PopeWatch: Who Are They to Judge?

If Pope Francis only knew how much the people, all persons, including the sodomites, depend upon him to keep our world sane and true, the reason for Georgio Bergoglio’s vocation to the priesthood, his first vocation, Pope Francis would call the sodomites out on their rape of the innocent and holy souls in his care. Perjury, lying in a court of law and the court of public opinion as the sodomites have done to inflict their agenda on innocent, chaste and decent homosexuals calls for Truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help me God.

wow good point Mary
re: “This is not about homosexuality. This is about homosexual behavior, sodomy by any other name.This is about using the power of government to impose the swindle that being a person of same sex orientation, or homosexual, is the same as sodomy.”

isn’t hate speech directed against persons? speech about actions or behavior is is not criminal is it? hate speech against persons has been called criminal, not speech against behavior

The darkness (all around us) does not comprehend the Gospel. Still, the light shines in the darkness and the darkness will never put it out.

God bless all here.

God bless all here.

And, keep the Faith.

In the Scriptures there seems to be two quite distinct, but not contradictory, approaches to sin.

The first is the prophetic. While all the prophets reveal aspects of this way, no one is better than Saint John the Baptist, who with vim and vigor, fire in his belly and fire in his eyes prepares the People of God for the coming of the One Who will baptize with the Holy Spirit and fire.That fire was love. it was the fire of love for God and yes for the sinners he was calling to repentance. His fire came out and set his hearers on fire: to the whole crowd gathered to hear him, he cried out “You brood of vipers….!” One could go into the water of the Jordan in response to quench the fire of judgment or, as it has been from the beginning in the Garden, run away {the more common approach] or the other age old response: control: somehow attempt to control the fire: aka Herod Antipas arresting John. John was arrested by Herod for preaching against the sin which Herod had committed: marrying his brother’s wife, Herodias. A puppet king’s singed conscience, a woman’s wrath and a dancing girl brought the whole thing to a head [no pun intended] and John lost his.

The other approach or model is that of the Shepherd going after the lost sheep. The Lord Jesus Himself incarnates this model. Although we see it throughout the four gospels, I would point to two stories which reveal this pattern perfectly to us. They are: the woman caught in adultery and the Samaritan woman at the well. In both, we have a despised sinner who has committed grave sins against the sixth commandment, an outcast, and a woman. In one story, the dialogue is brief and to the point, while in the other it is more prolonged and dialogical.

People often times forget that Jesus and the Pharisees with the stones in their hands, agreed on one thing: that the adulteress had sinned, a very grave sin indeed. The difference was in ‘approach’. The group of Pharisees condemned the sinner and wanted to stone her (and Jesus as well if he got in their way or fell in their trap). The Lord Jesus, the Good Shepherd, saw through both the adulteress’ sins and those of her accusers. Jesus sought to reveal, for the sake of their salvation, that the ones doing the condemning were just as much sinners as the adulteress. To break any commandment is (and still is) to break them all. Jesus despised the sins and loved the sinners. “Let the one without sin cast the first stone” [a hermeneutic for that occasion and for all occasions] Jesus was not saying the woman did not sin grievously; He was saying that all sin and no one is in the position to condemn the person. After a little scribbling in the dirt, and the stones dropping one by one, the woman and Jesus were there, left alone. “Woman where are your accusers? Is there no one left to condemn you?” “No one sir”. “Neither do I (Who am indeed without sin and could) condemn you” He doesn’t say everything is all warm and fuzzy now, “I am ok and you are ok” etc. He doesn’t say, I have to get the Sanhedrin to change the moral laws so that people like you will not be considered sinners. He says, “Go and sin no more”

In the story of the Samaritan Woman, a great deal of the story is really about faith, however in the course of the dialogue, Jesus asks the woman to go get her husband. He knows full well where she is ‘coming from’. She shamefacedly tells Him she does not have a husband but five. To which Jesus affirms her self-revelation-she has confessed. But again he does not condemn but continues and deepens the dialogue of salvation, until she goes and fetches not a pail for water, but the whole town and tells them how He has told her everything that she has done.

There are differences in temperament of course that enter into this picture. Also I have to also say, that in absolute frustration and as a last attempt to wake “Jerusalem” up before it was too late, Jesus Himself ‘let the Pharisees and Scribes” have it [See Matthew 23]. Nonetheless we have these two Scriptural models in approaching the sins of the world.
The real difference comes down to what one is really willing to do for the sake of the Lord, His truth, His gospel. John the Baptist was willing to go to His death for proclaiming the truth. Jesus too was willing to go to His death for witnessing to the Truth, for being the Truth. The difference is this. Jesus took upon Himself the sins of the world. We can say well we cannot do that. He was and is unique. Indeed He was. He alone is the Lamb of God Who takes away the sins of the world, yet He also revealed the way in which we ‘can take upon ourselves the sins of other’: mercy, forgiveness: “Father forgive them they know not what they do” Pray for those who persecute you etc

In the interest of transparency, my personality makes me ‘more prophetic’. However, I am increasingly becoming aware that the deep existential ignorance, the eclipse of sin because of the even deeper and worse eclipse of God in the world today, calls us to take the second path-model, that of Christ Himself. More and more I believe that while proclaiming the truth of the Gospel, including the truth in these ‘unpopular’ issues of our times, the real task of the Church is to pray for an outpouring of the Holy Spirit upon society so that the Spirit will convict people of their sin, both on the individual level and societal level.

Neither Prophet nor Shepherd are accepted by the society at large. People will flee from both or attempt to control both-and the biggest control is ‘death’. We really need to become more and more aware of what is going on around us.

Just as Jesus said,we are sheep and need a shepherd to lead us. For the last
thirty or so years we have lost our shepherds to the world and now many have
gone by the wayside. Pretty soon due to this neglect we may all be subject to jail and fines for our belief. I am sure we are near this now.

Anzlyne,
I understand exactly how you feel. I guess most of us have the situation in our families and friends who are living truly degrading lives. I try to remember that even Jesus was rejected, so why not me in His name? I pray, and pray and pray. I don’t argue (anymore) but they know clearly where I stand. Once in awhile a chiding reminder. Now in the case of one active homosexual, our relationship has truly improved and I have seen some movement in the right direction. No miracle, but hope. It is hard to put it in His hands, but we must. Just do what we can and you are right, it can be so hard to want so much and not see results. God bless.

Thank you Kevin. I will pray for you, please pray for us

If the leaders of the Catholic Church do not proudly and clearly embrace its moral teachings -even “insist” on them – we will be steamrolled.
Pope Francis isn’t going to change the Church’s moral doctrines, but it appears he is going to act as though they just aren’t that important. That’s not going to work. –

Don, I really think this is an extremely important topic for discussion so thanks for returning to this thread. My hope and current view is that Pope Francis wants to navigate a different approach on how we talk about some of these subjects to better encourage conversion without making them seem less important.

Unfortunately I believe the attempt to steamroll us is already long underway. The Enemy, and I mean enemy, is making it more and more difficult to talk about homosexuality in a truthful way. All Christians, not just the Bishops, need to wake up to the reality that we are under serious attack and we had better start fighting back while it is still legal or safe to do so. And actually, in some places it is not safe. Sadly, I am much too late to be called an alarmist.

I know of a doctor who refused to heal an American vet of the Korean war because she was Chinese. So, here, before a contract is signed or an agreement made about goods and services, the vendor is free to refuse to make a contract or agreement with an unnatural marriage proponent or even to accept a sodomist’s money. Doctor’s offices routinely refuse to accept money or payment from the hands of a patient of herpes or syphilis after treatment, quarantining the disease.
.
Ostracizing sodomy and/or unnatural marriage is preferable and legal.

EZ, It does matter because so many people, especially the young now not so young, do not bother to understand and outright reject the truth we teach on human sexuality. Mostly because we don’t teach it – we only say “the rules.” As a result homosexuality as well as all kinds of sexual deviancy is growing with disastrous spiritual, physical and societal consequences. I am not suggesting that Pope Francis is taking the wrong approach, as he well may be softening the opposition and unclogging a few ears. The Good News must be heard if it is to be accepted and some will listen some will not. We just have to find the best way to deliver it.

I am not so hopeful about everything just blowing away. Who would have believed 50 years ago abortion on demand? Who would believe 20 years ago “gay marriage?” And so on. We have witnessed years of regression into the darkness of inhuman behavior over our lifetime. So we push around a bishop one day, next time we maul him a bit. May be not, but may be so.

I think in approaching the human person correctly there must be a balance between the intellect and the heart. As correct as our moral teaching is, much of it has been presented to the intellect and less so to the heart – or at least this is the dominant perception. As a result the Church seems far removed from the lives of many. Many a good priest operate in this manner and they too seem removed from everyday life and struggle. Upon reflection, I think this may be the point Pope Francis is making. I also think the perception is a Church that lacks empathy. That is may be grotesquely unfair does not change what people perceive and I think there is a grain of truth to it. Too many of our priests and bishops are “removed” from the everyday struggle of life, failing to engage people on the streets as Mother Teresa did. I’ve often thought many to be out of touch with the real lives of their real parishioners, orthodox parishioners as well. And this, too, Pope Francis may be taking on.

Ez, I couldn’t agree more. Parents and their family are called to be the domestic Church, where children grow in the love of God. The problem is so many of my generation of parents are so poorly prepared because while they know the teaching, they never took the time to understand it. The younger generation of parents are even more vague in what they know.
I was very blessed to have truly saintly parents. Their examples of self sacrifice, humility, irretrievable love and faith were exceptional and yet, as far as direct teaching to their children they were less attentive. I believe it is because they assumed their children would be raised in the kind of Catholic culture (Catholic ghetto) they grew up in, where parish life was central and the parish priest a part of everyday life. Most of the people on the block were Catholic, but even those that were Jewish or otherwise, expected “Catholic” behavior from them. Many guiding hands, even to some extent the school system, was there to reinforce your values.

By the 1960s and suburban life this had all changed. The neighborhood was no longer identified by values but by location, and Church was no longer central but simply part of the mix of life. Assuming parents believed that schools would continue to reinforce their values – when it was often the opposite and learning the faith moved further and further to the periphery of priorities. Throw in TV, the sexual devolution, regressive progressivism and the brave new world was upon us. And yet, parents like mine were slow, very slow to realize the change taking place and never wanted to believe their children would be involved in any of it. They never wanted to believe the world could be a bad place where they lived.

Back in my writing days I had written an article on abandonment. I never published it because I thought it would hurt my parents. Basically my point was that many parents had unwittingly abandoned their children to forces, some evil forces, outside of the home. Children spent more time at school and with music and TV than they did with their parents. While parents assumed these mentors were benign at worse, most actually believed they were basically supportive of good living. So they went merrily along not knowing what was becoming of their children’s hearts and minds. Unfortunately it continues to this day and we moved along the same post-Christian world Europe is ahead of us on.

Kevin, your description of the shift in our culture is excellent.

As is your comment Anzlyne.

I understand what you mean, Kevin, when you say that generations of past did not think the emerging culture that their children were adopting was doing them any harm. You are so right when you say it is subliminal. It is so subtle and toxic, it should be feared.

My dad says to me today, that he doesn’t envy my generation of parents raising our children. The temptations, although big now, are only going to get greater as our children get older. He always says to me and my siblings “watch your children”, “talk to them”.

I even heard him tell my brother who has 2 boys under the age of 5, that he has to be watchful of any inner messages they are picking up, and to re-inforce to them good, strong, christian and noble male characteristics as they grow. To not assume they will know.

It’s sad that our generation raising children fear more sinister dangers. Where in the past it was primarily about physical safety (and yes it still is), today its about the dangers of a rotten thinking in our culture- that boys are really girls, that Jack’s become Judys when they hit 16. And that boys can “marry” boys, that girls can “marry” girls. It’s sick! Spain sue me!

I think Im hypersensitive about it today because the Gay and Lesbian Mardi Gras is on tonight in the city of Sydney. And to mock God, its always coincides with the start of Lent. My husband and I wanted to take our children to the dinosaur exhibition at the Museum in the city today, but I don’t want them being seduced by the rainbow flags plastered everywhere in town. Or walk past a drag queen in glitter. My girls love glitter!

I always tell my little 6 and 2 year old girls, who love princess stories, that girls marry boys and boys marry girls. I purposefully put the norm in their head at a young age. I cant believe I think I have to do this, but I know I should keep a watchful eye at the innocent media they watch. So they know there are rules to human sexuality and it is not, as society says, ok to do what you “feel” is right. After all the “feel” comes from a poorly formed understanding of human sexuality, where the correct understanding was not talked about from a young age. That parents thought their children were getting from the television. When in actual fact they were fed the exact opposite.

Call me simple minded.

Thank you Botolph.

We all are, as Catholics, travelling a steep hill.

God Bless you Botolph.