Why homosexualists hate Papa Ratzinger so much.

Fr. John Hunwicke has at his place a thoughtful piece about why some people hate Papa Ratzinger so very much.   I think he has it right.   He reposted some items which still hold up.   For example, from 2015:

I may have got this wrong, because in such matters one can only be anecdotal. But I think a particular constituency, just one among a number of others, is that of ideological homosexual extremists. Why do they detest him? Apparently he is the symbol of ‘homophobia’. Ratzinger’s views on homosexuality were, surely, no more ‘definite’ than those of S John Paul II. But it was Ratzinger who seemed to attract their venom. They loathed him because they apparently saw him as the enemy of their campaigns; and at the same time they tried to convince themselves that he was himself one of themselves, so that, by a paradox of weird inversion, they could hate him all the more.

Why? Here’s my hypothesis. A noisy minority of homosexuals seem to need comfort and reassurance and can only get it by convincing themselves and anybody who will listen to them that pretty well everybody else is also homosexual. Particularly anyone who doesn’t go along with their own narrative and world view. So: either you are openly homosexual; or, if you aren’t, that simply proves how hypocritical you are to conceal your condition! Either way, GOTCHA!!

I had the great honor to get to know Joseph Ratzinger a little when I worked in the Palazzo Sant’Uffizio.  He was American friendly, I initially worked for his dear friend another Bavarian Cardinal, in an office in which he took great interest, I was into Patristics, and I could speak several languages.  I would often pick his brains, which he enjoyed and we had great conversations. I learned his mind in those years about the traditional Mass, etc.  He gave me my thesis theme.  Etc. Etc.   In short, I got to know him a bit.

It seems to me that another reason why the sodomites hate Ratzinger so much is because is patently quite a gentle soul, very careful with other people’s dignity.  Hence, he is easily targeted.  That’s what bullies do.  They target those whom they think won’t or can’t fight back.   Why?  Because they are vicious and they are cowards.  I remind the readership that one of the Italian words for an active homosexual is “frocio”, which derives from Latin ferox, savage, insolent.

They hate Ratzinger and anyone aligned with him because of their own disorder.

Watch how the the sodomites and homosexualist allies work today.   That’s how they roll.  Part of their identikit is that they are bullies.   Think about it.

Some sharing options...

About Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Fr. Z is the guy who runs this blog. o{]:¬)
This entry was posted in Liberals, Sin That Cries To Heaven. Bookmark the permalink.

19 Responses to Why homosexualists hate Papa Ratzinger so much.

  1. Atra Dicenda, Rubra Agenda says:

    Father it’s very uncanny that you posted about Ratzinger this AM. I just texted my pastor about a dream I had last night with Ratzinger in it.

    In the dream, I was on the road traveling, having dinner and a glass of wine at a hotel bar alone (my wife and kids were not with me). I’d sat a chair away from the end of the bar to give myself space to be alone. On the news on the bar TV above me was the world dragging the Church through the mud over the abuse, the “clericalism”, corruption, the failure of the Bishops, new sex abuse allegations and new soromite sexual parties busted in Rome… suddenly I noticed a white cassocked Ratzinger sitting to my right at the previously empty seat.

    I know it sounds silly because it was apparently no big deal he was there at the bar, and no one else present seemed to noticed, despite the white cassock. He was younger and more vital than now, like how he looked at the beginning of his papacy.

    Anyway, he was writing a letter, clearly deep in thought in his own mind, mumbling occasionally to himself in German. Not wanting to interrupt his thoughts, I turned back to the TV….a continuous stream of bad news, abuse, corruption. I started to get upset in the dream just thinking about all the badness happening in the Church, started having some man sniffles as I drank my wine. Then he slides the letter over to me because apparently it was being written for me. I dont remember what it said exactly since it was a dream but it was a sort of manifesto of how things were going to improve and be okay and how there was a practical and possible way out of the current darkness, some path we can find back to the road of sanity, some secret door low in the wall that leads back to that Secret Garden as it were. And not some BS toothless sentimental gobbledygook in that letter, but real if painful solutions that supported the Church and Truth and would lead us back. I felt less angry and less sad in the dream. Then Ratzinger stood up, embraced me and I cried it out a bit while gave me a big hug like a dad would. Then I woke up.

    Clearly my subconscious is needing the Church to help me heal through all this corruption. Fathers like me need Fathers too, especially when our own biological dads aren’t the spiritual models we need and we feel like we’re making it up alone in the world surrounded by wolves and wondering if our shepherds are wolves after all too.

  2. RKR says:

    I read a related post on Ann Barnhardt’s blog recently re Lot and his interactions with the men of Sodom:

    Q: What do the sodomites want? What is their endgame? They already have their “faux-marriage”, they are clearly a de facto protected “victim class”. They carry on openly with not only no pushback or protest, but are actively praised for their depravity. What is their endgame?

    A: They want nothing less than the entire world to declare that GOD IS WRONG, AND THEY ARE RIGHT. And if God is “wrong” then God is not God, and the sodomites are actually superior to God, and have been victims of an inferior being all this time.

    I would point out a fascinating bit of exegesis that I saw within the past year or two, but can’t now find, regarding the events of Genesis Chapter 19 – Sodom and Gomorrah.

    When the two angels had entered into Lot’s house, and “the men of the city beset the house both young and old, all the people together” (verse 4), the point of the gathering wasn’t primarily gang rape. Think about it. Sodom was a city of non-trivial size. That mob didn’t show up with the expectation of every man in the city being able to rape the two men lodging in Lot’s house. They were probably hoping for the two lodgers to be brought out, and perhaps instigating an orgy among them.

    To see what their primary motive was, look at verse 9:

    But they said: Get thee back thither. And again: Thou camest in, said they, as a stranger, was it to be a judge? therefore we will afflict thee more than them.

    The mob of Sodom arrived at Lot’s house in order to demand that both Lot and his two guests RATIFY THE SODOMITES’ SEXUAL PERVERSION. They were there to demand ideological conformity, preferably by PARTICIPATION in perverse genital acts. Remember the 4-step progression of what evil demands: Toleration, Acceptance, Ratification, Participation.

    Look at the words they use… WAS IT TO BE A JUDGE?

  3. Pingback: Why homosexualists hate Papa Ratzinger so much. | Fr. Z’s Blog | Deaconjohn1987's Blog

  4. Robert_Caritas says:

    Dear Father Zuhlsdorf,

    This post brings up a question which has come to my mind regarding you, and I thought I might ask now. Besides the Tridentine Mass, a factor which seems to bind most traditionalists is counter-modernist Thomism (the kind of manualist Thomism made official under Saint Pius X). This is what separates them from Ratzinger, Balthasar et al. Yet you seem to appreciate the immense worth of the work stemming from the ressourcement movement. I actually think this is why God has blessed your blog so abundantly – it brings together both the case for Tradition with the theology which can best carry it (manualist neo-thomism is frightfully modern in many bad ways which echo authors like the logical positivists…). Your book recommendations have been very helpful in this respect. So I was wondering, where do you stand on this theological division?

    My own view is that the Church will only recover when She deeply re-roots herself in Sacred Tradition, which is God’s principal means of revelation and Self-communication. This means a deeply conservative stance on liturgy, but it also means a much broader outlook on the theological tradition than manualist neo-thomism allows. The more I read of Balthasar, the more I start to think he has laid the tracks for future theology (not to mention the more I become surprised at how much of Thomas he has held on to, especially in metaphysics).

    In Christ,
    Robert

  5. (X)MCCLXIII says:

    But Robert! Haven’t you heard? Fr Z is the doyen of Unreconstructed Ossified Manualists!

  6. chantgirl says:

    They also cannot stand someone who has left their perversion behind- Michael Voris. I have often thought that the Bishops’ loathing of Michael Voris was about more than just his reporting. A sinner who repents is a rebuke to obstinate sinners.

  7. Benedict Joseph says:

    Another bullseye. Well said indeed.

  8. Jennie Prater says:

    Unfortunately, I think it’s prophetic.

  9. Glennonite says:

    As unsettling as watching The Rocky Horror Picture Show. I cannot bring a non-Catholic to Mass these days for fear of embarrassment; add this…thing to the list.

    There was a time when the Church promoted and displayed beauty; now She seems to only thumb Her nose at beauty.

  10. AA Cunningham says:

    Fundamentally, homosexuals hate themselves, which is why they freely choose to engage in self destructive behavior.

  11. teomatteo says:

    They hated Pope Benedict because he: 1) Didnt accept their false understanding of their disorder and 2) He was smarter than the Lot of them.

  12. GM Thobe says:

    “He was smarter than the Lot of them. ”

    That alone sounds like enough to turn them salty.

  13. Fr. Reader says:

    @Robert_Caritas
    “The more I read of Balthasar, the more I start to think he has laid the tracks for future theology”.
    I have not read much from or about him, but from what I have read, his ideas about secularity, laymen, marriage, etc., are a bit poor.

  14. Fr. Reader says:

    Just finished re-reading Introduction to Christianity. It has some very inspiring passages.
    I was there in St Peter’s square at the moment of his election. I ran like a mad man to arrive on time. At that time I had read very little of his works, and I had been influenced negatively by the media. Seeing him in real life, the way he talks and smiles, his gestures, made me change my opinion about him.

  15. Robert_Caritas says:

    @Fr. Reader, there are quite a few issues on which I think Balthasar is wrong. But then again, the same could be said for most doctors of the Church. You have to read them as a whole to get a good picture of the faith, and to iron out the errors which are inevitably committed in one area by one or the other. Mysteriously this is how God works, and it’s also why building one’s theology on only one doctor is a very bad idea.

    What I have found incredible so far in Balthsar is his fundamental theology. He writes the by far most persuasive account of how human beings encounter God – through his Glory – that I have ever come across. And this is one of the key issues that the Church has been pummelled with since the enlightenment and even before : we are told that faith is not knowledge. Balthasar shows in great detail in what way it is true and certain knowledge.

    I highly recommend Aidan Nichols’ little book « A Key to Balthasar » to get a succinct but deep introduction to Balthasar’s key contributions to the theology. That most people have only heard of his errors — such as on hell — is the work of the Devil.

  16. Fr. Reader says:

    Thank you very much for the reply.

  17. Dismas says:

    To borrow somewhat from Aesop, does not a braying jackass think himself a roaring lion?

    What then can a jackass, having been shamed by the roar of a true lion, do to console himself? He dare not fight for supremacy, lest he be shamed further, so he sulks in envy. Such is it between a blathering heretic and an orthodox theologian.

  18. Maria says:

    To Atra Dicenda, Rubra Agenda – I dreamt before he resigned around September. He was giving an audience at Hall of Pope Paul VI. He was assassinated in December 2012 and he fell on my lap. I cried out in a very loud voice to God and asked Him why? I woke up and I knew that his days as pope is numbered.