Entry tags:
(no subject)
Me? Sticking up for the pope? If there was a hell, I'd ask someone to check the temperature there...
Entry tags:
(no subject)
The unconfirmed reports of the Pope's passing on Friday were incorrect and he passed away yesterday.
Since I have friends who are Christian, non-Christian, and ex-Christian, I have read a wide range of responses, from gleeful celebration to shrugging to deep mourning. My feelings about the Pope's passing are... nothing. Well, a little bit of something. But for the most part, I think of him as an old man, not connected to me, who lived a good long life and passed away in relative peace.
In some ways I might be inclined to view him as an enemy. After all, he did nothing to end the oppression of my people (gays, lesbians, bisexuals, transgendered, and intersex) and promoted the perpetuation of that evil. Lack of access to birth control is a link in the chain of female oppression, and he actively promoted the perpetuation of that, too. He remained captive to doctrines which lead to pain and suffering.
OTOH he did take steps which no pope had previously taken to promote peace and interfaith understanding. And he was not without compassion.
I remain mixed in my feelings towards him.
Since I have friends who are Christian, non-Christian, and ex-Christian, I have read a wide range of responses, from gleeful celebration to shrugging to deep mourning. My feelings about the Pope's passing are... nothing. Well, a little bit of something. But for the most part, I think of him as an old man, not connected to me, who lived a good long life and passed away in relative peace.
In some ways I might be inclined to view him as an enemy. After all, he did nothing to end the oppression of my people (gays, lesbians, bisexuals, transgendered, and intersex) and promoted the perpetuation of that evil. Lack of access to birth control is a link in the chain of female oppression, and he actively promoted the perpetuation of that, too. He remained captive to doctrines which lead to pain and suffering.
OTOH he did take steps which no pope had previously taken to promote peace and interfaith understanding. And he was not without compassion.
I remain mixed in my feelings towards him.
Entry tags:
(no subject)
Worried about the lure of the devil, a Vatican (news - web sites)-linked university on Thursday debuted its latest course offering: a class on Satanism, black magic and exorcism.
The class for clergy and seminarians at Rome's Pontifical Academy "Regina Apostolorum" arose from alarm about what some religious officials see as Satanic practices among young people, especially in Italy.
... A major theme of the first day's course was how to differentiate between a person who is possessed and someone who is simply suffering psychological problems.
... The Vatican is also concerned about a growing number of young people who develop what instructors called personal forms of Satanism, outside the sects that are closely monitored by police. They often learn about the devil through the Internet.
... Among the signs of possession by the devil, according to church teaching, are speaking in unknown tongues and demonstrating physical force beyond one's natural capacity.
from Vatican University Debuts Satanism Classes
(no subject)
This post is inspired in part by a post ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
lady_babalon made a few days ago, wherein she noted that sometimes in conversation she will be told that not all Christians are judgmental bigots. She then asked, "When you tell me you're not all like that, how exactly am I supposed to know this? Why exactly am I supposed to believe you?" Her question was fueled by the observation that there have been few times in her life when she experienced compassionate treatment by people she knew were Christians (i.e. clergy and/or proselytizers) and who knew she is pagan and queer, versus the horrendous treatment she has often received.
In my life, I can think of only one example that would give me cause to believe that Christians are truly concerned with the spiritual growth and salvation of queers. The Transgender Day of Remembrance vigil last year was led by a Dominican nun, assisted by a priest. The two apparently did a lot of work with the gay and lesbian community center in New Orleans.
As Catholic clergy, I suspect (though I did not ask them directly) that they believe and are required to teach that homosexuality is wrong. But even still, that did not stop them from seeing the suffering in the community and working to heal it. Their presence alone was moving and healing, simply because of the strong contrast they made with the body of my experience with Christians, and with the treatment of queers by society at large, which is largely fueled and perpetuated by the Christian teaching that homosexuality and transgenderism are sinful.
Outside of that, the only evidence I really have of the goodness and compassion of Christians are comments to that effect which I have received online. The rest of my experience with Christians has been like the treatment we received on Mardi Gras in 2002, or the people who have gone out of their way to pass laws which impede my basic rights, or the people who go on TV and blame people like me for bring God's wrath on America on Sept. 11, 2001, or the people who claimed that AIDS was deserved punishment from God because of "His" disapproval of homosexuality.
Where are the Christian voices on TV or in other media countering that? Bishop John Shelby Spong -- that's it. He's not even considered Christian by many.
Silence equals tacit approval and acceptance. So, until I see a mainstream, tangible movement made of Christians to help heal the suffering of queers, I too am extremely skeptical of the idea that Christianity teaches true compassion (instead of the "easy" compassion Jesus warned against in Matthew 5:43-47).
lady_babalon made a few days ago, wherein she noted that sometimes in conversation she will be told that not all Christians are judgmental bigots. She then asked, "When you tell me you're not all like that, how exactly am I supposed to know this? Why exactly am I supposed to believe you?" Her question was fueled by the observation that there have been few times in her life when she experienced compassionate treatment by people she knew were Christians (i.e. clergy and/or proselytizers) and who knew she is pagan and queer, versus the horrendous treatment she has often received.In my life, I can think of only one example that would give me cause to believe that Christians are truly concerned with the spiritual growth and salvation of queers. The Transgender Day of Remembrance vigil last year was led by a Dominican nun, assisted by a priest. The two apparently did a lot of work with the gay and lesbian community center in New Orleans.
As Catholic clergy, I suspect (though I did not ask them directly) that they believe and are required to teach that homosexuality is wrong. But even still, that did not stop them from seeing the suffering in the community and working to heal it. Their presence alone was moving and healing, simply because of the strong contrast they made with the body of my experience with Christians, and with the treatment of queers by society at large, which is largely fueled and perpetuated by the Christian teaching that homosexuality and transgenderism are sinful.
Outside of that, the only evidence I really have of the goodness and compassion of Christians are comments to that effect which I have received online. The rest of my experience with Christians has been like the treatment we received on Mardi Gras in 2002, or the people who have gone out of their way to pass laws which impede my basic rights, or the people who go on TV and blame people like me for bring God's wrath on America on Sept. 11, 2001, or the people who claimed that AIDS was deserved punishment from God because of "His" disapproval of homosexuality.
Where are the Christian voices on TV or in other media countering that? Bishop John Shelby Spong -- that's it. He's not even considered Christian by many.
Silence equals tacit approval and acceptance. So, until I see a mainstream, tangible movement made of Christians to help heal the suffering of queers, I too am extremely skeptical of the idea that Christianity teaches true compassion (instead of the "easy" compassion Jesus warned against in Matthew 5:43-47).
Entry tags:
religious gender elitism
About 100 men and women gathered outside Atlanta's Roman Catholic cathedral Thursday to protest the archbishop's exclusion of women from the Holy Thursday foot-washing ritual.
Contrary to the order from Archbishop John Donoghue, the protesters said the rite should include everyone. Donoghue did not address the protest during Mass Thursday night. He and his staff have refused to comment on the issue.
... In a letter last month to Atlanta priests, Donoghue said they should select 12 men from each parish to represent the apostles who had their feet washed by Jesus at the Last Supper.
from Faithful Decry Foot-Washing Ban of Women
It takes a special closed-ness of mind, and a special hatred of flesh, to think that the "fact" (disputed by some scholars and some non-canonical accounts) that Jesus' disciples were male sets a precedent that only people with penises deserve to participate in the remembrance of this event.
Jesus' message here was about humility, service, and compassion -- and this archbishop (and many before him) has turned it into something exclusionary.
Any mindset that reads the gospels and sees "people with penises" vs. "people without penises" instead of, just, people, is one that dehumanizes and closes the doors of the heart and soul.
Edit. It's difficult not to contrast the foot-washing scene in John, wherein Jesus washes the disciples' feet, with the foot-washing scene in Luke, where a woman (tradition says Mary Magdalene) washes Jesus' feet. If you restrict the remembrance of the scene in John to only male recipients, you are sending the subliminal message, intentionally or not, that it is fine for priests, who follow in the tradition of Jesus, to be served *by* women, but not to give service *to* women.
Entry tags:
An interesting counterpoint to my entries of the last several days.
Seen on the Beliefnet B-Log:
And, posted byarisbe, this article on Catholic social teaching:
On this second article, these comments are spliced together and greatly edited from two comments made in![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-community.gif)
challenging_god:
The article made a very good point in showing that the way the Catholic Church has gone about making economic pronouncements from its "bully pulpit" takes it into potentially dangerous territory. In the Catholic Church there is effectively no two-way discourse; the Church is not a democracy.
What I've advocated in mixing theology with practical concerns like economic or political implications envisions a two-way flow of information and argument. That is, if theology has economic implications, then economics should have theological implications. The Church should not then promote potentially flawed economics simply because that is what is compatible with its theology; economic innovation may suggest that theological innovation is needed. But it does not appear (from my detached perspective) that this is compatible with the way the Church sees it.
It has been demonstrated time and again, in business and government, that when the people in the trenches have a clear means of questioning policies that come from above, the entire structure works more efficiently. The Church does not have an effective mechanism for this. (Again, that assessment comes from a somewhat detached perspective.)
The Church is structured as it is to avoid giving heresy a chance to take root; but the Church also plays at being an institution of the world. Protestantism allows more of a feedback loop, but Protestant denominations are much more prone to schism over "timely" issues, which suggests that there is no easy answer on how to implement the economic implications of theology.
People have used the Bible to predict the Second Coming and the end of the world. But John M. Brown is one of the first to rely on the Old Testament to hunt for oil in Israel, where others have tried and failed. "Over the last five years significant amounts of gas have been discovered off the shore of both Israel and Gaza," insists Brown, chairman of Dallas-based Zion Oil & Gas. Decoding verses from Deuteronomy, he is determined to look for black gold to the south of the Mount Carmel range, a region known as "the head of Joseph," and an area near the Mediterranean, a.k.a. "the foot of Asher."
How to pay for this holy flyer? Zion recently went public on Nasdaq in a best-efforts offering for 1.3 million to 7 million shares at $5 apiece. The kicker: Brown must pay a hefty 8% to 10% of the proceeds to the underwriters--no believers, they. The money will support drilling on sites licensed from the Israeli government. And if the first efforts bear no fruit? Brown seems ethereally unconcerned. Many of his backers are evangelical Christians who want him to succeed. Besides, we are entering the season of miracles.
And, posted by
arisbe, this article on Catholic social teaching:The approach found in many of the encyclicals has led the Church to attempt to impose on the economic order principles external to the science of economics, and thus, it promotes policies that are bound to fail, and that will bring disrepute to the Church, leading people to reject its teachings as unserious.... [T]he principles of economic activity are orderly and unchanging, and attempts to impose particular policies from outside of that system reflect a lack of comprehension or recognition of the reality of the economic order.
On this second article, these comments are spliced together and greatly edited from two comments made in
challenging_god:The article made a very good point in showing that the way the Catholic Church has gone about making economic pronouncements from its "bully pulpit" takes it into potentially dangerous territory. In the Catholic Church there is effectively no two-way discourse; the Church is not a democracy.
What I've advocated in mixing theology with practical concerns like economic or political implications envisions a two-way flow of information and argument. That is, if theology has economic implications, then economics should have theological implications. The Church should not then promote potentially flawed economics simply because that is what is compatible with its theology; economic innovation may suggest that theological innovation is needed. But it does not appear (from my detached perspective) that this is compatible with the way the Church sees it.
It has been demonstrated time and again, in business and government, that when the people in the trenches have a clear means of questioning policies that come from above, the entire structure works more efficiently. The Church does not have an effective mechanism for this. (Again, that assessment comes from a somewhat detached perspective.)
The Church is structured as it is to avoid giving heresy a chance to take root; but the Church also plays at being an institution of the world. Protestantism allows more of a feedback loop, but Protestant denominations are much more prone to schism over "timely" issues, which suggests that there is no easy answer on how to implement the economic implications of theology.
Entry tags:
(no subject)
My last post brings me close to what is called in some circles "liberation theology." This is the idea that inequality, oppression, and exploitation are a large part of the suffering from which Jesus meant to liberate humankind.
Every indication that is coming out of "historical Jesus" research is that Jesus was a radical who challenged in the strongest way possible the political, economic, and religious status quo of his day. His concern was not necessarily that everyone should have equal wealth -- but the particularly parasitic forms of exploitation where the rich get exponentially more wealthy, while the poor are pushed into greater and greater desperation and marginality. The dilemma is compounded when the marginalized have no voice in the political scene.
digbydolben commented some time ago that a great struggle is shaping up between factions within Christianity, between the proponents of liberation theology, largely in the Catholic tradition, and the proponents of the largely Protestant view that Christianity is compatible with corporate capitalism. The more I examine this issue, the more I realize that he is right.
( Read more... )
crossposted to my journal and crossposted tochallenging_god
Every indication that is coming out of "historical Jesus" research is that Jesus was a radical who challenged in the strongest way possible the political, economic, and religious status quo of his day. His concern was not necessarily that everyone should have equal wealth -- but the particularly parasitic forms of exploitation where the rich get exponentially more wealthy, while the poor are pushed into greater and greater desperation and marginality. The dilemma is compounded when the marginalized have no voice in the political scene.
digbydolben commented some time ago that a great struggle is shaping up between factions within Christianity, between the proponents of liberation theology, largely in the Catholic tradition, and the proponents of the largely Protestant view that Christianity is compatible with corporate capitalism. The more I examine this issue, the more I realize that he is right.( Read more... )
crossposted to my journal and crossposted to
challenging_godEntry tags:
(no subject)
Some of you have rightly taken me to task for the sweeping and hasty comments I made yesterday about the Pope's pronouncement regarding the treatment of people in 'permanent vegetative states.'
I should perhaps clarify what I see as one purpose for this journal. I am not in any way pretending to be a pundit; I spell out my views as they occur to me, and though sometimes it bruises my ego I welcome feedback of all sorts. My ego needs to be bruised sometimes; it strengthens and hones the sharpness of my intellect, and of my compassion. So let me state explicitly, that no one need ever fear offending me simply by offering an opinion that differs from mine. Having friends who will rebuke me when I need to be rebuked is a blessing. I ask only that you be civil when doing so.
The nature of this medium, LiveJournal, is that it favors the recording of passing thoughts. It has been immensely useful to me in helping me to see the way my thoughts have evolved over the past two years. Even when I take the time to organize my thoughts before posting, my posts are still often quite raw, as they are works in progress. For me, who used to jealously hide rough drafts of everything until I was willing to let someone else peek, this has been a way of learning to open up, to see that I don't have to be considered an expounder of flawless wisdom.
I should perhaps clarify what I see as one purpose for this journal. I am not in any way pretending to be a pundit; I spell out my views as they occur to me, and though sometimes it bruises my ego I welcome feedback of all sorts. My ego needs to be bruised sometimes; it strengthens and hones the sharpness of my intellect, and of my compassion. So let me state explicitly, that no one need ever fear offending me simply by offering an opinion that differs from mine. Having friends who will rebuke me when I need to be rebuked is a blessing. I ask only that you be civil when doing so.
The nature of this medium, LiveJournal, is that it favors the recording of passing thoughts. It has been immensely useful to me in helping me to see the way my thoughts have evolved over the past two years. Even when I take the time to organize my thoughts before posting, my posts are still often quite raw, as they are works in progress. For me, who used to jealously hide rough drafts of everything until I was willing to let someone else peek, this has been a way of learning to open up, to see that I don't have to be considered an expounder of flawless wisdom.
Entry tags:
(no subject)
Pope John Paul II said Saturday the removal of feeding tubes from people in vegetative states was immoral, and that no judgment on their quality of life could justify such "euthanasia by omission."
Fantastic. Does that mean the Vatican will be helping families pay the catastrophic medical bills of keeping a person alive, for years or decades, when there is literally no hope of recovery?
The Pope called for more money for a "cure," but there is no "cure" for massive brain damage. Small amounts of damage can repair themselves over time, amazingly enough, but if the prefrontal cortex is destroyed, there's no one home and there never will be.
Why is our culture so afraid of death? Death is part of life. Death is fore-ordained at the moment of birth. To be honest I am not afraid of being dead, I am not afraid of the thought that who I am will one day disappear into oblivion. It's the process of dying itself I'm afraid of. All that pain and panic.
Fantastic. Does that mean the Vatican will be helping families pay the catastrophic medical bills of keeping a person alive, for years or decades, when there is literally no hope of recovery?
The Pope called for more money for a "cure," but there is no "cure" for massive brain damage. Small amounts of damage can repair themselves over time, amazingly enough, but if the prefrontal cortex is destroyed, there's no one home and there never will be.
Why is our culture so afraid of death? Death is part of life. Death is fore-ordained at the moment of birth. To be honest I am not afraid of being dead, I am not afraid of the thought that who I am will one day disappear into oblivion. It's the process of dying itself I'm afraid of. All that pain and panic.
Entry tags:
Can I have this posted on a plaque in every courthouse in America? It's by a saint...
Let us suppose that in explaining the words, "And God said, 'Let there be light,' and light was made," one man thinks that it was material light that was made, and another that it was spiritual. As to the actual existence of spiritual light in a spiritual creature, our faith leaves no doubt; as to the existence of material light, celestial or supercelestial, even existing before the heavens, a light which could have been followed by night, there will be nothing in such a supposition contrary to the faith until unerring truth gives the lie to it. And if that should happen, this teaching was never in Holy Scripture but was an opinion proposed by man in his ignorance.
... Usually, even a non-Christian knows something about the earth, the heavens, and the other elements of this world, about the motion and orbit of the stars and even their size and relative positions, about the predictable eclipses of the sun and moon, the cycles of the years and the seasons, about the kinds of animals, shrubs, stones, and so forth, and this knowledge he holds to as being certain from reason and experience.
Now, it is a disgraceful and dangerous thing for an infidel to hear a Christian, presumably giving the meaning of Holy Scripture, talking nonsense on these topics; and we should take all means to prevent such an embarrassing situation, in which people show up vast ignorance in a Christian and laugh it to scorn. The shame is not so much that an ignorant individual is derided, but that people outside the household of the faith think our sacred writers held such opinions, and, to the great loss of those for whose salvation we toil, the writers of our Scripture are criticized and rejected as unlearned men.
If they find a Christian mistaken in a field which they themselves know well and hear him maintaining his foolish opinions about our books, how are they going to believe those books in matters concerning the resurrection of the dead, the hope of eternal life, and the kingdom of heaven, when they think their pages are full of falsehoods on facts which they themselves have learnt from experience and the light of reason? Reckless and incompetent expounders of holy Scripture bring untold trouble and sorrow on their wiser brethren when they are caught in one of their mischievous false opinions and are taken to task by those who are not bound by the authority of our sacred books.
--Augustine, On The Literal Meaning of Genesis, Chapter 19
... Usually, even a non-Christian knows something about the earth, the heavens, and the other elements of this world, about the motion and orbit of the stars and even their size and relative positions, about the predictable eclipses of the sun and moon, the cycles of the years and the seasons, about the kinds of animals, shrubs, stones, and so forth, and this knowledge he holds to as being certain from reason and experience.
Now, it is a disgraceful and dangerous thing for an infidel to hear a Christian, presumably giving the meaning of Holy Scripture, talking nonsense on these topics; and we should take all means to prevent such an embarrassing situation, in which people show up vast ignorance in a Christian and laugh it to scorn. The shame is not so much that an ignorant individual is derided, but that people outside the household of the faith think our sacred writers held such opinions, and, to the great loss of those for whose salvation we toil, the writers of our Scripture are criticized and rejected as unlearned men.
If they find a Christian mistaken in a field which they themselves know well and hear him maintaining his foolish opinions about our books, how are they going to believe those books in matters concerning the resurrection of the dead, the hope of eternal life, and the kingdom of heaven, when they think their pages are full of falsehoods on facts which they themselves have learnt from experience and the light of reason? Reckless and incompetent expounders of holy Scripture bring untold trouble and sorrow on their wiser brethren when they are caught in one of their mischievous false opinions and are taken to task by those who are not bound by the authority of our sacred books.
--Augustine, On The Literal Meaning of Genesis, Chapter 19
Entry tags:
(no subject)
Many thanks to lady_babalon for catching this article and refering it to me. It is very edifying to see that I am not the only one who noticed the extreme anti-gay hatemongering in Mel Gibson's Passion of the Christ.
lady_babalon for catching this article and refering it to me. It is very edifying to see that I am not the only one who noticed the extreme anti-gay hatemongering in Mel Gibson's Passion of the Christ.With The Passion, Gibson... has produced a show that cunningly deploys fear of gays to reassure conservative Christians of their own righteousness. The script's anti-Semitic messages have been detailed by writers such as Christopher Hitchens, who recently argued in Slate that The Passion relies for its effect on a fascistic spectacle whose components include "a hatred of silky and effeminate Jews."[emphasis in bold added]
The most effeminate character in Gibson’s gospel, however, is satanic, not Semitic. The devil, who plays no role in the biblical Passion narratives, appears frequently in The Passion. The character is played by a woman... [who] is costumed and photographed to look like an effeminate man. Given Gibson’s past remarks about gay people, and his violent treatment of gay characters in the film Braveheart -- and given that, throughout history, Satan has almost invariably been depicted as male... -- it's reasonable to assume that this conflation of evil and effeminacy is intentional. (Taking a cue from Jesus Christ Superstar, Gibson underscores the point by presenting King Herod as a plump, soft man in Cleopatra eye makeup, attended by a queeny courtier.)
... James Baldwin’s observations on [The Exorcist], from a 1975 essay called "The Devil Finds Work," apply equally to Gibson’s movie: "The mindless and hysterical banality of the evil presented in The Exorcist is the most terrifying thing about the film.... Americans should certainly know more about evil than that; if they pretend otherwise, they are lying, and any black man, and not only blacks ... can call them on this lie; he who has been treated as the devil recognizes the devil when they meet."
Entry tags:
Thoughts on "The Passion" with spoilers
A full moon over the Garden of Gethsemane...
That embarassingly inaccurate image is the first shot of "The Passion of the Christ." (Well, maybe there was a full moon over the Garden during the night of Jesus' arrest, but if so, then it didn't happen during Passover...) Edit: The embarassing error is mine; my memory failed me, and after double-checking I found that the first day of Passover occurs on a full moon. I could erase the error, but I will leave it for posterity.
In many ways this movie was not at all what I expected. In other ways, it was exactly what I expected.
For one thing, the movie was slightly more anti-Semitic than the gospels themselves. Most problematic for me in this regard were three scenes in particular( Read more... )
Actually though I think the movie is distressingly homophobic. ( Read more... )
Next, I was surprised to see that while the imagery was vivid, even lush, there was an otherwordly feel to most of it. Many scenes have a detached, slow-motion feel. ( Read more... )
Then there is the violence. The movie can be described as an orgy of bloodletting, and I would compare the scourging of Jesus to the kind of "buckets of blood" violence you'd see in a slasher movie, meaning that it is so overblown it is unbelievable. (Not LJ-cut because the violence is hardly a spoiler.)
There is an awkward mingling of the two passion narratives in the gospels( Read more... )
The net effect is that while Gibson tried to portray Jesus as a human who was tortured and murdered, he actually portrayed events in a very unreal, otherworldly way.
I was, however, moved by one aspect of the film, and that was the portrayal of Mary's agony over seeing her son arrested, tortured, and executed. ( Read more... )
That embarassingly inaccurate image is the first shot of "The Passion of the Christ." (Well, maybe there was a full moon over the Garden during the night of Jesus' arrest, but if so, then it didn't happen during Passover...) Edit: The embarassing error is mine; my memory failed me, and after double-checking I found that the first day of Passover occurs on a full moon. I could erase the error, but I will leave it for posterity.
In many ways this movie was not at all what I expected. In other ways, it was exactly what I expected.
For one thing, the movie was slightly more anti-Semitic than the gospels themselves. Most problematic for me in this regard were three scenes in particular( Read more... )
Actually though I think the movie is distressingly homophobic. ( Read more... )
Next, I was surprised to see that while the imagery was vivid, even lush, there was an otherwordly feel to most of it. Many scenes have a detached, slow-motion feel. ( Read more... )
Then there is the violence. The movie can be described as an orgy of bloodletting, and I would compare the scourging of Jesus to the kind of "buckets of blood" violence you'd see in a slasher movie, meaning that it is so overblown it is unbelievable. (Not LJ-cut because the violence is hardly a spoiler.)
There is an awkward mingling of the two passion narratives in the gospels( Read more... )
The net effect is that while Gibson tried to portray Jesus as a human who was tortured and murdered, he actually portrayed events in a very unreal, otherworldly way.
I was, however, moved by one aspect of the film, and that was the portrayal of Mary's agony over seeing her son arrested, tortured, and executed. ( Read more... )
Entry tags:
Dextera Domini
From DEXTERA DOMINI: The Declaration on the Pastoral Care of Left-Handed Persons
THE RIGHT HAND of the Lord has adorned his spotless bride, the Church, with many wondrous gifts, not the least of which is the supreme ministry of defending the arsenal of Christian truth. Through the wisdom of a provident God, this congregation, the watchdog of the household of faith, exercises diligent custody over the sacred deposit of doctrine, guarding it like a talent buried in the sand (Matt. 25:25). To this richly satisfying task it brings the feral instincts of a lioness protecting her cubs and the dispassionate zeal of a raptor pursuing its prey, so that the pearl of great price may be safely gathered up with the wheat and deposited in the nets of Peter's bark (Matt. 13:46; 13:30; John 21:6). Wherefore it seeks to infiltrate the entire Catholic world, like leaven mixed into a lump of dough (Matt. 13:33), and so, like yeast, to ferment the pilgrim Church with its viscid and fungal spores so that the entire mass may swell into a frothy, pulsating, gelatinous ooze of faith. Thus, like a prudent householder, it may bring forth from its storeroom both the true and the old (Matt. 13:52).
Having already disposed of other perversions, it becomes necessary to speak out with the profound disgust regarding yet another aberration which, like the pulling of a polyester fiber, threatens to unravel the seamless garment of faith.
This particular menace has been propagated by those who, basing their opinions on spurious sophisms of the psychological and behavioral pseudo-sciences, claim that it is acceptable, or even normal, to use the left hand when engaging in manual activities. In the face of tradition and right reason, they point to a small but vocal minority of individuals who primarily use their left hands or purport to be bimanual. With callous disregard for the natural order they judge indulgently, and even excuse completely, sinistral behavior, that is, the indiscriminate use of the left hand in the place of the right. Such an insidious abuse is defended as though there were no difference between right or left, Jew or Greek, male or female, slave or free (Gal. 3:28).
For while it is neither possible nor desirable at present to decide whether this disorder is genetic in origin or merely the result of repeated nasty thoughts, in either case one may never argue that left-handedness is compulsive and therefore excusable. It is, of course, necessary to take note of the distinction between the sinistral condition and the individual left-handed actions, which are intrinsically disordered and utterly wrong.
And although the particular inclination of the left-handed person is not necessarily a sin, it is a more or less strong tendency ordered toward an intrinsic moral evil, and thus the inclination itself must be seen as an objective disorder. Therefore, both the condition and all acts flowing from it are to be condemned, as are all those who suffer from it or engage in it, and everyone who thinks like them or defends them or befriends them, into everlasting torments in the lowest pit of hell where the lake of fire is never quenched and the worm dies not (Mark 9:48).
THE RIGHT HAND of the Lord has adorned his spotless bride, the Church, with many wondrous gifts, not the least of which is the supreme ministry of defending the arsenal of Christian truth. Through the wisdom of a provident God, this congregation, the watchdog of the household of faith, exercises diligent custody over the sacred deposit of doctrine, guarding it like a talent buried in the sand (Matt. 25:25). To this richly satisfying task it brings the feral instincts of a lioness protecting her cubs and the dispassionate zeal of a raptor pursuing its prey, so that the pearl of great price may be safely gathered up with the wheat and deposited in the nets of Peter's bark (Matt. 13:46; 13:30; John 21:6). Wherefore it seeks to infiltrate the entire Catholic world, like leaven mixed into a lump of dough (Matt. 13:33), and so, like yeast, to ferment the pilgrim Church with its viscid and fungal spores so that the entire mass may swell into a frothy, pulsating, gelatinous ooze of faith. Thus, like a prudent householder, it may bring forth from its storeroom both the true and the old (Matt. 13:52).
Having already disposed of other perversions, it becomes necessary to speak out with the profound disgust regarding yet another aberration which, like the pulling of a polyester fiber, threatens to unravel the seamless garment of faith.
This particular menace has been propagated by those who, basing their opinions on spurious sophisms of the psychological and behavioral pseudo-sciences, claim that it is acceptable, or even normal, to use the left hand when engaging in manual activities. In the face of tradition and right reason, they point to a small but vocal minority of individuals who primarily use their left hands or purport to be bimanual. With callous disregard for the natural order they judge indulgently, and even excuse completely, sinistral behavior, that is, the indiscriminate use of the left hand in the place of the right. Such an insidious abuse is defended as though there were no difference between right or left, Jew or Greek, male or female, slave or free (Gal. 3:28).
For while it is neither possible nor desirable at present to decide whether this disorder is genetic in origin or merely the result of repeated nasty thoughts, in either case one may never argue that left-handedness is compulsive and therefore excusable. It is, of course, necessary to take note of the distinction between the sinistral condition and the individual left-handed actions, which are intrinsically disordered and utterly wrong.
And although the particular inclination of the left-handed person is not necessarily a sin, it is a more or less strong tendency ordered toward an intrinsic moral evil, and thus the inclination itself must be seen as an objective disorder. Therefore, both the condition and all acts flowing from it are to be condemned, as are all those who suffer from it or engage in it, and everyone who thinks like them or defends them or befriends them, into everlasting torments in the lowest pit of hell where the lake of fire is never quenched and the worm dies not (Mark 9:48).
Entry tags:
Why would the Vatican lie about having a huge frickin' menorah? They don't need it, for chrissakes
Israel's chief rabbis, who will meet the pope Friday, said they hope to get permission to search Vatican storerooms for artifacts such as the huge golden menorah that stood in the Jewish Temple in Jerusalem 2,000 years ago.
... When the Romans sacked Jerusalem in 70 A.D., they took huge amounts of booty home. Legend has it that religious articles from the Temple, including the menorah, were among them. The Arch of Titus in Rome depicts victorious Roman legions marching off with the seven-branch menorah in hand. Amar said the Vatican official denied the menorah was there. "My heart tells me this is not the truth, but that it is some kind of camouflage," Amar said. An aide to the rabbi said the Vatican was not likely to permit a search.
...Some Orthodox Jews believe the restoration of the menorah and other holy vessels to Jerusalem would be the first step in rebuilding the Temple, whose site is now occupied by the Al Aqsa Mosque, the third holiest shrine of Islam.
from Israeli Rabbis Hope to Search Vatican
... When the Romans sacked Jerusalem in 70 A.D., they took huge amounts of booty home. Legend has it that religious articles from the Temple, including the menorah, were among them. The Arch of Titus in Rome depicts victorious Roman legions marching off with the seven-branch menorah in hand. Amar said the Vatican official denied the menorah was there. "My heart tells me this is not the truth, but that it is some kind of camouflage," Amar said. An aide to the rabbi said the Vatican was not likely to permit a search.
...Some Orthodox Jews believe the restoration of the menorah and other holy vessels to Jerusalem would be the first step in rebuilding the Temple, whose site is now occupied by the Al Aqsa Mosque, the third holiest shrine of Islam.
from Israeli Rabbis Hope to Search Vatican
Entry tags:
(no subject)
I went to see a late night showing of The Order. This movie was originally going to be called The Sin Eater, and actually this should have remained the title, because the new title is misleading and inaccurate. There is no "Order" in this movie, except tangentially the main character's order.
This could have been such a better movie -- not by adding things in, but by leaving things out. Certain rather cheesy scenes which don't advance the plot at all were included that have the effect of damaging the movie considerably. I mean, priests in movies shouldn't confront unholy terrors and then exchange idle banter immediately afterwards, right? Most uneven movies start off excellent and get bad at the end; this movie does the exact opposite, with the first 30 minutes being awful, and the remainer being quite good and thought-provoking.
I have no idea whether or not Catholics will find this movie disparaging. It shows the Catholic Church as being rigidly dedicated to its teachings and sternly unforgiving towards those who have been excommunicated -- but then, isn't it?
( semi-spoilers that can be found in any review )
This could have been such a better movie -- not by adding things in, but by leaving things out. Certain rather cheesy scenes which don't advance the plot at all were included that have the effect of damaging the movie considerably. I mean, priests in movies shouldn't confront unholy terrors and then exchange idle banter immediately afterwards, right? Most uneven movies start off excellent and get bad at the end; this movie does the exact opposite, with the first 30 minutes being awful, and the remainer being quite good and thought-provoking.
I have no idea whether or not Catholics will find this movie disparaging. It shows the Catholic Church as being rigidly dedicated to its teachings and sternly unforgiving towards those who have been excommunicated -- but then, isn't it?
( semi-spoilers that can be found in any review )
(no subject)
I invite anyone who may be interested to read my post in challenging_god regarding I Corinthians 6:9 and the ongoing debate about homosexuality in Christian scripture.
challenging_god regarding I Corinthians 6:9 and the ongoing debate about homosexuality in Christian scripture.Entry tags:
(no subject)
To those who filled my request of paying for 2 months of LJ in return for postage for Mardi Gras packages -- thank you very much! Hope they arrived in good condition and that they were worth the wait.
seraphimsigrist mailed the $5 instead and, to sweeten the deal, included a few paper icons, which, as icons do, have their own style of striking beauty. This was a nice gift -- thank you, Father.
( Icons of Peter embracing Andrew, Francis of Assisi )
The icon of Peter and Andrew hugging was presented to the Roman Catholic Pope by the Eastern Orthodox Patriarch, and was meant to demonstrate fraternal fellowship between the two long-distant branches of the Christian faith.
A brave image, given nearly 1,000 years of misunderstanding and enmity. But imagine something even braver. Imagine an image of Jesus embracing Mohammed, or Buddha, or all such figures seated together at a table breaking bread. I'm convinced that, if they had been given the chance, this is what they would have done, without hesitation.
When these people gave their teachings, they meant to bring people together, not drive them apart. There is enough division in the world. Instead the teachings became symbols of national pride, of creedal superiority. It's long past time for people to discard these thoughts, yet they persist.
seraphimsigrist mailed the $5 instead and, to sweeten the deal, included a few paper icons, which, as icons do, have their own style of striking beauty. This was a nice gift -- thank you, Father.( Icons of Peter embracing Andrew, Francis of Assisi )
The icon of Peter and Andrew hugging was presented to the Roman Catholic Pope by the Eastern Orthodox Patriarch, and was meant to demonstrate fraternal fellowship between the two long-distant branches of the Christian faith.
A brave image, given nearly 1,000 years of misunderstanding and enmity. But imagine something even braver. Imagine an image of Jesus embracing Mohammed, or Buddha, or all such figures seated together at a table breaking bread. I'm convinced that, if they had been given the chance, this is what they would have done, without hesitation.
When these people gave their teachings, they meant to bring people together, not drive them apart. There is enough division in the world. Instead the teachings became symbols of national pride, of creedal superiority. It's long past time for people to discard these thoughts, yet they persist.