Help us expand our reach! Please share this article
The National Catholic Reporter (NCR), an independent Catholic newspaper, has endorsed the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court decision that will allow same-sex marriages in Massachusetts May 17, calling it “a beneficial step along the path of human understanding and human rights.”
Their opinion on this issue directly contradicts the teachings of the Church. Despite their name, they do not reflect the Catholic perspective on same-sex marriage.
For a Catholic newspaper to mislead its readers and pretend that endorsing same-sex marriage is not “a cavalier defiance of Church teaching” (as they call it) is not a slip of the pen, but a calculated risk.
The NCR editorial confronts the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, which, in a recently approved document, said “it is wrong to equate [same-sex] relationships to a marriage.” (“Between a man and a woman: Questions and answers about marriage and same-sex unions,” no. 4)
It expresses a view that contradicts the Church’s teaching, which clearly defines marriage as a heterosexual covenant “by which a man and a woman establish between themselves a partnership of the whole of life [and] is by its nature ordered toward the good of the spouses and the procreation and education of offspring.” (“Catechism of the Catholic Church,” no. 1601)
The editorial dismisses the magisterial authority of the Holy Father who, as recently as last year, spoke through the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith reiterating the essential points about marriage and stating that the “moral truth” is contradicted “by approval of homosexual unions.” (“Considerations Regarding Proposals To Give Legal Recognition To Unions Between Homosexual Persons,” no. 5)
Editors at the NCR, by using the platform of a Catholic publication to oppose the moral truth, are failing to practice journalism according to “the truths of human reason and the Catholic faith” as they are called upon to do by the constitution and bylaws of the Catholic Press Association to which they belong.
We call on them to reconsider that editorial position.