This is not good

Note: I've beeinterrupted five times so this is not exactly a good essay, but since this blog is my personal thoughts that I am trying to figure out what I think, take it with a grain of salt.


 A nonjudgemental pope chastizing those who try their best to follow the ten commandments.

And this is not from a conservative Catholic blog but from Reuters.

So don't judge those who have same sex attraction and chose to follow the promiscuous "gay lifestyle". and don't judge the divorced.

but then there is this:

the Argentine pope, who has called for the Church to reach out more to people on the margins of society, the suffering and victims of injustice, has faced stiff resistance from conservatives in the Vatican who fear that he is undermining traditional teachings on moral issues.

presumably the millions whose lives are destroyed because of sex trafficking are not supposed to be mad or judgemental.

Children whose parents divorce, or never marry, who ignore or neglect their kids are not to be angry (yes, I know divorce is sometimes needed, but I am not sure that the easy divorce/living together of the USA with a generation of children growing up without fathers is an improvment over the unhappy families and frustrated wives of the 1950's).

as for the gay lifestyle:

Heather has two mommies? Well, the dirty little secret is that a lot of such marriages are hetero/bi women who were hurt by men, and prefer a marriage based on friendship.

and why were they hurt? the sexual revolution that made women a commodity, and sex a recreation, what's love have to do with it?

But how many male homosexuals are faithful? In the past, they were encouraged by society and all around them to self control. Often they were married and had few or no liasons, or they quietly lived together with their partner, and everyone pretended they were merely friends.

But now the worst of the subculture is open to all, and no one dares to point out that it is sick.

so do I judge, or do I point out to a certain person that serially using his employees for sexual gratification is not a victimless crime, not to mention the "fruits" of his liasons: the harm and shame to wife and child, and that no decent farmer will work for him so the farm and farming equipment is going downhill quickly.

for Catholics, this is the argument of the Jansenists (inspired by Calvin and other Protestant reformers) vs the Jesuits (who used the idea of Jesus as merciful, under the icon the Sacred Heart). Ah but the Jesuits hated the Protestants, persecuted the Jansenist Catholics, and winked at the corruption of the French court...

Jesus was countercultural against the hypocrites, but one doubts he would lamblast the ordinary folks like this Pope does.

so should I be merciful and not condemn/oppose the sexual exploitation that is going on here, in my own household because "who am I to judge"? HELLO.

HIV spread because people wanted pleasure over inconvenience, or because they chose to have promiscuous sex and/or get high on drugs.

we now have a generation who no longer sees sex as part of lovemaking, baby making and marriage. for young folks, it's chaos under the guise of "choice".

true, most men settle down and see having children as a job for real men, but you wouldn't know it from a culture which pushes sex as nothing more than shaking hands.

So why isn't the pope pushing the idea of mature christianity as a good thing, instead of lambasting those who try to do the right thing?

And yes, I agree: Jesus had mercy for everyone.

But there is a difference between mercy/understanding and approval.

Jesus extends mercy to everyone, and will forgive your sins and welcome you home.

But if you notice, the Prodigal son got a welcome party, but the resentful and hardworking older brother inherited the farm.

And without the hardworking older brother, maybe the farm would have gone under and not been there for him to return to.

In other words, yes, mercy, but not in this way, a way that condemns those who try to do the right thing and are keeping the world going.

and this part of the report is just plain wrong:

The Argentine pope, who has called for the Church to reach out more to people on the margins of society, the suffering and victims of injustice, has faced stiff resistance from conservatives in the Vatican who fear that he is undermining traditional teachings on moral issues.In particular, he wants the Church to show more compassion for homosexuals as well as for Catholics who divorced and remarried outside the Church and are thus banned from receiving communion.

uh, there is a big difference between letting anyone come to church (the Catholic church doesn't count heads and anyone, from the homeless to the banker, can come in for mass).

And since often the priest might not know if the person is in the state of grace, the person will probably be given communion.

But most funerals etc. where strangers are there, the priest will remind you that communion is only for those who believe (no non Catholics who think it is just a piece of bread) and who do not have any major sins on their consciences.

Anyone is allowed to worship, but Paul was a bit nasty about sinners pretending they could receive. And one PC site sardonically said, hey Jesus gave the bread to Judas, so what's the big deal? Uh, no he didn't (Judas left before the communion part of the meal).

Am I the only one who knows what was going on in the gay bars and bathhouses? Or who knows that most men in gay marriages have open marriages?

Or the harm to feminism done by radical men hating lesbians, who go way beyond ordinary lesbians who marry their best friends, simply preferring a wife to a man for a spouse, but are seducing college women into paranoia and distortion of what making love is about?

One is reminded of what Camus wrote in The Plague:

“The evil in the world comes almost always from ignorance, and goodwill can cause as much damage as ill-will if it is not enlightened. People are more often good than bad, though in fact that is not the question. But they are more or less ignorant and this is what one calls vice or virtue, the most appalling vice being the ignorance that thinks it knows everything and which consequently authorizes itself to kill. The murderer's soul is blind, and there is no true goodness or fine love without the greatest possible degree of clear-sightedness.” 

The Pope is not clear sighted here. And that is the problem.

And because he is not clearsighted, he is being opposed by a lot of us who actually know the harm that comes from his actions.

... All I maintain is that on this earth there are pestilences and there are victims, and it's up to us, so far as possible, not to join forces with the pestilences.”

the talk of mercy is fine, but you are giving a green light to the behavior.

Wouldn't it be better to actually show mercy to the sociopath's victims?