FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums

Full Version: "Who am I to judge?" redux
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
http://www.harvestingthefruit.com/timoth...ment-11298

Comments:

1) This is the first time I actually watched Dolan's commentary.  It is actually more pathetic than I'd imagined.

2) In watching the cardinal's facial expressions and manner of speaking it is readily apparent to me that he is a) Unsure of what he is saying, and/or b) Fairly clearly simply currying favor (with his interviewer and the world).

3) "That's a pathway that will lead him away from the end for which he was created" - beautiful quote.

4) I have to say this: People who watch this and do not immediately recognize that a Catholic prelate talking in this fashion is disgraceful have lost their Catholic sensibilities.  That is the most basic way to put it.
Thank you for posting this.  It's nice to know that some people are logical enough to see that Dolan is both weak and idiotic in his "bravo."
(03-14-2014, 10:25 PM)A Catholic Thinker Wrote: [ -> ]http://www.harvestingthefruit.com/timoth...ment-11298

Comments:

1) This is the first time I actually watched Dolan's commentary.  It is actually more pathetic than I'd imagined.

2) In watching the cardinal's facial expressions and manner of speaking it is readily apparent to me that he is a) Unsure of what he is saying, and/or b) Fairly clearly simply currying favor (with his interviewer and the world).

3) "That's a pathway that will lead him away from the end for which he was created" - beautiful quote.

4) I have to say this: People who watch this and do not immediately recognize that a Catholic prelate talking in this fashion is disgraceful have lost their Catholic sensibilities.  That is the most basic way to put it.

I disagree with you, ACT -- and I promise you I haven't lost my Catholic sensibilities, that I still believe the Creed as understood in the trad way, and that I still believe everything on the FE website, including everything on this page: http://www.fisheaters.com/traditionalcatholicism.html

In that video, the subtitles over what the football player was saying are part of the problem. While sexually acting on homosexual impulses is a sin, as we all know, being a homosexual is not. It is a disorder. And it is a disorder that has to do with a lot more than where genitals end up -- and, in many aspects, might not have anything to do with genitals at all, for that matter. So the subtitles replacing the football player's words with things like "I'm prone to acts of grave depravity, intrinsically disordered acts that are contrary to natural law, etc." are unfair and not necessarily true, and for the presenter to make it seem as if Dolan was "bravo-ing" the idea of the man's being "prone to acts of grave depravity" is calumnious to both Dolan and the football guy.

Again, all this stuff seems to go to this obsession with penises in anuses (I am speaking generally here, not directing this to you personally!). It really does. That is what folks are thinking of when they talk of the "acts of grave depravity," those "intrinsically disordered acts that are contrary to natural law" and which "cry out to Heaven for vengeance."  Folks think "homosexual" and automatically think of "sodomy," by which they mean anal sex. But homosexuality is about a lot more than that and might not even INVOLVE that at ALL in a given person.

I really wish this were understood. If I were a chaste homosexual Catholic, I wouldn't want folks' minds automatically thinking "butt sex!" every time I entered the room. It's all so unseemly. It really is.

The support for homosexuals is support for people with disorders, the same as we'd support folks who are clinically depressed or what have you. It isn't advocating that anyone have any sort of sex outside of marriage. The disorder (for men) isn't defined as "wants to stick his penis in another man's butt"; it's "is sexually attracted to other men."  Anal sex may -- or may very well NOT -- play any role in the homosexual's sexual imagination or actions (hint: look up "frottage" some time, as an example). But whether it does or doesn't, the support given to him -- that the Church expects us to give to him as a brother in Christ -- isn't because he may (though he may well not) have an inclination to stick his penis into another man's butt; it's because he is a human being with a problem, that of being sexually attracted to members of his own sex.

The sodomy obsession when it comes to the topic of homosexuals is so bizarre to me. It's especially bizarre considering how popular anal sex is in the non-gay world and how no one talks about sins crying out to Heaven for vengeance when it comes to heterosexuals. 36% of women, and 44% of men, between the ages of 15 and 44 according to the CDC (a PDF file!) have had anal sex with an opposite-sex sex partner.

I dunno... The longer I live, and the more I see and hear, the more I think this sort of thing is the deeper explanation for things (that is NOT directed at you, ACT). I used to not believe that idea, thinking it a tired accusation with no basis in fact, but there is the study, and it does make psychological sense, and there just HAS to be SOME reason for the all-too-common vitriol and vehement unwillingness so many have to learn anything about all of this and get some subtlety and depth in their thinking about sexuality. Right now, so much conversation about it is at a gradeschool level --  "homos -- ewwwwwwwwwwww! Cooties! Butt sex! Butt sex! Butt sex! Grooooooooossssssssssssssssssss!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!" -- which gets expressed in an allegedly "Catholic" way:  "Homos -- that means SODS! --- ewwwwwwww! Cries out to Heaven! Depravity! Against nature! Butt sex! Butt sex! Butt sex!"  It's silly. And tiring. (and getting to be really boring as a topic LOL)

They are afraid to stand up for Jesus and they love the secular world to love them, they seem to need their approval.
(03-15-2014, 12:56 AM)Vox Clamantis Wrote: [ -> ](and getting to be really boring as a topic LOL)

QFT.

Let's talk about Christ. The Theotokos! St. Michael the Archangel! Anything but this!

I'm also getting sick of people calling a Cardinal "idiotic" and "unmitigated jackass". He may be an unfaithful pastor, but his humanity is more important than our indignation. Every man deserves a good character, as Aquinas teaches - unless the man himself defames it by his own actions. We need not point it out over and over again, especially using such labels. "Idiot", "jackass", 'fag", "homo", etc., are all creations of our minds to distance ourselves from people. Stick a label on them and that makes them somehow less human, just objectively and psychologically.

It's time to act... Smile
Vox, I basically disagree with your approach to homosexuality, for reasons expressed in a couple other long threads (by others more than myself).

"Coming out" means declaring same-sex-attraction AND the intent to act on it.  "Coming out" proudly is a declaration to the world that there is nothing wrong with homosexuality - that is, how the world defines "homosexuality" which absolutely includes living as a homosexual.  That's simply what "coming out" means, to virtually everyone.  To the secularists, to the liberals, to the "conservatives", and to traditional Catholics as well.  To the world.  That is reality.

That's what this guy meant when he made his announcement, and that's what Dolan praised.  Virtually everyone in the world sees it that way, just as they see Francis' "Who am I to judge?" as an implicit endorsement of homosexual behavior, to at least some extent, on some level.  (Everyone except neo-Catholic apologist spin-doctors struck blind with pollyannaism, that is.) 

Dolan knows this, which is why, I think, he looked like he was ashamed of himself while he was speaking.  I'll tell you what I didn't see there: the glow of the Holy Spirit that radiates from someone speaking truth.

If this was not the case, there'd be nothing to declare to the world, proudly or not.  A soul suffering from SSA should carry that cross and fight his temptations with the aid of Christ, the saints, and perhaps his family, friends, and spiritual advisor, without proudly declaring anything to the world, any more than would the struggling alcoholic.

For the record, I'm not accusing you of any moral weakness here - rather, I think this is an intellectual matter.  I think you're just not seeing the de-facto reality of these things: of what the terminology actually means.

De-facto realities matter.  This is a practical matter we're talking about.

If I were wrong about the fact that these senior churchmen are pandering to the world, and/or engulfed by diabolical disorientation, then this is what we would have seen: as soon as the world began declaring that (in the first case) the pope is no longer "judging" homosexual behavior, we'd have seen a response from the Vatican that would have shook the world.  These prelates, horrified that the world was now spreading the lie that grave sins are no longer condemned as grave sins, would have been shouting from the rooftops regarding the horrors of mortal sin and of Hell.

Instead, we heard maybe a couple little bleats long after the fact, as the party continues.

Dolan is making new homosexuals.  He is convincing young men struggling with SSA to let down their guard.  If it's Ok to proudly declare SSA, acting on SSA seems less evil.
(03-15-2014, 08:28 AM)Heorot Wrote: [ -> ]
(03-15-2014, 12:56 AM)Vox Clamantis Wrote: [ -> ](and getting to be really boring as a topic LOL)

QFT.

Let's talk about Christ. The Theotokos! St. Michael the Archangel! Anything but this!

Here we have the logical error of false dichotomy.  We can talk about both positive things and negative things.  If we find ourselves giving much attention to negative things it may be due to the crisis in the Church, not us.

I get tired of it too.  Believe me, I do.  And, actually, I, personally, haven't talked much at all about this topic.  I wasn't very active in the long threads dedicated to it.

The wisdom of Dr. von Hildrebrand is edifying:

"Indignation over something evil is just as much a pure value response as enthusiasm for something good.  Because both of these responses are fitting and appropriate with respect to their objects, and are indeed required by them, and because furthermore they both belong together, they both have a value, they are both something positive."
(03-15-2014, 11:33 AM)A Catholic Thinker Wrote: [ -> ]Vox, I basically disagree with your approach to homosexuality, for reasons expressed in a couple other long threads (by others more than myself).

"Coming out" means declaring same-sex-attraction AND the intent to act on it. 

Counter-examples PROVE that that is not at all necessarily true, that you are wrong, and there are counter-examples -- a number of them! -- HERE on this very forum.
Quote:"Coming out" proudly is a declaration to the world that there is nothing wrong with homosexuality - that is, how the world defines "homosexuality" which absolutely includes living as a homosexual. 

Homosexuality is a disorder, and "coming out," in itself, is nothing more and nothing less than declaring one has a disorder. Like I said, counter-examples PROVE you are wrong, and they exist HERE on this forum.

(03-15-2014, 11:40 AM)Vox Clamantis Wrote: [ -> ]
(03-15-2014, 11:33 AM)A Catholic Thinker Wrote: [ -> ]Vox, I basically disagree with your approach to homosexuality, for reasons expressed in a couple other long threads (by others more than myself).

"Coming out" means declaring same-sex-attraction AND the intent to act on it. 

Counter-examples PROVE that that is not at all necessarily true, that you are wrong, and there are counter-examples -- a number of them! -- HERE on this very forum.
Quote:"Coming out" proudly is a declaration to the world that there is nothing wrong with homosexuality - that is, how the world defines "homosexuality" which absolutely includes living as a homosexual. 

Homosexuality is a disorder, and "coming out," in itself, is nothing more and nothing less than declaring one has a disorder. Like I said, counter-examples PROVE you are wrong, and they exist HERE on this forum.

Who proudly declares their disorders in public, to the world, with the expectation of praise?

I have all kinds of weaknesses and disorders I do not expect praise for.

Exceptions prove the rule, it is said.  Exceptions are not relevant to the de-facto reality of what "coming out" means to the world.

At the very least - as we see so often - the complete failure to even make any attempt to give such comments the very careful qualification they call for is a cause for scandal.

Do you honestly believe that in that interview Cardinal Dolan was more interested in preaching truth than in the good reputation of himself and the Church in today's world?

I don't see it that way.

EDIT: Typo
Just FYI, I intend to "come out" in my parish starting a chapter of "Courage" - i.e. a group for SSA-afflicted people who wish to be faithful to the tradition, magisterium, scriptures, and faith of the whole Church. I expect maybe 2 or 3 people at most, either because most SSA people don't care what the Church teaches, or they get the wrong impression. This comes from words like "Who am I to judge?" and such ambiguous statements.

What Dolan and others are doing here is applauding the SECULAR man's coming-out (which is currently intrinsically tied to acceptance of the act of gay sex), not the CATHOLIC man's coming-out. Essential, essential, essential distinctions.

Were "coming out" associated with what it should be associated with - i.e. confessing a disordered passion, and asking for help and prayers from the Church - then it would be fine. What we need to do now is cease the whining and the back-and-forth arguments, and start encouraging SSA-people to "come out", while explicitly confessing celibacy, chastity, fidelity to the Church, and a pledge to become fully-mature, if it is possible for them.

Once the association between "gay & Catholic" and "faithful & Catholic" and "chaste & Catholic" has been established firmly, "coming out" won't be associated with public acceptance of sodomy anymore... at least not in the Church itself.

I admit this clearly: I do believe that the "Who am I to judge?" statement, taken almost as a magisterial infallible declaration by the press, has been the cause of this trouble. It will be the cause of more trouble. Francis does not know how to speak in public.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7