, but they don’t see how out of order and illogical it is for same sex unions?

      Seriously – i am left speechless at the blindness of these ‘decent people’

  6. Fr. Stephen Brown says:

    People like yourself will contribute enormously to healing the wounds of the world’s impurity by your brave witness to chaste living AND will help the Church’s mission/evangelisation through your humble and trusting acceptance of the Lord’s Cross, manifested in your same sex attraction.

    1. dismayed says:

      Father,

      One reason God gave love to the world was so that two committed human beings could love each other and become better people. God gave me my gayness (by the way, being gay has nothing to do with same-sex attraction–do you have any idea how you hurt gay people when you make such an inaccurate claim?).

      Therefore, God gave me my gayness as a way to love another gay man and become a better human being. God could care less whether a person is gay or straight.

      Sooner or later, your church will understand this. It is sad that a person as aware as you does not help your church move to this understanding sooner. All you do in your misunderstanding is hurt other human beings, which is an odd situation for someone who hopes to be good.

      1. Slats says:

        Dismayed, I don’t understand what you mean by saying that “being gay has nothing to do with same-sex attraction.” That seems like a fundamentally non-sequitur comment. I’ve always understood “gay” to be a colloquial term for being attracted to persons of the same gender; i.e. same-sex attraction. In what sense does “gayness” not have anything to do with same-sex attraction? Are you somehow defining terms differently than how most faithful Catholics would? I just want to understand how you are defining your terms.

        With regard to your second paragraph, Catholics would in no way subscribe to what you wrote in its first sentence, and never will within the integrity of our faith. As for the second sentence, it is true that God loves people regardless of whom they are attracted to, but He does care that all human beings be genuinely loving. Being involved in a same-gender relationship which includes genital activities would not at all be loving from a Catholic perspective from the standpoint of both faith and reason. Those claims you made about God – what is your source? Regardless of what religion one follows, there are two pathways to religious knowledge – reason (things we can figure out through evidence or rational thought), and revelation (a proposed supernatural encounter with God or gods). From which did you come to the very certain conclusion that God wants people to be “gay” and to be in genital relationships with people of the same gender? As you can probably tell, I’m asking with far more than a little skepticism, but I do want to know where you’re coming from, because you sound awfully certain about it.

        Conversely, Catholics feel pretty certain about what we believe as well, at least those Catholics who understand their own faith. You said, “Sooner or later, your church will understand this.” Actually, from what we believe both from the standpoint of reason and revelation, it’s inconceivable that the Catholic Church as a whole could ever conclude that God wants people to engage in same-gender genital behavior without ceasing to be the Catholic Church. It would run contrary to what we believe about the nature of the human person and the nature of revealed truth.

        Finally, while some Catholics are and/or have been hateful, that really does not apply to the bishop, nor the priest to whom you were responding, nor others who accurately hold what the Church believes and teaches about same-sex attraction (sorry to use terminology which is offensive to you, and I do want to read your explanation of why that’s offensive, but that is the terminology we use, and I would gladly explain why, but this post is already too long). We do believe that it is not only possible but life-or-death obligatory both to love those with attractions to people of the same gender and to believe that genital acts between people of the same gender are gravely wrong. There is a difference between who someone is and what they do. For Christians, including us Catholics, the whole point of Jesus dying on the cross was to separate us from our sins through their forgiveness. It is possible (and, as I said, for Christians, obligatory) to believe that some of a person’s actions are evil without condemning or writing that person off. I do believe that certain actions you are defending as good are actually objectively evil, but that does not mean that I do not love you, nor that I believe that God doesn’t love you. He does. He wants far more for you than what you are choosing for yourself.

      2. Albert says:

        If you believe in God – why don’t you believe his words?

      3. Brian Kerzetski says:

        dismayed,

        You have me totally confused. What is your definition of gay if same-sex attraction has nothing to do with it?

      4. Martin says:

        Could you please educate me on how “being gay has nothing to do with same-sex attraction”? This is the first time I heard that there is a difference, and would love to hear how these are different so I can understand why equating them is perceived as hurtful.

      5. Dr K says:

        Oh sweetie…no. God gave woman and man to each other to love, be fruitful, and take care of His world. Two men cannot do that. Nor can two women. I’m sorry, but everything you said was incorrect. Please revisit Genesis, Matthew 19:4-6, Hebrews 13:14, Epshesians 5:22-29, etc.

        And you are correct in saying there is a difference between same-sex attraction and homosexuality. Those who only have the attraction have not yet committed the sin, but are more vulnerable to it.

        1. Slats says:

          Dr. K., I don’t think I would buy the distinction you make between same-sex attraction and homosexuality. I think you are asserting that “homosexuality” describes not just the inclination, but the lifestyle as well. That’s not how I would use the term “homosexuality” (if I used it, and more pervasively how I understand it when someone else uses it). While I believe that the colloquial term “gay” does include a whole set of cultural and political presumptions about same-sex attraction to which Catholics could never agree, I still believe that those who use even that term are speaking primarily about the inclinations rather than necessarily the actions, although the actions would be radically assumed to be morally neutral or good. I have had people on message boards tell me that it is always going to be offensive to those persons with same-sex attractions who advocate for “gay rights” to fail to use the term “gay” in discussion with them, but I firmly believe that it is bad news (perhaps sinful from the omission of prudence) for any faithful Catholic to agree to that terminology, because the very use of the term presumes that sexual attraction is personal identity and also, as I said, radically presumes that same-sex genital acts are morally neutral or even good, to which a faithful Catholic can never agree and still remain faithful. If we get into a dialogue and agree to and use that terminology, we have already given up the farm (if not the faith) in the discussion.

        2. Slats says:

          Dr. K., P.S. – The reason I don’t agree with defining the term “homosexuality” to indicate the lifestyle as well as the attraction is that lots of Christians and even some faithful Catholics go around saying that “homosexuality is a sin.” That’s true if you define the term as you are, but that’s not what the people with whom we are dialoguing are going to hear. They’re going to hear that that assertion means that the attraction is a sin. It is not. It is the disordered result of original sin, but to have the attraction itself is not sinful as taught by the Catechism of the Catholic Church. Engaging in the acts and living the lifestyle is the sin. One person here once fussed at me (and the Church!) for saying that the attraction wasn’t a sin, citing Jesus’ words about adultery of the heart. That’s mistaking the sin of impure looking/objectification of another person/lusting according to the 6th and 9th commandment, and the desire to do so, which when resisted remains temptation, not sinful action.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

STAY CONNECTED


DON'T MISS A THING

Receive our updates via email.