An interview with Cardinal Dolan on “Meet The Press” aired this morning on NBC. He was asked for thoughts on the University of Missouri football player Michael Sam who had come out as gay recently. Cardinal Dolan responded “good for him” and “bravo.” Cardinal Dolan said the Bible says not to judge. That isn’t necessarily correct. There is one place in the Bible that says not to judge but you have to take into account the context in which this was said. We are not to use do not judge broadly so as to attribute it to circumstances it does not apply. Here are a couple of scripture passages:
John 7: 24 “Do not judge by appearances, but judge with right judgment.”
Leviticus 19: 15 “You shall do no injustice in judgment; you shall not be partial to the poor or defer to the great, but in righteousness shall you judge your neighbor.”
As you can see the two scripture passages above DO NOT condemn judging others.
In response New Catholic at the blog Rorate Caeli wrote this:
OK, then. Naturally, the Cardinal did not have to say anything at all regarding a specific individual, even if asked. But silence and discretion are one thing, explicitly refusing moral discernment is another, and raising such refusal to the status of “good” and “bravo” is quite noteworthy for a Prince of the Church, because it is in itself a moral judgment, a positive moral judgment.It is quite easy to see that no moral debate in which the Catholic Church takes part, of any kind and on any level, can ever anymore advance even one inch if the parameters become simply an isolated reading of “not judging” – and much less if “not judging” is elevated to the positive judgment of “good” and “bravo.” Politicians quote a pontiff when casting immoral votes, and what can the Church say, from now on, on any legal matter (that presupposes a moral order)? It can always be used to stop any social debate. What can poor pastors and vicars say regarding any sin, even personally to a parishioner, when the isolated presentation of “no sense of judgment” becomes normative? Or even regarding, for instance, an inclination that our judgmental Catechism of the Catholic Church defines as “objectively disordered” (regardless of the practice or not of the “intrinsically disordered” acts attached to it)?
And if you do not like this post, who are you to judge us?…