Thank God for B16, he continues to tell the truth
Khan | 12.24.08 - 3:07 pm | #

When the Pope gave us the Encyclical God is Love he was correct as well.

In the Gospels, Jesus frequently shows us how to respond to the unjust. If we look at the Sermon on the Mount we can see that leaving a path for understanding and redemption is the norm.

This carries into Catechism, which instructs us how to deal with perceived sin and disagreement.

I, personally, do not see how your frequent habit of describing people who disagree in derogatory terms is a proper reponse to our obligation to Evangelize. I can see how it might be nice in terms of self affirment, drawing compliments and support from people who already agree. But demonizing tends to make people less receptive to what one has to say.

You have written that Mary was your last great hurdle as an Evangelical coming to Catholicism. I wonder if one hurdle might remain. We are 'one Holy catholic and apostolic Church' which prays for unity and peace. Presence as a community is deemed an integral part of the mircle of the Eucharist.

It is fun to put on "God's Team" t-shirts and ridicule everyone else. But our Catholic obligation is quite different. We are to erase divisions, not encourage them, and we are supposed to have the humility to realize that we all fall woefully short of the standard that Jesus set for us. We even proclaim this, en masse, before receiving the sacrament of Communion.

In this particular case, the practice of demonization seems especially unfortunate. The people who disagree are partially grasping what our Catechism teaches, that gays are equal children of God and entitled to certain inalienable rights. Our culture has long dehumanized this small sad group ("faggot!" was a common insult when I was younger). So we should be glad that people are trying to afford them some respect.

This does not mean that we should not also be trying to educate on how inalienable rights and other moral perogatives should be properly balanced. But sneering and derision seem to be a particular un-Christ-like response to misguided compassion.
Fitz | Homepage | 12.24.08 - 3:34 pm | #

I have no problem respecting homosexual persons. I simply object when they tell lies and demand that I approve of homogenital sex, the fraud of gay "marriage" and the various bigoted things they say about the Catholic faith. I have, in fact, defended homosexual persons from unjust attacks on this blog. I think that chaste homosexuals who are faithful to Church teaching should be considered for ordination if, other things being equal, they are found to be good priest material. I have no interest in civil penalties that discriminate against homosexual persons. I simply do not accept that what they do in the bedroom is a good, nor that failure to acclaim it so is "bigotry".
Mark P. Shea | 12.24.08 - 3:41 pm | #

Fitz: Aren't you being a tad sneering and derisive?
Carbon Monoxide | 12.24.08 - 3:47 pm | #

Fitz: Aren't you being a tad sneering and derisive?
Carbon Monoxide | 12.24.08 - 3:47 pm | #

M. Shea- Too true. We can disagree without taping every second of their life in order to sit in judgment of them. We can afford them their freedom and still disagree with their behavior. Why is it that they cannot be afford us even the freedom to express ourselves.

And CMonoxide Seems you have a consistent echo. are you posting in a cavern?
JosephineMo6 | 12.24.08 - 4:06 pm | #

It's because everything I write is worth reading twice...and I'm hacking past the firewall at work that prevents me from viewing this fine site.
Carbon Monoxide | 12.24.08 - 4:16 pm | #

It's because everything I write is worth reading twice...and I'm hacking past the firewall at work that prevents me from viewing this fine site.
Carbon Monoxide | 12.24.08 - 4:16 pm | #

I found the commentary in The Independent generally fair although his opening and closing paragraphs were snide. However, the comments below the article were pretty much the usual slanderous hate filled crap we hear from so many on the secular left.
Arnold | 12.24.08 - 4:54 pm | #

So is "gay marriage" "marriage" or "consumer sex" ?

They bear witness against themselves.

I'm sorry to say that homosexuals are not the only ones involved in the sins pointed out by Humanae Vitae.
whimsy | Homepage | 12.24.08 - 5:50 pm | #

Whispers in the Loggia seemed to suggest that the Italian word rendered as 'gender' is the word used to refer to LGBT folks in Italian - so the Pppe could've been speaking of 'gays' rather than of 'gender studies,' 'gender politics' and whatnot per the Independent article.
Even if that's the case, the articles point that B16 was speaking of the view the Church has always held about sexual morality stands. He was mentioning gay lifestyles as an example of 'consumer sex' - sex outside of matrimony, sex for pleasure alone, selfish sex.
I can't blame people who see their SSA orientation as their identity, or a crucial component thereof, reacting badly to the statement, even though it's nothing new. They think the pope took a gratuitous swipe at their very selves. He wasn't even responding to a question - he just came out and offered this statement, out of the blue, it might seem.
Still, they're in error, because 'gender' is much in the news- not just in the US. the recently failed attempt to assert UN protection over homosexual persons. The good purpose would be to condemn the likes of Iran for hanging gay teenagers; but it would also be used against countries that hadn't legalized gay marriage, and against the Church. So the reference wasn't out of the blue.
You can see why the sound bite version got the reception it got. I reckon next time, the cardinals will pick someone with a very politic tongue, who lets his aides say things like this when they need saying... Then they'll all sit back and say "Remember Papa Ratzinger? You never knew WHAT was gonna come out of that man's mouth!"
Sue Murphy | Homepage | 12.25.08 - 12:39 am | #

I'm sorry to say that homosexuals are not the only ones involved in the sins pointed out by Humanae Vitae.

And I think that was the Pope's point. We treat sex as something to be doled out as casually as a handshake these days. You don't need me to reiterate the Church's teaching on sexuality, but it *is* equally applied to gay and straight persons alike - sex outside the confines of a life-giving, loving marriage is a sin. Period. Doesn't matter what your inclination(s) is/are.
Amy P. | Homepage | 12.25.08 - 9:38 am | #

"...the former Hitler Youth member who was once known as Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger..."

When this particular reductio-ad-hitlerum factoid gets simply tossed in as a dependent clause, you know the author is on autopilot.
Richard | 12.25.08 - 9:51 am | #

In the college where I teach, the students are taught that differences in gender are primarily a social construct. At a recent gathering of the faculty we were taught that if we believed that men and women were made in such a way that they should be sexually attracted to the opposite sex that we were guilty of the sin of heterosexism and therefore bigots. We were even told that we should never assume that a women automatically has a man as her significant other or that a man automatically has a woman as his significant other and that doing so was a sign that we were bigoted.

And, this is happening at a school which is associated with a Protestant denomination.
Jeffery | Homepage | 12.25.08 - 11:33 am | #

Fitz,

I trust you fully comprehend, as in the inner most layer of the onion type of comprehension, in the following statements. Unrestrained "Sexual License" is being used as a VERY EFFECTIVE "Grond" type-battering ram to attack and discredit the church, willfully and purposely by those who hate the church. If you mean that "Soothing Words" and "Jacuzzi Jesus" language will turn these groups over from the "Dark Side", I would ask you how successful that task has been with its militant application over the last 60 years in light of the rise in Abortion, Pornography, Divorce, Promiscuity, redefinition of marriage and a whole host of other problems including disease and death from unrestrained sexuality. The dictatorship of "Compassion" as the "ONLY VIRTUE" and those who prescribe only it, I firmly believe are wrong. Because as you know, there is only one "REAL" virtue right? "Compassion" (Which, in the contemporary sense of the word means "Being Nice to People") all other virtues honor, duty, temperance, etc. They are worthless..being "Nice" is the only thing Jesus asks us to do when defending ourselves, our families, our church. Because "Niceness" is the "ONLY" way to show God's Love right? Please people can we FINALLY PUT THIS silly notion to bed? The Nice-a-fication of Christianity is destroying us.

Fitz, God Bless you but I'm not going to sit around and try to "Nice" people to my way of thinking all the time, those who are consequentially unaware but nevertheless firmly committed 3rd degree black belts in Moral Relativism, are not going to listen to some kind of Weenie Man "Heeeey guys...come onnn now." retort. (Make sure you use a nasally weenie voice when saying the previous statement) This has been tried, tried, tried, and tried again. Guess what its not working. In fact, the lack of strong language and moral conviction, has scandalously been lacking. "Nice" should not be the ONLY tool in the quiver of the Christian.

This scene comes to mind on the kind of responses needed. http://www.youtube.com/watch? v=c...feature=related

Skip to about about 4:30 on playback time. The message seems to be fairly black and white to me, no hand wringing, and said with some overt masculinity to boot.

Don't get me wrong, the log in my eye is very thick, and I'm not calling for some kind of Pseudo-Islamic response. But I think we need to upgrade our rhetoric to something more "Masculine" "Finessed" and "Beefy" if you will. In fact, its WAYYYY past time to do this.

By the way, for those of you who like to use "Taxonomy" to explain the Human Sexual Condition. You...Are....Not...Your...Sexual...Proclivities.

So quit identifying yourself as such no matter how "Useful" it apparently is. (I.E Homosexual, Heterosexual)
Al | 12.26.08 - 1:29 pm | #

Al,

I had an odd response to the "Jesus of Nazareth" segment you linked: Jesus & His message are powerful.

Thnx.
Angelo Natalie | Homepage | 12.26.08 - 4:37 pm | #

"I'm sorry to say that homosexuals are not the only ones involved in the sins pointed out by Humanae Vitae."

This is very true. Some proclaimed that access to birth control would strengthen marriages, bring an end to prostitution, and result in more respect for women.

Sadly, women, and too often, their children are burden with the ill effects of some proclamations.
dpt | 12.27.08 - 4:22 pm | #

One more thing. I'm not disregarding compassion in any way. It is very important. Its just not the only virtue in the arsenal and there is more than one way to show compassion than just "Kindness".
Al | 12.29.08 - 12:31 pm | #