I had intended to write today about the translation error in the English version of the recent Synod’s final document. However, over at The Catholic Thing, Robert Royal covers the issue well and says many of the same things I had intended to say, and he does so masterfully. I urge you to read his piece.
Royal also comments on the demotion of Card. Burke, saying:
There’s a double sadness here. Pope Francis clearly approved these moves – whether they were instigated by him personally or by advisers he listens to. But it’s precisely voices like Burke’s that he needs to keep around. He’s already hearing plenty from often unreliable counselors like Cardinals Maradiaga, Marx, and Kasper. The last in particular seems more and more incoherent as he tries to explain precisely why marriage is indissoluble and yet those in a second sexual relationship – though not a marriage – may be absolved and return to receiving Communion. The only way that’s possible is if God repeals the Law of Non-contradiction. I don’t think that’s on his to-do list.
But there’s more and, I think, worse. I’m not especially given to conspiracy theories in sacred or secular contexts. But there’s some – let’s say – systemic problem within the Vatican that having a loyal truth-teller like Burke around helps to correct.
Read the rest over there.
And thanks to the reader who left me a voicemail (see sidebar).
If ever you needed proof of what an evil site and occasion of sin the National Schismatic Reporter (aka Fishwrap) has become, just have a look at the combox under the shameful post by Michael Sean Winters about the reassignment of Card. Burke. HERE
I undershot when I used the image of a “Lord of the Flies Dance” to describe what was about to happen once Card. Burke was demoted from his position as Prefect of the Signatura.
Like and admire Card. Burke or dislike and scorn Card. Burke… no one should ever treat another person in public the way they are treating Card. Burke – and each other – over there.
I blame the editors of the Fishwrap, in general, for their hypocritical policies concerning their combox, and Michael Sean Winters, in particular, for fostering such hostility and lack of charity.
I am forced to conclude that that is what they want.
Bishops who read this blog: I implore you to consider looking in on the combox over there under that entry before your meeting later this week. You cannot stop what is going on over there, I’m afraid. But there is something you can do. The display of sheer viciousness in their combox should demonstrate why there should be a formal demand from bishops far and wide that they remove the word “Catholic” from their title.
And if you ever wondered why I don’t allow an open combox here – once upon a time I did – both the combox at the National Schismatic Reporter regarding Card. Burke and that of Crux on the same matter should convince you that my policy is correct.
BTW… what I saw at Crux isn’t, in the main, as barbaric and twisted as what I saw at Fishwrap.
More and more I am using the moderation queue function here.
I want to provide a space for open discussion, I really do. But I cannot allow the sort of savagery that anonymity and a lack of consequences seems to bring out from people. I am sure that were I to have an open combox again, as other sites do, my traffic here would skyrocket far beyond what it already is, which is pretty darn high.
The spiritual cost would be too great. I would be cooperating in evil.
That’s what Fishwrap is doing. And they invite it and provide occasions for it.
We see horrific violations of charity and reason all over the internet in comboxes of blogs and on media websites. I try to tamp that down here, though some of it filters through. Far far less than what you see at Fishwrap, however, and for that I am grateful.
Conservatives and traditionalists certainly have their wickedly vicious commentators, who, emboldened by anonymity and a lack of immediate consequences, puke their bilious dreck into public view. It is one of the greater concerns I have in my life and work here.
But I have to say that what you see from liberals outstrips the bile of conservatives by orders of magnitude.
Let me remind you of something. When you post something on the internet, there are consequences, both for you and for others.
You may be a matter of scandal to others, weakening their faith. Direct ad hominem attacks are horrid and unfair, especially when lobbed into the arena with cowardly anonymity. You endanger your immortal soul when you do these things. I sincerely fear that many of the commentators in the combox at the Fishwrap are in danger of going to Hell. Anyone who can write some of the things you see over there has to be spiritually sick in dangers ways.
But that may be expected from a site that actively and openly promotes dissent from the Church’s teachings.
There is plenty of room and even a great need today for sharp rhetoric and blunt responses. But we must stick to issues and not make direct personal attacks. I am not saying that we should never have fights. We must have fights, as a matter of fact, when the stakes are high. In fighting, however, we mustn’t become subhuman, agents of the Devil.
We have to be ready in our participation in the comboxes of the internet, to take some hard knocks. If we choose to descend onto the digital sand of the arena, we are going to take some hits. That’s okay. But do so after having put on the armor of God and after having recalled the Apostle’s urgent admonition in 1 Peter 3. When he tells people to be prepared to give answers, he says, first, they should sanctify Christ in their hearts and then, after, to do so with “with modesty and fear, having a good conscience”. Why?
That whereas they speak evil of you, they may be ashamed who falsely accuse your good conversation (anastrophe – manner of life, not just how we talk) in Christ.
For it is better doing well (if such be the will of God) to suffer, than doing ill.
Let the activity in the comboxes of those sites – if you dare to look into them – be a stimulus for some of you to examine your consciences and consider well your own participation in online comboxes…. at least my combox.
Let’s all be better.
I can’t catch everything here that violates decorum. I have no staff. So I ask you to participate, even vigorously, but to police yourself. Think about what you are about the post. Think before posting.
We can all fail in charity, but let’s not make that our default position.
The combox, for this entry, is closed.
UPDATE 10 Nov 1544 GMT:
I received an email from a reader:
Father,
When I went to the site just now (granted, here on PST), there was a sign that says “Comments are now closed.” And some of the comments had already been deleted.
Remaining comments are still of bottomfeeding variety, though.
There’s no proof like a few time-stamped screenshots, though.
This is at Fishwrap under that horrid post:
Editor’s note: Because the comments on this blog post have become unacceptable, NCR editors have decided to remove the Disqus thread for this post.
Meanwhile, Fishwrap is at it again with a new post on Card. Burke from CNS. HERE Never mind that it isn’t from a Fishwrap writer, they picked the worst possible photo of the Cardinal and they opened the combox. Their usual viciousness has started up again, just as they intended.
Again, as the bishops meet, they should watch what Fishwrap is doing.
UPDATE 1757 GMT:
One of the prime movers of the nastiness about Card. Burke in the combox of the Fishwrap is one “Bill Freeman”:
This seems to be, as one of you readers pointed out to me in an email, the same fellow about whom Deacon Kandra wrote a blog post. HERE
Here is his bio at the site “Progressive Catholics” HERE
What’s your background?
Unlike many ceremony officiants, I didn’t just go online and get ordained. After 35 years as a Roman Catholic deacon, I was ordained a priest in the independent Catholic movement on November 19, 2011.
I am a priest with the United American Catholic Church. My ministry is centered at the Friar Mychal Judge Pastoral Center in Northern Virginia where I am a chaplain working with the sick and those at the end of life, their families and caregivers. As part of that ministry, I oversee a worldwide Prayer Request Wall. I have an active wedding ministry with Progressive Catholic & Interfaith Weddings.
Enough said. This is the sort of influence that drives the combox at Fishwrap.
At least Freeman uses his real name. I have to give him that. That’s a notch above the cowards over there.
UPDATE 2040 GMT:
Fishwrap has closed their combox under the CNS piece that they reposted. I am told by a reader here, however, that it is still possible to see the discussion through Disqus.
What is far more worrisome, however, is the new piece by Robert Mickens about Cardinal Burke.
First, allow me to remind you that Mickens was fired by the ultra-liberal English magazine The Tablet for his public comments about Benedict XVI. It was bad enough that not even The Tablet could stomach it. HERE
Mickens piece is as nasty, as the main entry, as the Fishwrap’s combox usually becomes.
His main notion is that Card. Burke and people who participate in the Extraordinary Form, a tiny minority, are sick weirdos. No one should pay attention to them. He spends some ink dumping on John Paul II and Benedict. The whole thing reeks of the usual smug liberal fantasy about their self-proclaimed moral superiority.
Here is a sample:
Burke, during these past six or so years in Rome, has emerged as perhaps the most liturgically and doctrinally “retrodox” prelate in the church. His name has become synonymous with the cappa magna and other outlandish ecclesiastical attire dating to a bygone era. He prides himself on being a fervent pro-life activist, though others would call him an overzealous anti-abortionist given his insistence that capital punishment and war, though rarely permissible, are not intrinsically evil. On the flip side, he makes his the loudest voice in the room — as he showed during the last synod gathering — in order to remind the whole world that sexual love between two people of the same sex is always an intrinsic evil. [This may be the root of the Fishwrap’s hatred of Burke.]
The cardinal’s fan base is made up mainly of Tridendine Mass devotees and proponents of the so-called “reform of the reform” of the liturgy, as well as other socially conservative Catholics. They all march (though some seem to just sleepwalk) under the banner of the “hermeneutic of continuity,” a phrase they mistakenly attribute to Benedict XVI. (The retired pope actually espoused a “hermeneutic of reform,” defining it as “a combination of continuity and discontinuity at different levels” and “innovation in continuity.”) [Ironic that he should mention him in this way, after what he did to Benedict on Facebook.]
Fortunately, the Burke groupies are a tiny minority within the much, much wider church. But, unfortunately, a good part of this minority seem to be seminarians (especially in English- and French-speaking areas), and a good number of priests ordained in the last five to 10 years. And then there are the bishops. [Your Excellencies… are you paying attention?] Lamentably, there seem to be no lack of them. At least the loudest ones. And the United States would seem to have more than its fair share.
This last point, however, exposes the incoherence of what Mickens is pushing. If there are so few of these retro-weirdos around, why the worry? If Burke’s “followers” are so insignificant in number and so marginal, why does Mickens dedicate so much space and energy to trashing them?
Could it be a) that they are not so insignificant and could it be that b) these liberals can’t afford even the existence of just one person telling the truth?
Mickens’ vilification of Card. Burke and others who might be in harmony with him comes from deep fear. These people are terrified. The clock keeps ticking and they are going to run out of steam without getting what they want. In the meantime, the number of young priests who want solid, traditional Catholicism is growing and there is nothing they can do about it.
Wherever Mickens’ sour hatred comes from, it is frankly shocking to see something like this from a publication that has the word “Catholic” in the title.
The Catholic Bishops should not give the NCR a pass for this.
For those snobby dopes out there who think Joe and Mary Bagofdoughnuts in the pews are too stoopid to handle Latin or that hearing some chant is toooo haaaard.
Here is a 5 year old singing the common Christian table prayer in Latin. Correctly.
Today seems an especially good day to post this request, from a priest:
I write with a request that some of your readers may be able to assist with. I am starting preparation to offer the EF at our military installation in ___, where I have a group that is asking for it, and others in the community who are very much opposed. Again, I wish they would learn to get along, so catechesis is part of my responsibility. In searching all of our chapels, I have found many of the things that I’ll need, including chalice veils and nurses, but we have no fiddleback chasubles [First, we know what you mean, but let’s all avoid the term “fiddleback” and call the style “Roman”. Second, “Roman” is not obligatory. We can also use the fuller, “ample” or “Gothic” style.] with matching stoles and maniples. Because I have some leaders who are very gun-shy about my efforts to get the EF going here, I am trying to start all this up without requesting any financial support from the government or community. [What? I’m sure that Pres. Obama himself would be so pleased!] If you know of any who may be able to assist in our acquiring a complete set (white / gold, green, red, violet, and black), I would very much appreciate it.
Just last week, I had someone tell me their own funeral plans, which include a funeral Mass in the EF. I’ve been asked about the EF by new young officers, age 22, all the way to folks in their 60s.
Perhaps you readers might have some suggestions.
First, I wonder who would be the owner of such items. A military installation, by definition, does not have a “stable group”. That makes things a little dicey.
If there were a local group established, along the lines of the one I am involved with HERE, perhaps that group could give support to all the chaplains and priests who may be posted there and the people who come and go.
The liberal Lord of the Flies dance has begun with the appointment of Card. Burke to the Knights of Malta.
What better way to see what the extreme Left is doing than to see how HuffPo provides us with AP’s report:
AP – not exactly Catholic friendly unless its hard-left liberal – is what all the local outlets will pick up. Watch for the distortions.
This is an exercise in yellow journalism.
Cardinal Burke Loses Another Vatican Job [LOSES? Every single move before this has been an obvious PROMOTION!]
AP By FRANCES D’EMILIO
VATICAN CITY (AP) — American Cardinal Raymond Burke, a fervent opponent of abortion and gay marriage, was removed by Pope Francis from another top Vatican post on Saturday. [Which makes it sound as if Francis (and AP) is a fervent supporter.]
The removal of Burke as head of the Holy See’s supreme court was widely expected in church circles. [There’s some amazing reporting for you, considering that Card. Burke publicly confirmed that it was going to happen.]
While he was archbishop of St. Louis, from 2003-2008, Burke led fellow American bishops in campaigns to deny Communion to Catholic politicians who support legalized abortion. He has also questioned some of the pontiff’s pronouncements and approaches. [First, what does “question” mean? And what would those pronouncements be?]
Last year Francis took Burke off the Vatican’s powerful Congregation for Bishops, dealing with appointments of bishops worldwide. [Actually, he didn’t reappoint him. Burke’s five year term was up. Furthermore, his “job” was Prefect. He didn’t lose his “job”.]
On Saturday he transferred Burke from the Vatican court job to the largely ceremonial post of Patron of the Sovereign Military Order of Malta, a charity whose activities include hospitals and residences for the elderly around the world.
Burke, at 66, would have still had a good decade to continue serving in high-profile Vatican posts. [And, should Francis resign at 80, which is likely, Card. Burke will still be around.]
[Now the sharpened stick and face paint comes out…] His strident discourse and preference of fancy, old-fashioned vestments contrast starkly with the informal, chatty tone and simple, almost Spartan style Francis has established for his papacy. [I wonder if AP has done a story about how much more it costs for Pope Francis to live in the Casa Santa Marta than in the Apostolic Palace.]
Last month, Burke marshaled conservative criticism against the possibility the Vatican may loosen up rules that ban Communion for divorced, remarried Catholics. [“The Vatican”… sigh. What really happened is that Card. Burke defended the Church’s perennial teachings.]
Francis has said that church hierarchy should not focus so much on abortion and same-sex marriage but instead concentrate on making the church a more welcoming place. [Which doesn’t mean changing the Church’s doctrine.] Meanwhile, Burke has said to a Catholic broadcaster that “we can never talk enough” against abortion and same-sex marriage. [Which puts him in agreement with St. John Paul II, who wrote: ” It is difficult to imagine a more unjust situation, and it is very difficult to speak of obsession in a matter such as this,…”]
He has also questioned Francis’ denunciation of excesses of capitalism. [I don’t know when he did that. Could it be when Card. affirmed what Francis said, namely, that Evangelii gaudium, (with its odd comments about capitalism), is not intended to be magisterial?]
The Acton Institute and The Catholic University of America School of Business and Economics will hold a conference on “The Relationship between Religious and Economic Liberty in an Age of Expanding Government,” and examine the important and complex relationship between religious liberty and other freedoms, particularly economic freedom.
In recent years, religious liberty in America and abroad has undergone varying degrees of challenges. In much of the West, actions by the government have made it more difficult for Christians and other believers to practice their faith, which includes not only the right to worship but also to exercise political, civil, and economic freedoms.
In “The Relationship between Religious and Economic Liberty in an Age of Expanding Government” speakers will examine how the Christian conception of religious liberty limits the state’s exercise of power, the manner in which the expansion of economic freedom creates new opportunities and challenges for believers, and how social welfare policies can inhibit or facilitate religious freedom.
WHO:Cardinal Robert Sarah (Pontifical Council ‘Cor Unum’),
Russell Hittinger (The Catholic University of America)
Michael Novak (Author and former Ambassador)
Jay W. Richards (The Catholic University of America).
WHAT: Panel Discussion: The Relationship between Religious and Economic Liberty in an Age of Expanding Government
WHEN: Monday, November 10, 2014
12 p.m.-5 p.m. (includes lunch and reception)
WHERE: Edward J. Pryzbyla University Center, Great Room
The Catholic University of America
620 Michigan Ave NE
Washington, D.C.
This is the second conference in an international series of five on “One and Indivisible? The Relationship Between Religious and Economic Freedom.”
For more information or to request accommodations for disabilities, contact Beatriz Lopez in the school of business at lopezbe@cua.edu.
MEDIA: To attend the event, media should contact the Office of Public Affairs at 202-319-5600 or cua-public-affairs@cua.edu.
Michael Sean Winters specializes in irrational demonizing of those with whom he disagrees. His present instance of high dudgeon is aimed at Catholic University of America. What is CUA’s sin? CUA has dared to host a conference in which speakers associated with Acton Institute are to be involved!
Imagine! The nerve!
A while back, Winters helped to organize at CUA a conference which aimed to smear free-marketers (Acton Institute) as boogeyman “libertarians”. I was told that, even though the liberal media made much of MSW’s conference, fewer than 40 people showed up. The basic thrust of MSW’s conference: anyone who believes in a free-market is a “libertarian”. There doesn’t seem to be much more nuance than that. Just accept that “libertarian” is “bad” and that anyone not onside with big government, etc., is, without any other qualification, a “libertarian”.
One of MSW’s speakers was, by the way, the union activist – some might suggest thug – Richard Trumka. He was welcomed by Winters at his own CUA event, but, apparently, the involvement of speakers associated with Acton Institute at someone else’s event is simply too much to be borne.
In his attempt to shame CUA and to smear the event, MSW resorts to a seriously low-blow and intellectually dishonest tactic. He questions how CUA could team up with Acton, given that Acton’s Fr. Robert Sirico – and I am not making this up – “makes the case that John Galt, the hero of Ayn Rand’s Atlas Shrugged is really a Christ-figure.”
For liberals, you see, Ayn Rand is invoked in the same way as the creature under the bed or Hannibal at the gates is raised to frighten impressionable children. “Ayn Rand!?!” Thus follows the fluttering of hands, the sinking upon the fainting couch while men stand by with deep frowns and good boys and girls draw their covers up about their ears.
Keep in mind that if you are a liberal who believes in redistribution of wealth and a nanny state, it is okay that you have ever in your life, probably your youth, read Ayn Rand. But if you believe in a free market and just enough government to foster economic freedom in a virtuous society, if you have even looked at the cover of a book by Ayn Rand, even if you were only a stupid eighteen-year old, you are solemnly to be condemned with bell, book and candle… and fan fluttering.
“Rand was a nasty personality… She is indeed frequently adolescent… She was not as clear a thinker as she thought herself to be (her arguments in favor of abortion are among the weakest on the market). Indeed, in her writings and public appearances she almost seemed to relish the offense she gave for her strident, brash, and relentless defense of reason, human freedom, and laissez-faire capitalism. If she ever suffered a fool gladly—if she ever suffered a fool at all—one would be hard pressed to find any record of it. She was the antithesis of Mother Teresa, and would have bragged about it. I disagree profoundly with Rand; her attenuated definition of faith as unreason and her notion of sacrifice as wholly lacking dignity are unrecognizable to a Christian. Even her economics are better spelled out in Mises or Hayek. Her esthetic philosophy is paper thin and idiosyncratic; her malevolence toward children and the vulnerable is exceedingly distasteful. For these and many more reasons, people who reverence Western Civilization must reject Rand.”
I wouldn’t call that an endorsement of Ayn Rand. That apart, Sirico describes what is patently obvious to anyone who read Atlas Shrugged even at a stupid-eighteen: Rand herself intended John Galt to come off as a Christ-figure.
You see, Winter’s sense of personal liberal moral superiority and his animus for Acton and for Fr. Sirico, are such that he feels himself free completely to distort what Sirico actually wrote about the figure of John Galt in Ayn Rand’s Atlas Shrugged. Sirico was trying to understand what Rand was up to without approving of what she did. HERE
MSW is frantically trying to paint anyone who believes in a free market as being a “libertarian”, which is tantamount to being a black-marketer in fighting-dogs. Anyone who thinks that massive government regulation and that redistribution of wealth are not actually cures for poverty are smeared with a shameful scarlet L.
Like every liberal – for whom freedom means only that you are free to agree with him – Winters seems not to be able to stand that Acton should have an equal voice in the discussion about what economic and religious freedom means.
LAST WORD: I hope that anyone in the D.C. area will make the effort to go to the conference and to bring friends. Let there be a huge turnout.
And so the shoe has dropped. From today’s Bolletino.
Nomina del Patrono del Sovrano Militare Ordine di Malta
Il Santo Padre ha nominato Patrono del Sovrano Militare Ordine di Malta l’Em.mo Card. Raymond Leo Burke, finora Prefetto del Supremo Tribunale della Segnatura Apostolica.
[01769-01.01]
Nomina del Prefetto del Supremo Tribunale della Segnatura Apostolica
Il Papa ha nominato Prefetto del Supremo Tribunale della Segnatura Apostolica S.E. Mons. Dominique Mamberti, Arcivescovo titolare di Sagona, finora Segretario per i Rapporti con gli Stati.
His Eminence Raymond Card. Burke is now Patron of the Knights of Malta. This is not the usual way of doing things, as it has been pointed out before. First, the position is usually saved for a Cardinal who is in the twilight of his career… although during this pontificate this may still be true. Keep in mind that, since His Eminence is pretty young for a Cardinal, in the next pontificate, another Pope could snap his fingers and make Burke Prefect of a Congregation. Second, now that Card. Burke is no longer the Prefect of a Dicastery, he is far freer to act and to speak than he was before. So far as I know, the Cardinal has retained, for now, his appointments to certain Congregations.
As far as Card. Burke’s successor at the Signatura is concerned, I suspect that His Excellency Archbp. Mamberti hasn’t seen a marriage case, or any other canonical process, for a while. He has been working as a diplomat for quite some time. He comes to his new role from the Secretariat of State. He will no doubt bring a … fresh perspective to the role.
That said, at Aletheia Card. Burke has his best interview to date:
Cardinal Burke: “I Don’t Ever Put Myself in Opposition to the Successor of St. Peter”
He makes some clarifications about suggestions that he has made himself an opponent of Pope Francis. They go along the lines that you might imagine but with real clarity. I pass over those here. You can read them there. I found of much greater interest his comments about the Synod. My emphases:
At the Synod, when the interim report came out, some said it was a disaster.
It was a total disaster.
The final report noted the need for “sensitivity to the positive aspects” of civil marriages and, “with obvious differences, cohabitation.” The Church, it says, “needs to indicate the constructive elements in these situations.” The paragraph, number 41, passed the requisite two-thirds majority. Do you find it disturbing that this paragraph gained a two-thirds majority among the bishops?
The language is at best confused, and I’m afraid that some of the Synod Fathers may not have reflected sufficiently on the implications of that, or maybe because the language is confused, didn’t understand completely what was being said. But that is disturbing for me. And then the whole matter: that even though [certain] paragraphs were removed, and rightly so, although contrary to practice in the past the document was printed with those paragraphs included, and one had to go and look at the votation to see that certain paragraphs had been removed. It’s disturbing to me that even those sections which were voted to be removed still received a substantial number of votes.
Juridically, when those three paragraphs did not receive the two-thirds majority, were they to be removed from the document?
Absolutely. We couldn’t have any discussion on that text, but we voted paragraph by paragraph, and what’s the point of voting paragraph by paragraph except to either accept a paragraph of have it removed. This is just one more disturbing aspect about the way in which Synod of Bishops was conducted.
Do you see this agenda continuing through the coming year? They aren’t going to change course?
No, because the General Secretary [the former titular Archbp. of Diocletiana, Card. Baldisseri] has identified himself very strongly with the Kasper thesis, and he is not hesitant to say so and has gone around also giving talks in various places. He’s less outspoken than Cardinal Kasper but nevertheless it’s clear that he subscribes to that school. So no, this is going to go on and that’s why it’s important that we continue to speak up and to act as we are able to address the situation.
[…]
Now that Card. Burke is no longer the head of dicastery, it is doubtful that he will be appointed by Pope Francis to the next Synod in 2015.
That does not mean that he has been silenced.
I, for one, congratulate Card. Burke on his appointment and for the loosing of his leash.
I think I should commit to memory that last quickly delivered blast response to why the “preacher”‘s floating interlocutor has never heard any of his explanations (thus suggesting that they aren’t to be believed).
Over at St. Peter’s List there is a great explanation of the Sins That Cry Out To Heaven, namely willful murder (the blood of Abel), the sin of Sodom (the sin of Sodom), oppression of the poor, and defrauding laborers of their wages.
I bring to your special attention the description of the Sin of Sodom, which concerns homosexual acts. Yes, it does. The point is made is that the Sodomites did commit other sins, but God destroyed Sodom because of sodomy, homosexual acts, which are an “abomination” deserving of punishment from God. St. Peter’s List makes use of some material by my friend Msgr. Charles Pope.
I warmly recommend a complete reading of the whole post, but here is the section on Sodomy, homosexual acts, which are Sins That Cry Out To Heaven:
2. The Sin of Sodom
And the Lord said: The cry of Sodom and Gomorrha is multiplied, and their sin is become exceedingly grievous. I will go down and see whether they have done according to the cry that is come to me: or whether it be not so, that I may know. – Gen. 18:20-21
The “Sin of Sodom” is described as “carnal sin against nature, which is a voluntary shedding of the seed of nature, out of the due use of marriage, or lust with a different sex.”3 Given modernity’s substitution of God and Nature with the will of the individual as an autonomous moral universe, sodomy – more specifically active homosexuality, not orientation – has become part of the new post-Christian norm. [norm! Go against that “norm” and you will receive threats of violence. You will be persecuted and hounded, from outside of the Church and, now, within.] Neither Divine Law nor Natural Law form an external guide for the modern man; thus, the only boundary of autonomous individual is the autonomy of another. The boundary for what is and is not moral appears to be consent. Consequently, moral dialogue has been flattened to mere platitudes, [well put] e.g., this isn’t hurting anyone, [it is does] it’s my body [your body isn’t your “property”] and my choice, love is love. [It isn’t love.] Many often comment on the modern West’s apparent lack of morality, but few comment on the fact the West has lost the vocabulary to even discuss on morality.4 [As Chesterton put it, modern man has not only lost his way, he has lost his address.]
A few distinctions. [Qui distinguit bene docet.] First, the issue of same-sex marriage is not a religious issue, [nor is it a civil rights issue!] it is a rational and philosophical one. Considerations of marriage as a natural institution, the moral import of natural law, and the harmony between unity and procreation in sex are all within the purview of the natural virtues and reason; however, as geology and astronomy may both tell us the Earth is round, so too can the two sciences of theology and philosophy tell us the same thing.5 For example, no one holds that the commandment thou shall not murder was unknown before God revealed it on Mt. Sinai. It was revelation confirming reason, a demonstration of the greater truth that grace perfects nature.
The discussion for this list is less about same-sex marriage and more about a proper interpretation of Scripture. It is a conversation about those who do see Sacred Scripture as a moral authority, but attempt to harmonize their modernist views on sexuality with the Holy Bible. [That is, to twist Scripture to the point that it becomes unrecognizable.] Typically, this leads to “new” interpretations of Scriptures on homosexuality. These interpretations are often weak and out of context, but since they serve the end that people want people follow them. A tenuous intellectual argument will always serve as long as it achieves the end people desire, especially if that end is wrapped in autonomy and sexual gratification. [That’s what it comes down to.]
On the Interpretation of Hospitality Violations
[NB. This is what we got in seminary.] Those who argue that Sodom and Gomorrah should be understood outside any homosexual context often submit that the divine judgment of those cities was due to violations of Ancient Near East hospitality laws. In The Sin of Sodom & Gomorrah is not about Hospitality, the good Msgr. Pope offers a strong rebuttal. In part:
First there is a text from Ezekiel:
Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy. They were haughty and did abominable things before me. Therefore I did away with them as you have seen. (Ezekiel 16:49-50)
Now this is the text used most often by those who deny any homosexual context in the sin of Sodom. And, to be fair, it does add a dimension to the outcry God hears. There are clearly additional sins at work in the outcry: pride, excess or greed, and indifference to the poor and needy. [Thus, the Sodomites were sinning in other ways as well.] But there are also mentioned here unspecified “abominations.” The Hebrew word is תּוֹעֵבָ֖ה (tō·w·‘ê·ḇāh) which refers to any number of things God considers especially detestable, such as worshiping idols, immolating children, wrongful marriage [! such as incest and adultery] and also homosexual acts. For example, Leviticus 18:22 uses the word in this context: Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; it is an abomination.6 [How is this difficult?]
But of itself, this text from Ezekiel does remind us that widespread homosexuality is not the only sin of Sodom. And while the abomination mentioned here may not be specified exactly, there is another Scriptural text that does specify things more clearly for us. It is from the Letter of Jude: [the inspired Word of God…]
In a similar way, Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding towns gave themselves up to sexual immorality and perversion. They serve as an example of those who suffer the punishment of eternal fire. In the very same way, these dreamers pollute their own bodies, reject authority and slander celestial beings. (Jude 7-8)
And thus it is specified that the central sin of Sodom involved “sexual immorality (ἐκπορνεύσασαι) and perversion (ἀπελθοῦσαι ὀπίσω σαρκὸς ἑτέρας – literally having departed to strange or different flesh).” And this would comport with the description of widespread homosexual practice in Sodom wherein the practitioners of this sin are described in Genesis 19 as including, “all the men from every part of the city of Sodom—both young and old.”
Hence we see that, while we should avoid seeing the sin of Sodom as only widespread homosexual acts (for what city has only one sin?), we cannot avoid that the Scriptures do teach that homosexual acts are central to the sins of Sodom which cry to heaven for vengeance, and for which God saw fit to bring a fiery end.
Genesis 19 speaks plainly of the sin, Ezekiel 16 broadens the description but retains the word “abomination,” and Jude 7 clearly attests to sexual perversion as being the central sin with which Sodom and Gomorrah were connected.
One of the takeaways from the good monsignor’s commentary is that sexual perversion is not the only sin of which Sodom and Gomorrah were guilty. [NB] Many allow themselves to be confused by arguments that attempt to replace the primary sin (sexual perversion in a homosexual context) with the secondary sins.7 And while the discussion here is not necessarily why homosexuality is a sin that cries to heaven, it should serve to clarify that it is impossible to read the Sodom and Gomorrah narrative outside a homosexual context. [Commit that to memory.]
___ NOTES ___
3. Douay Catholic Catechism of 1649, Q. 928 – Thank you to Taylor Marshal for posting this excerpt on his blog. Marshall makes the point that America has failed “four for four” on these sins that cry out to heaven. [?]
4. Moral Vocabulary: When he was Archbishop of Denver, His Excellency Chaput gave a talk that incorporated the problem of the lost moral vocabulary. Repentance & Renewal, 2010. [?]
5. Theology as a Science: For an introduction to understanding Sacred Doctrine as the Queen of the Sciences and how she orders those sciences, see Queen of the Sciences and Queen of the Sciences II. [?]
6. SPL Note on Leviticus & Homosexuality: When Lev. 18:22 is cited as an undeniable condemnation of homosexuality in Scripture, it is often met with certain sophist rebuttals, e.g., Leviticus also outlaws shaving, tattoos, and eating pork. First note that these statements are an assertion, not an argument. The underlying argument that is needed on both sides is how one decides what is still valid law and what is not. In short, as Catholics we know that the OT is perfected in the NT and the NT is foreshadowed in the OT; thus, we see in Scripture Christ’s intent to perfect the law, not abolish it. Certain laws, however, demand a change in order to be perfected. For example, the OT law of circumcision was perfected in the Sacrament of Baptism. The Levitical laws on purity are a subject we see both St. Peter and St. Paul address. Homosexuality, on the other hand, was restated as a sin by St. Paul. In reverse, one could always ask those who use this argument against Leviticus what their hermeneutic for understanding the OT and NT is. It will, inevitably, be their own autonomous will. For more see Catholic Answers on the subject. [?]
7. Further Commentary on the Hospitality View: In addition to Msgr. Pope’s article, Catholic Answers addresses it in their treatment of homosexuality in general and Fr. Longenecker comments on it in his article The Sin of Sodom. In related studies, the good Msgr. Pope has written about the wrath of God and several other articles on homosexuality (Biblical Teaching on Homosexuality, the “Lost Generation of the Church,” and a Pastor’s Attempt to Teaching the Bible on Homosexuality). Catholicism holds that the laws of the State are drawn from the laws of nature, and the laws of nature are distinct from the divine laws in Scripture. To understanding the relationship of laws and the context in which Catholicism advocates for the legal defense of natural marriage, see Think like a Catholic – 7 Questions on the Four Laws. A collection of Catholic documents on sexuality and the pastoral care of homosexually oriented person is found at 5 Catholic Documents on Family, Sex, and Homosexuality. Those who still question the traditional interpretation of the Church on homosexuality may reference Early Church: 12 Quotes on Homosexuality & Other Sexual Sins. [?]
Read about the other three heinous sins over at St. Peter’s List.
Are you involved in such sins? Examine your conscience and GO TO CONFESSION.
There is no sin that a person can commit that God will not forgive, in the Sacrament of Penance, provided you ask for forgiveness. Then, you will need to pray for graces and develop the virtue of Courage, especially to suffer when you have temptations.
Marco Tosatti has won from me the adjective “intrepid” which I have stripped from Tornielli (what’s up with him, anyway?). He has piece about the recent odd Rescript “edict” about bishops and cardinals and other office holders resigning or being dismissed from their offices. HERE
Tosatti muses that perhaps the new norms are aimed in part at Benedict XVI’s former Secretary of State and present Camerlengo, Card. Bertone, who turns 80 on 2 December. Could be.
He also points out a change in language. Bishops and cardinals are now “bound” (tenuti) rather than merely “invited” (invitati) to turn in their resignations at 75. The Pope is still the one who decides to accept them or not, so nothing changes there. But there is greater pressure now to turn in the resignation. Are there some who don’t?
Tosatti also gives a short list of prelates who are over 75 but still functioning, which leads me to wonder what the landscape would look like were they out of the picture.
Card Amato: 76, Saints
Card. Vegliò: 77, Migrants
Card. Grocholewsi: 75, Education – perhaps to be replaced by the Pope’s friend Archbp. Fernandez from Argentina
Card. Caffara: 76, Bologna – who contributed to the “Five Cardinals Book”
Card. Romeo: 76, Palermo
Card. Lehmann: 78, Mainz – Prefect of CDF Card. Müller is from Mainz, though I am told that his position seems to be secure
Card. Acerbi: 75, Knights of Malta – usually they end office at death, but Pope Francis told Card. Burke that that’s where he wants to put him
Card. Sodano: 87, Dean – enough said
Clearing out the Curia’s old guard and replacing them with men who are more clearly onside, would also have an impact on the next Synod of Bishops in 2015. Dicastery heads, such as Card. Burke, Prefect of the Apostolic Signatura, participate in the Synod ex officio.
Please remember me when shopping online. Your use of my Amazon affiliate link is a major part of my income. It helps to pay for insurance, groceries, everything. Thanks in advance.
“This blog is like a fusion of the Baroque ‘salon’ with its well-tuned harpsichord around which polite society gathered for entertainment and edification and, on the other hand, a Wild West “saloon” with its out-of-tune piano and swinging doors, where everyone has a gun and something to say. Nevertheless, we try to point our discussions back to what it is to be Catholic in this increasingly difficult age, to love God, and how to get to heaven.” – Fr. Z
dPilk on YOUR URGENT PRAYER REQUESTS: “The parents of Gemma Faustina are asking for prayers for their unborn daughter. We are asking for the intercession of…”
Federated Computer… your safe and private alternative to big biz corporations that hate us while taking our money and mining our data. Have an online presence large or small? Catholic DIOCESE? Cottage industry? See what Federated has to offer. Save money and gain peace of mind.
“Until the Lord be pleased to settle, through the instrumentality of the princes of the Church and the lawful ministers of His justice, the trouble aroused by the pride of a few and the ignorance of some others, let us with the help of God endeavor with calm and humble patience to render love for hatred, to avoid disputes with the silly, to keep to the truth and not fight with the weapons of falsehood, and to beg of God at all times that in all our thoughts and desires, in all our words and actions, He may hold the first place who calls Himself the origin of all things.”
Everyone, work to get this into your parish bulletins and diocesan papers.
The most evident mark of God’s anger and the most terrible castigation He can inflict upon the world are manifested when He permits His people to fall into the hands of clerics who are priests more in name than in deed, priests who practice the cruelty of ravening wolves rather than the charity and affection of devoted shepherds.
St. John Eudes
Your support is important. Thanks in advance.
To donate monthly I prefer Zelle because it doesn't extract fees. Use
frz AT wdtprs DOT com
Donate using VENMO
GREAT BEER from Traditional Benedictine Monks in Italy
Good coffee and tea. Help monks.
I use this when I travel both in these USA and abroad. Very useful. Fast enough for Zoom. I connect my DMR (ham radio) through it. If you use my link, they give me more data. A GREAT back up.
Help support Fr. Z’s Gospel of Life work at no cost to you. Do you need a Real Estate Agent? Calling these people is the FIRST thing you should do!
They find you a pro-life agent in your area who commits to giving a portion of the fee to a pro-life group!
Don’t rely on popes, bishops and priests.
“He [Satan] will set up a counter-Church which will be the ape of the Church because, he the devil, is the ape of God. It will have all the notes and characteristics of the Church, but in reverse and emptied of its divine content. It will be a mystical body of the anti-Christ that will in all externals resemble the mystical body of Christ. In desperate need for God, whom he nevertheless refuses to adore, modern man in his loneliness and frustration will hunger more and more for membership in a community that will give him enlargement of purpose, but at the cost of losing himself in some vague collectivity.”
“Who is going to save our Church? Not our bishops, not our priests and religious. It is up to you, the people. You have the minds, the eyes, and the ears to save the Church. Your mission is to see that your priests act like priests, your bishops act like bishops.”
“The modern habit of doing ceremonial things unceremoniously is no proof of humility; rather it proves the offender's inability to forget himself in the rite, and his readiness to spoil for every one else the proper pleasure of ritual.”
- C.S. Lewis
This blog has to earn its keep!
PLEASE subscribe via PayPal if it is useful. Zelle and Wise are better, but PayPal is convenient.
A monthly subscription donation means I have steady income I can plan on. I put you my list of benefactors for whom I pray and for whom I often say Holy Mass.
In view of the rapidly changing challenges I now face, I would like to add more $10/month subscribers. Will you please help?
For a one time donation...
To donate monthly I prefer Zelle because it doesn't extract fees. Use
frz AT wdtprs DOT com
As for Latin…
"But if, in any layman who is indeed imbued with literature, ignorance of the Latin language, which we can truly call the 'catholic' language, indicates a certain sluggishness in his love toward the Church, how much more fitting it is that each and every cleric should be adequately practiced and skilled in that language!" - Pius XI
"Let us realize that this remark of Cicero (Brutus 37, 140) can be in a certain way referred to [young lay people]: 'It is not so much a matter of distinction to know Latin as it is disgraceful not to know it.'" - St. John Paul II
Let us pray…
Grant unto thy Church, we beseech Thee, O merciful God, that She, being gathered together by the Holy Ghost, may be in no wise troubled by attack from her foes. O God, who by sin art offended and by penance pacified, mercifully regard the prayers of Thy people making supplication unto Thee,and turn away the scourges of Thine anger which we deserve for our sins. Almighty and Everlasting God, in whose Hand are the power and the government of every realm: look down upon and help the Christian people that the heathen nations who trust in the fierceness of their own might may be crushed by the power of thine Arm. Through our Lord Jesus Christ, Thy Son, who liveth and reigneth with Thee in the unity of the Holy Ghost, God, world without end. R. Amen.
Almighty and eternal God, who created us in Thine image and bade us to seek after all that is good, true and beautiful, especially in the divine person of Thine Only-begotten Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, grant, we beseech Thee, that, through the intercession of Saint Isidore, Bishop and Doctor, during our journeys through the internet we will direct our hands and eyes only to that which is pleasing to Thee and treat with charity and patience all those souls whom we encounter. Through Christ our Lord. Amen.
If ever you needed proof of what an evil site and occasion of sin the National Schismatic Reporter (aka Fishwrap) has become, just have a look at the combox under the shameful post by Michael Sean Winters about the reassignment of Card. Burke. 
Greg Hlatky on Some notes for your Sunday Mass in the Vetus and the Novus Ordo: ““By pursuing perfection we will achieve excellence.” – Vince Lombardi”
