Showing posts with label LGBTQ. Show all posts
Showing posts with label LGBTQ. Show all posts

Tuesday, May 28, 2024

Pope Francis: 'Too Much Faggotry in Seminaries..."

Pope Francis is once again in the headlines for comments he allegedly made.  According to reports, the pope said that there is too much "frociaggine" or "faggotry" in seminaries. According to Time.com, "The remark, said to have been made during a closed-door meeting last Monday, was first reported by Italian news and gossip site Dagospia and then affirmed by Italian newspapers la Repubblica and Corriere della Sera, which each cited unnamed firsthand sources."  

Matteo Bruni, director of the Holy See Press Office, in a statement on Tuesday, “The Pope never intended to offend or express himself in homophobic terms, and he apologizes to those who felt offended by the use of a term, as reported by others.." 

According to reports, when the pope stated this, bishops in attendance laughed. The comment is being dismissed as a "gaffe" on the part of Pope Francis due to a lack of understanding of the word's context in Italy. Despite the pope being of Italian descent, he is an Argentinian and grew up in a predominantly Latino culture. 

American Magazine and other publications are also excusing the pope's use of the word as a mere gaffe and that it was not intended to offend anyone, in particular, the LGBTQIA community.  

The comment does come as strange after Pope Francis has been the only pope to have reached out to those in the Gay community and has been "gay-friendly."  Despite affirming Catholic teaching on Homosexuality, the pope has always made it a point to be merciful and amicable towards those in the Gay community.  


Source:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2024/05/27/pope-francis-reported-derogatory-phrase-homosexuals/

https://time.com/6982651/pope-francis-reported-homophobic-slur-gay-priests-seminaries/

https://www.repubblica.it/cronaca/2024/05/27/news/papa_francesco_incontro_vescovi_gay_frociaggine-423115446/

https://archive.is/pLiCa

https://www.dagospia.com/?refresh_ce

https://www.vaticannews.va/en/pope/news/2024-05/pope-francis-apology-italian-bishops-conference.html




Friday, May 24, 2024

Nintendo Paper Mario Transgender Character

The Evolution of Vivian: Transgender Representation in 'Paper Mario'

The world of video gaming has seen a significant evolution in the representation of diverse characters, and one such character that stands out is Vivian from the 'Paper Mario' series. Vivian first appeared in 'Paper Mario: The Thousand-Year Door,' which was released in 2004 for the Nintendo GameCube. She is a member of the Shadow Sirens and later becomes an ally to Mario, helping him on his quest.

In the original Japanese version and some other foreign localizations of the game, Vivian was depicted as a transgender woman or a male-identifying cross-dresser. However, this aspect of her character was not included in the original English localization due to the age rating the localizers were aiming at when translating the game. This decision sparked discussions and debates within the gaming community about the importance of representation and the localization process.

Fast forward to 2024, and Nintendo has released a remake of 'Paper Mario: The Thousand-Year Door' for the Nintendo Switch. In this updated version, Vivian is consistently portrayed as a transgender woman in both the Japanese script and the revised English localization. This change marks a significant step in LGBTQ+ representation in video games, as it brings a character's true identity to a wider audience and acknowledges the importance of inclusivity in gaming narratives.

The inclusion of Vivian as a transgender character in the remake has been met with positive reactions from both fans and critics. It reflects a growing awareness and acceptance of transgender individuals in media. Video game review platforms and news outlets have highlighted this update as a progressive move by Nintendo.

Vivian's character development throughout the game is also noteworthy. She overcomes an inferiority complex and learns to respect herself as she travels with Mario. Her journey is one of self-discovery and empowerment, resonating with many players who have faced similar struggles.

The gaming industry still has a long way to go in terms of LGBTQ+ representation, but characters like Vivian serve as important milestones. They not only provide visibility to underrepresented groups but also enrich the storytelling experience by offering diverse perspectives.

As the conversation around representation in media continues to evolve, it's clear that the inclusion of characters like Vivian is more than just a token gesture. It's a commitment to telling authentic stories that reflect the real world's diversity. With this remake, Nintendo has shown that it is listening to its audience and taking steps to be more inclusive, setting an example for others in the industry to follow.

This is not the first time Nintendo has presented a "sus" or suspicious character.  In the original Nintendo system, there was the character "Birdo" who was presented as confused about whether it was a boy or a girl. 

Some Christian groups are protesting the game, including the conservative Catholic Group "TFP" or America Needs Family.  They are actively collecting a petition to send to Nintendo's powers that be. 


Source:

https://nypost.com/2024/05/23/lifestyle/nintendo-includes-transgender-character-in-new-paper-mario-video-game/

Random: Super Mario Party Shows That Nintendo Still Can't Decide Birdo's Gender | Nintendo Life



Tuesday, April 9, 2024

Vatican Condemns Gender Theory etc.

The Vatican's recent document on human dignity, titled "Dignitas Infinita," represents a significant contribution to the ongoing discourse on the inherent worth of the human person within Christian anthropology. This declaration, which took several years to develop, underscores the Church's unwavering stance on the intrinsic and inalienable dignity of every human being, created in the image and likeness of God and redeemed in Jesus Christ.

"Dignitas Infinita" is not merely a theological treatise; it is a call to recognize and respect the dignity of every person in various spheres of life, including social, political, and economic realms. The document draws from the rich teachings of the Church and the latest developments in academia to address the ambivalent ways in which the concept of human dignity is understood today.

One of the most notable aspects of this document is its comprehensive approach to human dignity. It goes beyond the traditional bioethical concerns to include pressing contemporary issues such as poverty, the plight of migrants, violence against women, human trafficking, and war. This holistic view aligns with Pope Francis' encyclical "Fratelli Tutti," which offers an original analysis of human dignity beyond all circumstances.

The declaration also seeks to bridge the gap between different perspectives within the Church, emphasizing that the defense of human dignity encompasses both the protection of life from conception to natural death and the advocacy for the marginalized and oppressed. This inclusive approach reflects a maturation in the Church's social doctrine, recognizing that various violations of human dignity are interconnected and must be addressed collectively.

Fundamental to "Dignitas Infinita" is the affirmation of the equal dignity of all people, irrespective of their conditions or qualities. It challenges the misunderstandings that arise from equating personal d
ignity with the capacity for reasoning, thereby excluding the unborn, the elderly, and individuals with mental disabilities from the scope of personal dignity. The document firmly asserts that dignity is a gift present in every human being, regardless of their stage in life or cognitive abilities.

The Vatican's declaration is a testament to the Church's dedication to upholding human dignity in the face of modern challenges. It serves as a moral compass for believers and non-believers alike, guiding actions and policies towards a more just and compassionate society where every person is valued and respected.

For those interested in delving deeper into the theological and magisterial foundations of the Church's understanding of human dignity, as well as the contemporary moral issues it addresses, "Dignitas Infinita" is an essential read. It not only reaffirms the Church's long-standing teachings but also responds to the critiques and questions of our time, offering a path forward for all who seek to honor the infinite worth of every human person.

The Vatican's "Dignitas Infinita" document is a profound exploration of human dignity from a Christian anthropological perspective. Here are some key points highlighted in the document:

1. Inherent Dignity: The document reaffirms the Church's belief in the inherent and inalienable dignity of every human being, created in the image and likeness of God and redeemed by Jesus Christ. This dignity is not subject to change and is independent of any cultural, social, or personal conditions.

2. Holistic Approach: It adopts a holistic approach to human dignity, addressing not only traditional bioethical concerns but also contemporary issues such as poverty, migration, violence against women, human trafficking, and war.

3. Inclusivity: The document emphasizes the equal dignity of all people, irrespective of their conditions or qualities, challenging the notion that dignity is tied to the capacity for reasoning and thus excluding certain groups such as the unborn, the elderly, or individuals with mental disabilities.

4. Interconnected Violations: It recognizes that various violations of human dignity are interconnected and must be addressed collectively, bridging the gap between different perspectives within the Church.

5. Response to Modern Challenges: The declaration serves as a moral compass, guiding actions and policies towards a more just and compassionate society where every person is valued and respected.

6. Biblical and Magisterial Foundations: The document draws from biblical revelation and the Church's teachings to assert that human dignity is confirmed by the incarnation and resurrection of Christ, which reveals man's call to communion with God.

7. Misunderstandings of Dignity: It addresses misunderstandings that arise from equating personal dignity with the capacity for reasoning, thereby advocating for the dignity of every human being regardless of their stage in life or cognitive abilities.

"Dignitas Infinita" is a call to action for all individuals and institutions to recognize and uphold the infinite worth of every human person, reflecting the Church's dedication to human dignity in the face of modern challenges. It is an essential document for anyone interested in the theological, social, and moral implications of human dignity as understood within the Christian tradition.

The Vatican's Perspective on Human Dignity, Gender Theory, and IVF

The Vatican has a long history of engaging with complex moral and ethical issues, and its documents often reflect deep theological reflection and guidance on these topics. Recently, the Vatican has released a new document titled "Dignitas Infinita" which addresses the theme of human dignity in the context of contemporary challenges.

The document, which took five years to develop, builds upon the teachings of the Catholic Church and recent papal magisterium. It emphasizes the "indispensable nature of the dignity of the human person in Christian anthropology" and discusses the implications of this concept in various realms, including social, political, and economic.

One of the key aspects of the document is its stance on gender theory. The Vatican has reaffirmed its position that gender theory, which suggests that gender identity can be separated from biological sex, is a "grave threat" to society. The document states that gender-affirming surgeries and surrogacy are considered grave violations of human dignity, equating them with other practices such as abortion and euthanasia.

The document also touches upon the topic of in vitro fertilization (IVF). The Catholic Church's position on IVF has been consistent over the years, viewing it as morally unacceptable because it separates procreation from the marital act and establishes the "domination of technology" over the creation and destiny of human life.

"Dignitas Infinita" serves as a reminder of the Church's view that human dignity is inherent and flows from the creation of individuals "in the image and likeness of God" and their redemption in Christ. This dignity is present from conception to natural death, and the Church calls for the respect and protection of this dignity in all stages of life.

The document's release has sparked discussions and debates, reflecting the diverse opinions within the Catholic community and beyond. While some view the document as a reinforcement of traditional Catholic teachings, others criticize it for not applying the principle of respect and honor to gender-diverse individuals.

The Vatican's contributions to these discussions are significant as they shape the moral and ethical discourse within the Church and influence the global conversation on these pressing issues. "Dignitas Infinita" is an example of the Vatican's ongoing effort to engage with modern challenges while upholding the principles of the Catholic faith. 

For those interested in exploring the full text and implications of the Vatican's document, it is available for review and study.  See: Declaration “Dignitas Infinita” on Human Dignity (2 April 2024) (vatican.va)


Source:

Vatican document on modern issues shows 'how stupid it is' to see Church as 'left' or 'right': Bishop Barron (msn.com)

Vatican declares gender-affirming surgery/surrogacy as grave violations (msn.com)

Vatican slams surrogacy, gender-affirming surgery (nydailynews.com)

Vatican denounces gender-affirming surgery, surrogacy in declaration on 'dignity' (msn.com)

Gender-affirming surgery threatens ‘unique dignity’ of a person, Vatican says (msn.com)

Gender-affirming surgery threatens ‘unique dignity’ of a person, Vatican says (msn.com)

What's the Vatican Statement on Gender Theory Really About? | Opinion (msn.com)

Roundtable: What the Vatican said about gender theory in ‘Dignitas Infinita’ | America Magazine

Vatican blasts gender-affirming surgery, surrogacy and gender theory as violations of human dignity – The Morning Call (mcall.com)


Sunday, March 17, 2024

Reflection: 5th Sunday of Lent - Following Him

Today's readings tell us that God makes things new in Christ (2 Corinthians 5:17). We must follow Christ in order to be part of this renewal. This following of Christ will not be easy. We must suffer greatly (Matthew 10:18). 

As we enter the fifth Sunday of Lent in cycle B, we are called to deepen our reflection and understanding of the scriptures. This period of Lent is a time for personal growth and spiritual renewal, inviting us to contemplate the mysteries of faith and the journey toward Easter.

The readings for this Sunday offer profound insights into the nature of sacrifice, redemption, and the transformative power of love and faith. They challenge us to look within ourselves, confront our weaknesses, and embrace the path of righteousness that leads to eternal life.

In the first reading, we encounter the promise of a new covenant, one that is written not on stone but on the hearts of believers. It speaks to the intimate relationship God desires with each one of us, calling us to a deeper communion with the divine.

The responsorial psalm echoes this theme of mercy and forgiveness, reminding us that God's love is ever-present and that we are always welcomed back into His grace when we seek reconciliation.

The second reading reminds us of Christ's obedience and humility, qualities that led Him to the ultimate sacrifice on the cross. His example serves as a beacon for our own lives, urging us to live in service to others and to uphold the values of the Gospel.

Finally, the Gospel reading brings us face-to-face with Jesus' prediction of His own death and resurrection. It is a poignant reminder of the cost of our salvation and the depth of God's love for humanity. Through His suffering and triumph over death, we are offered a path to new life.

In the first reading, we are told that God is going to start a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah. This covenant will be different from the one the Israelites were used to.  Before, God showed Himself to them and brought them out of slavery. He would work His wonders before them and others, showing that He is God (Psalm 95:9). Now things will be different.  He is going to place His law in their hearts (Psalm 37:31). Here we see how God is preparing humanity for Jesus. He is setting a place in man's heart for Himself (Ephesians 3:17). This new covenant will include not only Israel and Judah but the rest of the world (Jeremiah 31:1,3-4,7-8John 11:52).  The old covenant was a preparation for the new. This is why Jesus did not come to abolish the old but to fulfill it (Matthew 5:17).  The old is part of the new.  It is a religious and spiritual metamorphosis. However, to be part of this new covenant, we must be pure of heart, mind, and soul. This brings in the Psalm for today.

In the responsorial Psalm, we recite, "Create a clean heart in me, O God."  We ask God for mercy and ask that He in His generosity and goodness restore His image in us by wiping clean all that exists in us that keeps us from this image (Isaiah 1:18). Only God can do this (Psalm 51:7).  God is the only one who knows us inside and out (Psalm 139:2).  He can perceive our introspection and know our temperament. We were created by Him, we come from Him (Genesis 1:27). His breath and word are what keep us in existence (Genesis 2:7Psalm 39:5Matthew 4:4). This washing of the soul brings back the joy in us. God reestablishes His friendship with us. In response, we must call others who are in sin and bring them to this spiritual laundry mat that is God's grace, so to speak (Colossians 3:16Romans 15:14James 5:20). This cleaning is done with the blood of the lamb who was slain (Revelation 12:11). His suffering redeems us. It restores us as we read in the second reading.

The second reading reminds us that Jesus prayed and offered Himself for all of us. Today's second reading is sometimes used by Jehovah's Witnesses and Muslims to claim that Jesus was not god.  To them, he was either a demi-god or a prophet. The words, "he learned obedience" and "was made perfect" seem to indicate this.  However, we must understand that Jesus was both God and man (John 1:114). He had two natures and one personhood. This is called the Hypostatic union. The fact that He was God did not make His humanity any different. He experienced everything human beings experience except sin (Hebrews 4:15). Christ ate, drank, cried, experienced different emotions, thought, learned, etc. He was not some magical deity walking the Earth like Hercules fighting Titans and whatnot. For all intent and purpose, Christ lived like an "average Joe." So because of this, He learned obedience and was made perfect because His humanity was authentically human.  Since He did not succumb to any temptation and followed through with the will of His Father, Christ became the source of our salvation.  He is the new Adam (1 Corinthians 15:45).

Finally, in the Gospel, we read of Jesus' agony.  Jesus announces the hour has come for the Son of Man to be glorified. This hour is the new beginning. The beginning of the new covenant was signed, sealed, and delivered by the suffering and death of Christ. Jesus says, "Unless a grain of wheat falls to the ground and dies, it remains just a grain of wheat, but if it dies, it produces much fruit." Here He is referring to Himself. His death on the Cross had to occur. Jesus had to suffer to redeem us. Humanity got into trouble via sin and death, so Christ would use the image of sin (humanity) and death to save the world (Romans 5:12-18). If we are to call ourselves Christians, then we too must suffer (Matthew 16:24). Jesus reminds us, "Whoever loves his life loses it, and whoever hates his life in this world will preserve it for eternal life." This means that we must be open to suffering and even martyrdom if it comes to that (Matthew 24:9).

This life that we live today is not what we were meant for.  Humanity was meant for so much more. The Covid 19 coronavirus pandemic has reminded us of the importance of life.  Today we are learning of the many Christians being killed. These are the martyrs of today who follow Christ to the cross. Their reward will be in heaven. Instead of focusing on the rewards of this life that wither like a crown of leaves, they focus on the crown in heaven that never withers (1 Corinthians 9:25). These Christians unite themselves to the suffering Christ. We too are united when we suffer for the faith (1 Peter 2:212 Timothy 2:12Romans 8:17). The agony of Christ shows us how Christ was truly human. This ties into what we read in the second reading regarding Jesus learning obedience and being made perfect. He suffered even before being scourged at the pillar.

Christ asks the Father to save Him from this hour. However, he did not quit and accepted what was coming. In the Mass, we join Jesus in this hour by reliving His passion, death, and resurrection. Christ has not been sacrificed again, He died once and for all peoples (Hebrews 9:28Romans 6:101 Peter 3:18). This death weakened the hold of the ruler of this world who is the liar Satan (Revelation 12:11). It is no wonder why today we see all kinds of evils and crazy ideas taking over society (Isaiah 5:20).  These crazy ideas are out there.  From so-called same-sex marriage to gender theory.  We must be on the alert with things of this world.  Satan knows his time is up so he has to pull all stops to try to deceive many (1 Peter 5:8). However, Christ, as He is lifted up from the earth, will draw all people to Himself (John 3:14-15). In the end, Christ wins. We must follow Christ. As we reflect on these readings, let us open our hearts to the transformative power they hold. May this Lenten journey bring us closer to understanding God's profound love for each of us and inspire us to live out our faith with renewed conviction.  May Jesus Christ be praised!

Readings: Fifth Sunday of Lent | USCCB


**PLEASE Be Generous:
If you enjoy this blog, the radio podcasts, Sacerdotus TV broadcasts, or have received a free sacramental via mail, then please consider helping this work expand by donating and helping reach the fundraising goal.  

See to donate: http://www.gofundme.com/sacerdotus. You can also donate via our Paypal, by becoming a monthly patron on patreon.com/sacerdotus or by purchasing items from our online store: www.sacerdotusstore.com

Thank you







Thursday, March 14, 2024

Pope Francis 'Gender Theory Worst Danger'

Gender theory is an academic field that explores the concepts of masculinity, femininity, and queer behavior within various contexts and societies. 

It differentiates between 'sex', which refers to biological attributes, and 'gender', which encompasses the roles, behaviors, and expectations society associates with being male or female. This theory posits that gender is not an innate trait but rather a social construct learned through interaction and cultural norms.

In light of this definition, Pope Francis' recent comments on gender theory have sparked significant debate. He has labeled gender theory as the "worst danger" of our time for attempting to erase the differences between men and women, which he believes are essential to humanity's identity. The Pope's stance has been met with both support and criticism, reflecting a broader societal discussion on the nature of gender and identity.

For further reading on Pope Francis' views, you can refer to articles from America Magazine, CBC News, Vatican News, Breitbart, and National Catholic Reporter. It's crucial to engage with this topic thoughtfully, considering the diverse perspectives and sensitivities involved.


Post your thoughts below on Disqus. Be sure to follow the rules or your comment will not be permitted.


References:

: [America Magazine Article](https://www.americamagazine.org/faith/2024/03/01/pope-franics-gender-ideology-vocation-247409)

: [CBC News Article](https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/pope-francis-gender-theory-ideology-1.7130679)

: [Vatican News Article](https://www.vaticannews.va/en/pope/news/2024-03/pope-francis-gender-ideology-is-the-ugliest-danger-of-our-time.html)

: [Breitbart Article](https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2020/02/08/pope-francis-condemns-the-evil-of-gender-theory/)

: [National Catholic Reporter Article](https://www.ncronline.org/blogs/francis-chronicles/pope-francis-gender-theory-problem-not-solution)

Thursday, February 22, 2024

Trans Funeral Organizer: 'We Want An Apology from Catholic Church'

In an ironic turn of events, LGBT activists are demanding a public apology from St. Patrick’s Cathedral in New York City and the Catholic Church after the funeral of a male using the pseudonym "Cecilia Gentili," a transgender activist, and actor, was allegedly cut short by the Cathedral during the service. 

The organization Gays & Lesbians Living in a Transgender Society (GLITS) has called for an explanation from the Cathedral regarding what they describe as "painfully dismissive and exclusionary language" used in a statement after the incident. 

During the funeral, participants, many of them wearing extravagant drag, repeatedly interrupted the priest and broke into loud chants. One reveler even took to the podium to pray for "access" to "gender-affirming healthcare," a cause that the Catholic Church opposes. 

The founder of GLITS, a man who calls himself "Ceyenne Doroshow," organized the event and later admitted to deceiving the Cathedral by keeping details about Gentili "under wraps" before the gathering. In response, St. Patrick’s Cathedral expressed "outrage" at having been deceived and assured concerned Catholics that a Mass of reparation had been said at the Cathedral since the incident.

The Cathedral's actions have sparked controversy, with GLITS claiming that St. Patrick’s Cathedral was filled with over 1,400 mourners and community members for Cecilia Gentili's funeral. However, his service ended an hour earlier than scheduled, denying him the full funeral mass that had been agreed upon. GLITS also disputes the Cathedral's narrative that they were manipulated by funeral organizers regarding Gentili's identity, stating that they had advised Cathedral staff to look up Cecilia Gentili's work and community service.

Activist Ceyenne Doroshow gave a small press conference giving his narrative claiming that the Catholic Church knew Gentili was a transexual and about his life. Doroshow claimed the Archdiocese's statement was offensive, hateful, and contradicted Fiducia Supplicans stating Pope Francis okayed "Same-sex Marriage." This is of course not true. Doroshow continued claiming that it was none of the staff of St. Patrick's cathedral what was "in between Cecilia's legs" implying gender.  He claims the cathedral discriminated against the trans community after admitted he did deceive the cathedral about the deceased.  Moreover, he continued to tell a story about being raised Catholic and going to school only to be molested by another student and a security guard. 




The situation highlights tensions between LGBTQ activists and religious institutions, emphasizing the need for respectful dialogue and understanding across different perspectives.

Doroshow is right to a certain extent. The Archdiocese, particularly the staff at St. Patrick's Cathedral did botch things up.  Canon Law is clear:

§3. In the prudent judgment of the local ordinary, ecclesiastical funerals can be granted to baptized persons who are enrolled in a non-Catholic Church or ecclesial community unless their intention is evidently to the contrary and provided that their own minister is not available. 

Can. 1184 §1. Unless they gave some signs of repentance before death, the following must be deprived of ecclesiastical funerals: 1/ notorious apostates, heretics, and schismatics; 2/ those who chose the cremation of their bodies for reasons contrary to Christian faith; 3/ other manifest sinners who cannot be granted ecclesiastical funerals without public scandal of the faithful. §2. If any doubt occurs, the local ordinary is to be consulted, and his judgment must be followed. 

Can. 1185 Any funeral Mass must also be denied a person who is excluded from ecclesiastical funerals.

A baptism certificate should have been requested and produced. The situation should have been vetted. If Doroshow is being truthful that he told the staff that Gentili was an activist, then they should have done their research.  Moreover, once attendees entered the Cathedral, the staff should have known this event would be problematic.  They should have canceled right on the spot and not let it go on.  It seems the staff did not think and just took the donation.

However, Doroshow did admit to deceiving the staff so he has blame as well. He should have done his own research. If he claims Gentili battled the Catholic Church for decades then he should have known the Church's stance on homosexuality. He should have researched what Fiducia Supplicans is and what it really says. Doroshow is under the impression it is a license to bless so-called Same-Sex Unions.  As many Catholics showed concern about, the declaration would cause confusion and make people think that the Church changed its stance on marriage.  We are seeing the bad fruits of the wording and promotion of Fiducia Supplicans at play. 

Priests like James Martin of the Jesuit order are also not helping by playing word games and giving false hope to the LGBTQIA community thinking the Church is changing her teachings on homosexuality.  We can have bridges, but like with real ones, the linking destinations will always be the same.  The George Washington Bridge will always link the Bronx with New Jersey.  We can extend bridges to the LGBTQIA community, but our side will still have the same destination: Gospel Truth.  We cannot change this.  

It seems this drama or story is not over and will continue. As time moves on, it seems this funeral was a stunt and not a genuine goodbye to the trans community's "icon."  Time will tell.  I will update this post if new details come along.


What do you think? Post your comment below on Disqus.  Be sure to follow the rules so your comment can go through.  



Sources:



  

Monday, December 18, 2023

Pope Francis Okays Blessing of Gay Couples? Not Quite!

Today the media went into a frenzy. "Pope approves same-sex blessings" were the hooks being shared on social media. On the television, reporters looked elated at the news and even the Late Night's Stephen Colbert showed glee announcing this news as the crowd gave an extended applause to the pope. Father James Martin of the Jesuit order and "liberal" Catholic accounts also showed their celebratory posts on social media. So what happened?  Did the Vatican and Pope really approve of same-sex blessings? The answer is "yes" and no. 

Before Catholics panic or others laugh at the Catholic Church believing we are contradicting ourselves, the Church is not blessing same-sex unions directly. They are doing what they always have done, bless individuals who request a blessing. Everyone can receive a blessing. This is not news. What is making news is the emphasis being made by the media and so-called "liberal or progressive" Catholics who are presenting this news from an LGBTQIA lens. The CDF released a Declaration entitled Fiducia Supplicans: On the Pastoral Meaning of Blessings today. It is an answer to several dubias sent to Rome by some prelates.  The declaration is not solely about same-sex unions. It is focused on "irregular situations."  The phrase "Same-sex" is mentioned only three times.  Fiducia Supplicans was written to answer questions about who can receive blessings.  For quite some time now, some clerics have refused to bless people in irregular situations. An irregular situation is when someone is in a situation that is not morally acceptable. For example, a couple living together without being married, a couple with a child out of wedlock, a same-sex couple, a couple divorced civilly, and so forth.  These situations are often difficult to deal with in a pastoral sense.

Pope Francis since the onset of his pontificate has focused on mercy. He wants the Church to be merciful and reach out to those on the peripherals as he has often stated. He wants bishops and priests to acquire the "scent of their sheep," in other words, to mingle with them and minister to them.  Pope Francis more than any other pope has done a lot to reach out to those often pushed aside, even by the Church. This shepherding has brought him many enemies, especially from those who called themselves "traditionalists." They feel the pope is a modernist seeking to turn the Church into an "anything goes" institution.  Pope Francis wants all people to know of Christ and His mercy. He wants everyone to come to Christ the best they can even those who are in these irregular situations which are often hard to resolve.  Same-sex unions are probably the most difficult to deal with because both parties feel they are "in love" and that their relationship is equal to that of a heterosexual couple "in love."  What are we to say to these people? Do we tell them they have to split and stop seeing each other and live a celibate life?  This is easier said than done. Things are not always black and white so to speak. In light of this, the Church is chipping away at these difficult situations by confirming that same-sex couples can be blessed along with other irregular situations people find themselves in.  

Now, this does not mean the pope is giving the okay to bless same-sex unions per se. He is stating that individuals can be blessed even if they are in irregular situations. No longer can some rigid clerics dismiss these people in irregular situations as pariahs. They have to bless them, but with prudence of course; analyzing the situation carefully. The Church is not blessing same-sex unions as a thing, only the persons in them. God cannot bless sin. God cannot bless a union that contradicts His will. The Catholic Church cannot change this any more than she can change the law of gravity.  A gay couple can be blessed as two individual persons, not the gay union itself.  Blessing a same-sex union itself goes against the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith which said in 2003, 

"In those situations where homosexual unions have been legally recognized or have been given the legal status and rights belonging to marriage, clear and emphatic opposition is a duty. One must refrain from any kind of formal cooperation in the enactment or application of such gravely unjust laws and, as far as possible, from material cooperation on the level of their application. In this area, everyone can exercise the right to conscientious objection." (
http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20030731_homosexual-unions_en.html)


So clearly, the Church still has to resist any attempt to redefine marriage and cannot endorse same-sex unions.  However, she can bless those in them directly as individuals. This has always been the case.  Many are asking why do we need to be told this again? Well, it is 2023, language has changed. The Church needed to repeat the message for today's audience while adhering to the teachings of the Church which can never change. This is how doctrine develops.  It does not change but uses language for the current age to make Church teaching clearer. Fiducia Supplicans reaffirms that marriage can only be between one man and one woman.  It states clearly:

4. Pope Francis’ recent response to the second of the five questions posed by two Cardinals[4] offers an opportunity to explore this issue further, especially in its pastoral implications. It is a matter of avoiding that “something that is not marriage is being recognized as marriage.”[5] Therefore, rites and prayers that could create confusion between what constitutes marriage—which is the “exclusive, stable, and indissoluble union between a man and a woman, naturally open to the generation of children”[6]—and what contradicts it are inadmissible. This conviction is grounded in the perennial Catholic doctrine of marriage; it is only in this context that sexual relations find their natural, proper, and fully human meaning. The Church’s doctrine on this point remains firm.

5. This is also the understanding of marriage that is offered by the Gospel. For this reason, when it comes to blessings, the Church has the right and the duty to avoid any rite that might contradict this conviction or lead to confusion. Such is also the meaning of the Responsum of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, which states that the Church does not have the power to impart blessings on unions of persons of the same sex.

6. It should be emphasized that in the Rite of the Sacrament of Marriage, this concerns not just any blessing but a gesture reserved to the ordained minister. In this case, the blessing given by the ordained minister is tied directly to the specific union of a man and a woman, who establish an exclusive and indissoluble covenant by their consent. This fact allows us to highlight the risk of confusing a blessing given to any other union with the Rite that is proper to the Sacrament of Marriage.

The document continues stating that there cannot be any confusion or mingling done with the blessing to make it seem like a marriage or an approval or legitimization of the union:

31. Within the horizon outlined here appears the possibility of blessings for couples in irregular situations and for couples of the same sex, the form of which should not be fixed ritually by ecclesial authorities to avoid producing confusion with the blessing proper to the Sacrament of Marriage. In such cases, a blessing may be imparted that not only has an ascending value but also involves the invocation of a blessing that descends from God upon those who—recognizing themselves to be destitute and in need of his help—do not claim a legitimation of their own status, but who beg that all that is true, good, and humanly valid in their lives and their relationships be enriched, healed, and elevated by the presence of the Holy Spirit. These forms of blessing express a supplication that God may grant those aids that come from the impulses of his Spirit—what classical theology calls “actual grace”—so that human relationships may mature and grow in fidelity to the Gospel, that they may be freed from their imperfections and frailties, and that they may express themselves in the ever-increasing dimension of the divine love.

You can read the entire document here: https://press.vatican.va/content/salastampa/it/bollettino/pubblico/2023/12/18/0901/01963.html#en.  

So as you can see, the Pope and the Catholic Church is not endorsing so-called gay marriage or same-sex unions or anything of the like. They are simply repeating the Church's teaching that anyone can be blessed. They are blessing the sinner but not the sin, so to speak. The media and other malicious Catholics have been trying all day to push this story as a change in the Catholic Church's teaching or presenting the pope as some new reformer introducing "modern and updated right-with-the-times" innovations. This is far from the truth. 

Again, the document reaffirms marriage between one man and one woman, warns clerics not to use this blessing as a form of the Marriage rite or a parallel form of a Marriage rite existing alongside the normative one, and reaffirms God's mercy and the need to right things little by little on the spiritual course of life.  

The Catholic Church has no authority to bless same-sex unions, so-called gay marriage, divorce anyone, or endorse homosexual acts.  We can bless individual sinners even if they are a couple, but not sin. 

In 1 Cor. 6:9-11, St. Paul says:  

"Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God. Such were some of you; but you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God."

St. Paul is the man who was formerly known as Saul.  He persecuted Christians until Christ appeared before him and converted him.  (see Acts 9)  So since Christ converted him and gave him a mandate, Paul's words are valid.  Notice how he tells us who will not inherit the kingdom of God.   He mentions effeminate and homosexual people.  He continues that some of them lived those lifestyles but were 'washed, sanctified and justified in the Lord Jesus Christ and Spirit of God.'   This basically means that among the people he was preaching to there were some who lived this sinful lifestyle.  But, they changed- they converted and stopped.  

God loves everyone yes, but He does not love Sin.  Homosexuality is a lifestyle that causes great friction in the relationship between God and a Soul.  It is one of the Sins that cries out to God for vengeance (Genesis 18:20).  The cities of Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed because of the homosexual behavior among its citizens (Jude 5-7)

God Himself said it is an abomination (Lev. 18:22, 29)  This does not sound like God accepts everyone and everything they do.  In reality, God requires us to follow His Commandments and Will.  Jesus taught us the Our Father prayer that says, "Your will be done on earth as it is in heaven."  It is not about us, it is about God.  

Jesus would never condone Homosexuality because it would go against the Word He gave us in the Scriptures.  God is Truth and immutable, He cannot contradict Himself.  

The Catechism of the Catholic Church is clear on Homosexuality:

2357 Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex. It has taken a great variety of forms through the centuries and in different cultures. Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained. Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity,141 tradition has always declared that "homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered."142 They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.

2358 The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God's will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord's Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.

2359 Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection.

Fiducia Supplicans clearly states that this blessing is solely pastoral and not ritual or lutirgical.  It cannot be done in a church setting such as in front of the sanctuary or altar.  Despite this, many bishops and Catholics in general have voiced their concerns regarding the optics and misinterpretation of the blessing.  Bishops in regions where homosexuality is criminalized such as Africa have voiced concern that blessing same-sex couples may signal to secular authorities that the Church is in defiance.  Cardinal Fernandez and the Dicastery of the Doctrine of the Faith did not think these variables through.  We shall see what happens next.

UPDATE January 4, 2024

Cardinal Fernandez and the Dicastery of the Doctrine of the Faith have just issued a press release concerning the reception of Fiducia Supplicans:




Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith
Press release concerning the reception of Fiducia supplicans


4 January 2024


We are writing this Press Release to help clarify the reception of Fiducia supplicans, while recommending at the same time a full and calm reading of the Declaration so as to better understand its meaning and purpose.


1. Doctrine


The understandable statements of some Episcopal Conferences regarding the document Fiducia supplicans have the value of highlighting the need for a more extended period of pastoral reflection. What is expressed by these Episcopal Conferences cannot be interpreted as doctrinal opposition, because the document is clear and definitive about marriage and sexuality. There are several indisputable phrases in the Declaration that leave this in no doubt:


«This Declaration remains firm on the traditional doctrine of the Church about marriage, not allowing any type of liturgical rite or blessing similar to a liturgical rite that can create confusion». One acts in these situations of couples in irregular situations «without officially validating their status or changing in any way the Church’s perennial teaching on marriage» (Presentation).


«Therefore, rites and prayers that could create confusion between what constitutes marriage – which is the “exclusive, stable, and indissoluble union between a man and a woman, naturally open to the generation of children” – and what contradicts it are inadmissible. This conviction is grounded in the perennial Catholic doctrine of marriage; it is only in this context that sexual relations find their natural, proper, and fully human meaning. The Church’s doctrine on this point remains firm» (4).


«Such is also the meaning of the Responsum of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, which states that the Church does not have the power to impart blessings on unions of persons of the same sex» (5).


«For this reason, since the Church has always considered only those sexual relations that are lived out within marriage to be morally licit, the Church does not have the power to confer its liturgical blessing when that would somehow offer a form of moral legitimacy to a union that presumes to be a marriage or to an extra-marital sexual practice» (11).


Evidently, there is no room to distance ourselves doctrinally from this Declaration or to consider it heretical, contrary to the Tradition of the Church or blasphemous.



2. Practical reception


Some Bishops, however, express themselves in particular regarding a practical aspect: the possible blessings of couples in irregular situations. The Declaration contains a proposal for short and simple pastoral blessings (neither liturgical nor ritualised) of couples in irregular situations (but not of their unions), underlining that these are blessings without a liturgical format which neither approve nor justify the situation in which these people find themselves.


Documents of the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith such as Fiducia supplicans, in their practical aspects, may require more or less time for their application depending on local contexts and the discernment of each diocesan Bishop with his Diocese. In some places no difficulties arise for their immediate application, while in others it will be necessary not to introduce them, while taking the time necessary for reading and interpretation.


Some Bishops, for example, have established that each priest must carry out the work of discernment and that he may, however, perform these blessings only in private. None of this is problematic if it is expressed with due respect for a text signed and approved by the Supreme Pontiff himself, while attempting in some way to accommodate the reflection contained in it.


Each local Bishop, by virtue of his own ministry, always has the power of discernment in loco, that is, in that concrete place that he knows better than others precisely because it is his own flock. Prudence and attention to the ecclesial context and to the local culture could allow for different methods of application, but not a total or definitive denial of this path that is proposed to priests.


3. The delicate situation of some countries


The cases of some Episcopal Conferences must be understood in their contexts. In several countries there are strong cultural and even legal issues that require time and pastoral strategies that go beyond the short term.


If there are laws that condemn the mere act of declaring oneself as a homosexual with prison and in some cases with torture and even death, it goes without saying that a blessing would be imprudent. It is clear that the Bishops do not wish to expose homosexual persons to violence. It remains vital that these Episcopal Conferences do not support a doctrine different from that of the Declaration signed by the Pope, given that it is perennial doctrine, but rather that they recommend the need for study and discernment so as to act with pastoral prudence in such a context.


In truth, there are not a few countries that, to varying degrees, condemn, prohibit and criminalize homosexuality. In these cases, apart from the question of blessings, there exists a great and wide-ranging pastoral responsibility that includes training, the defense of human dignity, the teaching of the Social Doctrine of the Church and various strategies that do not admit of a rushed response.



4. The real novelty of the document


The real novelty of this Declaration, the one that requires a generous effort of reception and from which no one should declare themselves excluded, is not the possibility of blessing couples in irregular situations. It is the invitation to distinguish between two different forms of blessings: “liturgical or ritualized” and “spontaneous or pastoral”. The Presentation clearly explains that «the value of this document […] is that it offers a specific and innovative contribution to the pastoral meaning of blessings, permitting a broadening and enrichment of the classical understanding of blessings, which is closely linked to a liturgical perspective». This «theological reflection, based on the pastoral vision of Pope Francis, implies a real development from what has been said about blessings in the Magisterium and the official texts of the Church».


In the background is found the positive evaluation of “popular pastoral care” which appears in many of the Holy Father’s texts. In this context, the Holy Father invites us to value the simple faith of the People of God who, even in the midst of their sins, emerge from their everyday lives and open their hearts to ask for God’s help.


For this reason, rather than the blessing of couples in irregular unions, the text of the Dicastery has adopted the other profile of a “Declaration”, which is much more than a responsum or a letter. The central theme, which invites us especially to a deeper pastoral practice which enriches our pastoral praxis, is to have a broader understanding of blessings and of the proposal that these pastoral blessings, which do not require the same conditions as blessings in a liturgical or ritual context, flourish. Consequently, leaving polemics aside, the text requires an effort to reflect serenely, with the heart of shepherds, free from all ideology.


Although some Bishops consider it prudent not to impart these blessings for the moment, we all need to grow equally in the conviction that: non-ritualized blessings are not a consecration of the person nor of the couple who receives them, they are not a justification of all their actions, and they are not an endorsement of the life that they lead. When the Pope asked us to grow in a broader understanding of pastoral blessings, he proposed that we think of a way of blessing that does not require the placing of so many conditions to carry out this simple gesture of pastoral closeness, which is a means of promoting openness to God in the midst of the most diverse circumstances.


5. How do these “pastoral blessings” present themselves in concrete terms?


To be clearly distinguished from liturgical or ritualized blessings, “pastoral blessings” must above all be very short (see n. 38). These are blessings lasting a few seconds, without an approved ritual and without a book of blessings. If two people approach together to seek the blessing, one simply asks the Lord for peace, health and other good things for these two people who request it. At the same time, one asks that they may live the Gospel of Christ in full fidelity and so that the Holy Spirit can free these two people from everything that does not correspond to his divine will and from everything that requires purification.


This non-ritualized form of blessing, with the simplicity and brevity of its form, does not intend to justify anything that is not morally acceptable. Obviously it is not a marriage, but equally it is not an “approval” or ratification of anything either. It is solely the response of a pastor towards two persons who ask for God’s help. Therefore, in this case, the pastor does not impose conditions and does not enquire about the intimate lives of these people.


Since some have raised the question of what these blessings might look like, let us look at a concrete example: let us imagine that among a large number making a pilgrimage a couple of divorced people, now in a new union, say to the priest: “Please give us a blessing, we cannot find work, he is very ill, we do not have a home and life is becoming very difficult: may God help us!”.


In this case, the priest can recite a simple prayer like this: “Lord, look at these children of yours, grant them health, work, peace and mutual help. Free them from everything that contradicts your Gospel and allow them to live according to your will. Amen”. Then it concludes with the sign of the cross on each of the two persons.


We are talking about something that lasts about 10 or 15 seconds. Does it make sense to deny these kinds of blessings to these two people who ask for them? Is it not more appropriate to support their faith, whether it be small or great, to assist them in their weaknesses with a divine blessing, and to channel that openness to transcendence which could lead them to be more faithful to the Gospel?


In order to avoid any doubt, the Declaration adds that, when the blessing is requested by a couple in an irregular situation, «even though it is expressed outside the rites prescribed by the liturgical books, this blessing should never be imparted in concurrence with the ceremonies of a civil union, and not even in connection with them. Nor can it be performed with any clothing, gestures, or words that are proper to a wedding. The same applies when the blessing is requested by a same-sex couple» (n. 39). It remains clear, therefore, that the blessing must not take place in a prominent place within a sacred building, or in front of an altar, as this also would create confusion.


For this reason, every Bishop in his Diocese is authorized by the Declaration Fiducia supplicans to make this type of simple blessing available, bearing in mind the need for prudence and care, but in no way is he authorized to propose or make blessings available that may resemble a liturgical rite.


6. Catechesis


In some places, perhaps, some catechesis will be necessary that can help everyone to understand that these types of blessings are not an endorsement of the life led by those who request them. Even less are they an absolution, as these gestures are far from being a sacrament or a rite. They are simple expressions of pastoral closeness that do not impose the same requirements as a sacrament or a formal rite. We will all have to become accustomed to accepting the fact that, if a priest gives this type of simple blessings, he is not a heretic, he is not ratifying anything nor is he denying Catholic doctrine.


We can help God’s People to discover that these kinds of blessings are just simple pastoral channels that help people give expression to their faith, even if they are great sinners. For this reason, in giving a blessing to two people who come together to ask for it spontaneously, we are not consecrating them nor are we congratulating them nor indeed are we approving that type of union. In reality the same happens when individuals are blessed, as the individual who asks for a blessing – not absolution – could be a great sinner, but this does not mean we deny him this paternal gesture in the midst of his struggle to survive.


If this is clarified as a result of good catechesis, we can free ourselves from the fear that these blessings of ours may express something inadequate. We can be freer and perhaps closer and more fruitful ministers, with a ministry that is full of gestures of fatherhood and hospitality, without fear of being misunderstood.


We ask the newly-born Lord to shower a generous and gracious blessing upon everyone so that we can live a holy and happy 2024.


Víctor Manuel Card. Fernández
Prefect


Mons. Armando Matteo
Secretary for the Doctrinal Section

Source: https://www.vaticannews.va/en/vatican-city/news/2024-01/dicastery-for-the-doctrine-of-the-faith-on-fiducia-supplicans.html



What do you think? Post your comments below. Remember to follow the rules for Disqus so your post can be posted.  



Source:

https://press.vatican.va/content/salastampa/it/bollettino/pubblico/2023/12/18/0901/01963.html#en

https://www.vaticannews.va/en/vatican-city/news/2023-12/fiducia-supplicans-doctrine-faith-blessing-irregular-couples.html

https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/256308/vatican-says-priests-can-bless-same-sex-couples-without-condoning-their-lifestyles

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/pope-francis-allows-priests-to-bless-same-sex-couples/ar-AA1lGhyK?ocid=socialshare&cvid=b1e1d7c2e2fe47fdb3f643c61fc03a8a&ei=23





Friday, June 30, 2023

SCOTUS Knocks Down LGBT Tyranny & Student Freebies

The Supreme Court is on a roll this week!  First, they knocked down Affirmative Action which is on its face racist and discriminatory, and now has affirmed the first amendment matters. The Court in a 6-3 decision ruled in favor of Lorie Smith, a Christian web designer who refused to create a website promoting so-called "same-sex marriage." She was of course sued on the pretense of discrimination. 

In the past, Christians became the target of gay couples who were seeking to make an example out of them when the odds were in their favor. Back then, more liberals controlled the court and legislated from the bench. They often decided in favor of the LGBTQIA community setting aside the text of the Constitution, particularly the First Amendment, in favor of inferences that made no legislative or rational sense when compared to the Constitution. 

Well, things are different now. The Court decided to protect the First Amendment rights of Christians and overall conscience rights. Immediately the left cried out "Second-class citizenship!" In other words, they feel the LGBTQIA community will not be seen as second-class citizens. Justice Sotomayor wrote in a dissent,

"Today, the Court, for the first time in its history, grants a business open to the public a constitutional right to refuse to serve members of a protected class. Specifically, the Court holds that the First Amendment exempts a website design company from a state law that prohibits the company from denying wedding websites to same-sex couples if the company chooses to sell those websites to the public. The Court also holds that the company has a right to post a notice that says, “‘no [wedding websites] will be sold if they will be used for gay marriages.’”

There is speculation that Sotomayor herself may be a lesbian due to her passionate responses whenever the other justices decide against the LGBTQIA community. What she and other leftists fail to realize is that one party cannot force another party to go against their beliefs whether religious or not. No one is being denied service. Cakes, pizzas, and websites can be made for the LGBTQIA community, but not ones with content that goes against the provider of the service. This should be common sense to anyone who has reasoning skills. For example, one cannot ask a Jewish caterer to create Nazi theme meals or a Muslim-run business to create something that contains pork. Not only is it disrespectful, but an affront to the person's conscience rights.

The Supreme Court also gave a huge blow to President Biden's Student Loan Forgiveness program which sort to erase all or most of the debt students have accrued during their studies in college. The plan was welcomed by many students who feel that student loans are like owing money to a Mafia loan shark. However, many others protested the idea believing it to be fiscally irresponsible and teaching students in college to be irresponsible. The reason they go to college is to earn a degree so as to get a better-paying job to pay for living expenses including debts and mortgages. Paying off their student debt with taxpayer money sends the message that they do not have to pay back debts. It creates an atmosphere of irresponsibility. Students can study on loans and then not pay them back while relying on the government to use taxpayer dollars to pay back loans. The idea sends the wrong message.  

What is next? Will people who owe rent or mortgages demand the government uses taxpayer dollars to bail them out?  Some may bring up the 2008 bailing of banks, but that situation was different. Banks are important in a capitalist society. They need to be up and running, not failing and collapsing. The bail money they were given was not free money either. They had to pay it back to the taxpayers. Paying student loans is way different. No one is paying taxpayers back if this plan took hold in the united states. This decision was also a great one.  President Biden is now assuring students in debt of a "plan b" approach in order to circumvent the Supreme Court's ruling. 

Are we starting to see the Supreme Court actually upholding the Constitution? It sure looks like it.  It looks like the majority of the justices are interpreting the Constitution as it is and not inferring on it what it does not state. We saw this with the Dobbs decision last year which knocked down Roe vs Wade. Roe vs Wade was decided on the premise that women had equality and the right to privacy. How does this even add up to abortion?  Where does abortion even fit in this?  It made no sense and had to be overturned.  Similarly, cases like Obergefell were decided on claims that equality exists and enumerated rights are granted, therefore same-sex couples can marry.  The Constitution does not even mention marriage or abortion!  

Hopefully, the Supreme Court of the United States continues on this path and will eventually overturn Obergefell restoring marriage as only being between one man and one woman.  Today's ruling ended "Pride Month" on a sour note for the LGBTQIA community.  

You can read the Court's opinions here:

21-476 303 Creative LLC v. Elenis (06/30/2023) (supremecourt.gov)

22-535 Department of Education v. Brown (06/30/2023) (supremecourt.gov)

22-506 Biden v. Nebraska (06/30/2023) (supremecourt.gov)


What do you think?  Post your comment below. Remember to follow the rules so your comment can be posted. 



Source:

Gay couple cited by Christian web designer who won Supreme Court case may not exist (yahoo.com)

Supreme Court Just Marked ‘Gays and Lesbians For Second-Class Status’ Declared Sotomayor In Scathing Dissent: ‘Profoundly Wrong’ (msn.com)

BREAKING: Supreme Court Rules In Favor Of Web Designer Who Refuses to Promote Gay Weddings (mediaite.com)

Supreme Court injustice: ‘legal innocence’ is not enough (msn.com)

'Embarrassing': Sotomayor slams SCOTUS decision that marks 'gays and lesbians for second-class status' (msn.com)

'Nuclear hypocrisy': Legal experts stunned by SCOTUS' 'weird' ruling in LGBTQ rights case (msn.com)

A Huge Win for the First Amendment (msn.com)

'Loaded gun': Expert suggests LGBTQ ruling paves way to return to 'Whites-only' luncheonettes (msn.com)

Biden unveils new student loan forgiveness plan after Supreme Court defeat (usatoday.com)

June 30, 2023 SCOTUS blocks Biden's student loan plan and limits LGBTQ protections (cnn.com)

What Will Happen to Your Student Loans Now - The New York Times (nytimes.com)

Roberts scolds liberal justices for demonizing rulings they don't like: 'Disturbing feature' of dissents (msn.com)

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/06/30/opinion/affirmative-action-supreme-court-repeal.html

Monday, June 12, 2023

'For We Are Many' - Legion & LGBTQI Pronoun Fixation

Within the last decades, a lot has changed. Gay Pride has been spreading like a virus around the world, especially in the media. We see the "rainbow" colors all over the place. On websites, social media, and even at the White House, State government buildings, schools, and some churches. If anyone dares criticize or comment against this, they are canceled, ostracized, banned from social media platforms, and in some cases, even arrested.  We even have some Catholics in the clergy and laity defend this movement to the point of watering down the Church's teachings rooted in Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition.  It is just a bizarre time to live in.  The question is, what is behind all of this?  

People using the pronouns "they, them, their" seems analogous with "We are Legion (Mark 5:9)." It makes no sense to use these words to identify one individual.  Are we seeing demonic activity manifesting in social engineering?  A religious sister on Twitter was recently attacked by a Franciscan priest who teaches at St. Bonaventure University over comments making this connection with the pronoun use and Legion of the Gospels. This, again is so absurd. It feels like one is in the Twilight Zone program where reality seems to alter itself as one is living it.  

I am sure anyone who may be gay or an "LGBTQI ally" and is reading this will automatically label this post as "homophobic." This take is also absurd and a huge problem. Criticism is not hate. If something is immune from criticism, then it is a dictatorship that often pretends to have invincibility and later falls down hard. This post is not meant to be hateful, but to provide critical thinking to the phenomenon going on in regards to "pronouns."  As a Christian, I cannot help but see the correlation between Mark 5:9 and the insistence on using absurd pronouns in today's age. I am not stating that members of the gay community are demons or of the devil. What I am stating is that there may be a demonic influence behind it. Ephesians 6:12 reads, "For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms."  In other words, we Christians are not at war with our fellow brothers and sisters who may not share our faith or may not share it completely. We are at war with the spiritual forces of evil and the powers of this dark world, as Ephesians describes them.  

Those who know a bit about exorcisms know that there are different ways in which the devil or demons attack humans. Most are familiar with demonic possession when a demon or group of demons take over a human body and mind causing it to behave strangely and manifest superhuman traits. Then there are the less familiar terms of demonic obsession and oppression.  Demonic obsession is when the devil or demons literally are obsessed with an individual. They harass the person and even inflict misfortunes on them. Finally, there is demonic oppression which has some commonality with obsession but focuses more on the spiritual well-being of the person. In demonic oppression, the individual becomes to get weighed down by demonic attacks which are sometimes subtle. When the individual falls into temptation and sin, the demon(s) jump on this moment and begin to make the individual's life difficult. The individual is tempted and harassed so greatly that he or she beings to suffer spiritually, psychologically, emotionally, and even physically.  This will eventually lead to doubting, indifference towards religious convictions, acedia, and other ills. It is like a deep spiritual depression where one becomes hopeless, feels alone, and starts doubting everyone including themselves just like in the case of psychological depression which may lead to suicide.  

Agnosticism and Atheism are forms of demonic oppression. Remember, if you reject God then you open yourself to His opponent de facto. One does not need to invite satan and his demons in via word, thought, or action. Just by rejecting God and/or sinning without care, one is inviting the enemy in. Similarly, if one is living in the sin of homosexuality without concern for it as if it were nothing serious, one is inviting in demonic forces that one truly cannot comprehend because they are in the spiritual realm. This is why we see a large amount of the LGBTQI population suffering from mental illnesses and even committing suicide. Some may blame religion or religious proselytism for this, but there is no correlation. People many times complain that the government is oppressing them, but we do not see a lot of suicides because of this. Similarly, there are other things that people feel weigh heavily on them, but we do not see high numbers of mental illness or suicide among these groups. Homosexuality is distinct in this regard.  

This is why we must look into the obsession with absurd pronoun use. The demand to use strange pronouns causes confusion which is a sign of the devil who is a liar and caused confusion on day one with Adam and Eve. The demand to use strange pronouns means to convey plurality in order to represent one individual is a sign of "Legion" who was "many" in the one. It erases the sense one personhood and turns the individual into a plurality of expressions or manifestations.  To describe oneself as "they" or "them" or even "Us" or "zir" is to attempt to depart from the physical realm where our ontology only manifests in a singular and constant form. Only the spiritual realm is free of physicality and physics. Those who are not wise and who are blind to the spiritual world see this abuse of pronouns as nothing serious. It is just someone "living their truth" or "their expression." However, those of us who have the grace to see beyond the physical can see there is indeed something spiritual behind this and it is not good (2 Timothy 2:26, Ephesians 2:2).  

Again, this post is not meant to attack the LGBTQI people but to critically think about what is influencing it. We are all being attacked and influenced by the devil. The LGBTQI community cannot be singled out. However, they are the ones currently pushing their propaganda aggressively on all of us, so it begs the question of why and why this phenomenon is so powerful. Not even Nazism was able to convince so many of its ideology. The Catholic Church herself was once the superpower of the Western world and even she did not have such influence and control over the masses. So how can a minority of people with a simple "rainbow" flag have so much influence and power over the masses?  

Is it money? Is it a pity for those who have been targets of hate and abuse over the centuries?  Is it an attempt to be allied with this minority group?  In light of the many other groups who have more money and have had established power but were not able to reach the amount of control as the LGBTQI have, we can truly suspect that the power behind this agenda is demonic. Remember, Scripture and Jesus Himself have referred to satan as being the "ruler of this word" or "god of this age." (John 12:31; 14:30; 16:11, 2 Corinthians 4:4, Colossians 1:13).  That being stated, things in this world are influenced directly by the devil and demons.  We can assume that the influence, power, and extreme protection that homosexuality has gotten from the world is directly from satan himself because he is the ruler of this world and has great influence over it.  Many people do not even notice that the Pride flag has six colors, a number often attributed to the antichrist. We who studied physics know that the rainbow has seven colors, a number associated with God. 

This is why we must minister to homosexual persons with love, the hard truth and grace. There is no place for homophobia or hate in Christianity and evangelization. Some Protestant denominations force conversion therapy on their homosexual parishioners, however, we as Catholics must let God's grace do the conversion. We all need conversion, not just homosexuals. All of us sin, not just homosexuals. We are all targets of satan. This evil and proud creature hates us and is envious of us (Wisdom 2:24).  We must remember that this creature is the target, not homosexuals or one another. He is our enemy, not homosexuals or any other person who may not share our faith.   


What are your thoughts on this?  Post them below on Disqus. Remember to follow the rules of engagement for your comment to be permitted on this post.  



Saturday, June 3, 2023

Forget Puerto Ricans, Pride is Better...

June Spotlight – Is the Media Overlooking Puerto Ricans in Favor of Pride Month?

Every June, the media landscape transforms into a vibrant celebration of Pride Month, a time dedicated to honoring the LGBTQ+ community’s fight for equality and visibility. Rainbow flags, parades, and stories of queer resilience dominate headlines, social media feeds, and corporate campaigns. However, this intense focus often overshadows another significant cultural event in June: the National Puerto Rican Day Parade and the broader recognition of Puerto Rican heritage. Some argue that this imbalance reflects a broader attempt to sideline Puerto Rican stories, effectively diminishing their cultural presence in favor of Pride Month’s global momentum. Let’s explore this dynamic, the media’s role, and what it means for both communities.
The Media’s June Obsession: Pride Month Takes Center Stage
June has become synonymous with Pride Month, a global movement that commemorates the 1969 Stonewall Riots and advocates for LGBTQ+ rights. The media’s coverage of Pride is extensive, and for good reason—it’s a time to celebrate progress, highlight ongoing struggles, and amplify marginalized voices within the queer community. In recent years, major outlets like NPR and The Washington Post have dedicated significant resources to Pride, covering everything from parade updates to the political and social challenges faced by LGBTQ+ individuals. Corporate brands, too, jump on the bandwagon, with companies like Target and Bud Light historically rolling out Pride-themed merchandise, though not without controversy, as seen in 2023 when Target pulled some LGBTQ+ items after backlash.
In Puerto Rico, Pride Month is a major event, with the island hosting multiple celebrations, including the San Juan Pride Parade, which draws thousands to the streets of Condado. The parade, which began in 1990 as a response to the AIDS epidemic and police persecution, has grown into a powerful symbol of resistance and joy, often culminating at Parque del Tercer Milenio with performances and rallies. Other events, like Boquerón Pride in Cabo Rojo and Rincón Pride, further cement Puerto Rico’s status as the “LGBTQIA capital of the Caribbean,” as noted by travel platforms like misterb&b. The media, both local and international, often highlights these events, framing Puerto Rico as a progressive haven for queer travelers and residents.
However, this focus on Pride can sometimes eclipse other cultural narratives, particularly those tied to Puerto Rican identity. The National Puerto Rican Day Parade, held annually on the second Sunday of June along Fifth Avenue in New York City, is one of the largest demonstrations of ethnic pride in the U.S., attracting nearly four million spectators by 2007. It celebrates the 3.2 million inhabitants of Puerto Rico and the millions of Puerto Ricans living on the mainland, showcasing their contributions to culture, politics, and society. Yet, despite its scale and significance, the parade often receives less consistent media attention compared to Pride events, especially in years when controversies or major Pride milestones dominate the news cycle.
Puerto Rican Stories: A Struggle for Visibility
The media’s coverage of Puerto Rican issues in June often feels sporadic, tied to moments of crisis rather than sustained cultural celebration. As noted in a 2020 panel discussion hosted by the Craig Newmark Graduate School of Journalism at CUNY, mainstream U.S. media tends to focus on Puerto Rico “only when natural disaster strikes or when there is a massive protest.” This was evident during Hurricane Maria in 2017 and the 2019 protests that led to Governor Ricardo Rosselló’s resignation, where outlets like NBC News and the Washington Post provided in-depth reporting. However, the panel highlighted a lack of attention to “slow-building, quiet emergencies,” such as the island’s ongoing mental health crisis or economic struggles, which are often overshadowed by more sensational stories.
In June, this pattern becomes even more pronounced. While Pride Month garners widespread, celebratory coverage, the National Puerto Rican Day Parade and other Puerto Rican cultural events often struggle to break through the noise. For instance, in 2017, the parade faced significant media scrutiny—not for its cultural significance, but for its controversial decision to honor Oscar López Rivera, a figure seen by some as a freedom fighter and by others as a terrorist. Sponsors like Goya Foods and JetBlue pulled out, and the story dominated headlines, overshadowing the parade’s broader message of Puerto Rican pride and unity. Similarly, in 2010, the parade’s selection of telenovela actor Osvaldo Ríos as “International Godfather” sparked backlash due to his past domestic violence conviction, leading to withdrawals by figures like U.S. Representative Luis Gutierrez and corporate sponsors like Verizon. These controversies, while newsworthy, often frame Puerto Rican events in a negative light, rather than celebrating the community’s achievements.
Meanwhile, Pride Month’s coverage tends to be more uniformly positive, focusing on joy, resilience, and progress. In Puerto Rico, the intersection of Pride and Puerto Rican identity is significant—LGBTQ+ Puerto Ricans have been at the forefront of activism, from the first Pride march in 1990 to the fight against hate crimes, which remain a pressing issue. The island has the highest hate crime rate in the U.S., with six of the 44 transgender and gender non-conforming people killed in the U.S. in 2020 being Puerto Rican, according to the Washington Blade. Yet, even this intersection often gets framed through the lens of Pride, rather than as a broader Puerto Rican story. The media’s focus on Pride can inadvertently marginalize other aspects of Puerto Rican identity, creating a narrative where one community’s visibility comes at the expense of another’s.
An Attempt to Forget Puerto Ricans?
Some critics argue that the media’s disproportionate focus on Pride Month reflects a broader attempt to “forget” Puerto Ricans, prioritizing a global, mainstream movement over a specific ethnic group’s cultural narrative. This perspective is rooted in the historical marginalization of Puerto Ricans within the U.S. As a colonial territory, Puerto Rico’s relationship with the mainland is fraught with systemic inequities, from economic exploitation to political disenfranchisement. Carla Minet, executive director of the San Juan-based Center of Investigative Journalism, noted during the CUNY panel that U.S. journalists often “try to go around and ignore” the colonial relationship, which shapes every story about the island. This avoidance can lead to superficial coverage that fails to capture the depth of Puerto Rican experiences, especially during a month when cultural pride should be front and center.
The media’s framing of Puerto Rican stories also reveals a linguistic and cultural disconnect. Minet pointed out that U.S.-based publications rarely use the term “colony” to describe Puerto Rico, despite its common usage among Puerto Ricans, because the word isn’t part of the mainland’s everyday vocabulary. Similarly, journalists often misuse terms like “emigrate” to describe Puerto Ricans moving to the mainland, ignoring their status as U.S. citizens. These missteps reflect a broader lack of cultural fluency, which can make Puerto Rican stories feel less accessible or relatable to a mainstream audience—potentially contributing to their underrepresentation in June’s media landscape.
In contrast, Pride Month’s narrative is more universally understood and marketable. The rainbow flag, the history of Stonewall, and the fight for marriage equality are familiar touchstones that resonate globally, making Pride an easier story for media outlets to tell and for corporations to monetize. This accessibility can lead to a kind of cultural erasure, where Puerto Rican voices are drowned out by the louder, more commercially viable Pride narrative. For Puerto Ricans, this can feel like a deliberate attempt to sideline their identity, especially in a month that should also be theirs to claim.
A Call for Balance: Celebrating Both Identities
The tension between Pride Month and Puerto Rican cultural events in June doesn’t have to be a zero-sum game. Both celebrations are vital, and both communities deserve visibility. LGBTQ+ Puerto Ricans, in particular, embody the intersection of these identities, showing how they can coexist and even amplify each other. Figures like Pedro Peters Maldonado, the first openly gay politician elected in Puerto Rico in 2012, and activists like Silvia Rivera, a Puerto Rican trans woman who played a key role in the Stonewall Riots, highlight the deep ties between Puerto Rican and queer histories.
The media can play a crucial role in bridging this gap by adopting a more balanced approach. Instead of focusing solely on Pride parades or Puerto Rican controversies, outlets could explore stories that weave both narratives together—like the role of LGBTQ+ Puerto Ricans in the National Puerto Rican Day Parade, or how Pride events in San Juan incorporate Puerto Rican cultural elements, such as bomba y plena music and traditional foods like guava and cheese combos. Highlighting these intersections would not only give Puerto Ricans their due in June but also enrich the Pride narrative by showcasing its diversity.
Moreover, journalists need to move beyond crisis-driven coverage of Puerto Rico. The island’s cultural contributions—its music, art, cuisine, and resilience—deserve to be celebrated year-round, but especially in June, when Puerto Rican pride is on full display. By providing context and history, as Minet suggested, reporters can create more nuanced stories that resonate with both Puerto Rican and non-Puerto Rican audiences. This might mean dedicating airtime to the National Puerto Rican Day Parade’s history, its impact on the diaspora, and its role in empowering the community, rather than only covering it when controversy strikes.
Conclusion: A Shared Spotlight
The media’s focus on Pride Month in June is understandable—it’s a global movement with a clear, compelling narrative that resonates widely. But this focus shouldn’t come at the expense of Puerto Rican stories, which are equally deserving of attention. The National Puerto Rican Day Parade and the broader celebration of Puerto Rican heritage are not just events; they’re affirmations of identity, resilience, and cultural pride for millions of people. By overshadowing these stories, the media risks perpetuating a form of cultural erasure, making it seem as though Puerto Rican voices matter less than those of the LGBTQ+ community.
A more equitable approach is possible—one that celebrates both Pride Month and Puerto Rican heritage, recognizing their shared values of resistance, community, and joy. For Puerto Ricans, especially those who are also part of the LGBTQ+ community, June should be a time to shine in all their complexity. It’s up to the media to ensure that no one’s light is dimmed in the process.

Sacerdotus TV LIveStream

Labels

Catholic Church (1552) Jesus (721) God (704) Bible (594) Atheism (389) Jesus Christ (378) Pope Francis (342) Liturgy of the Word (310) Atheist (270) Apologetics (250) Science (231) Christianity (197) LGBT (148) Theology (141) Liturgy (134) Blessed Virgin Mary (119) Abortion (97) Gay (95) Prayer (94) Pope Benedict XVI (91) Philosophy (89) Rosa Rubicondior (82) Traditionalists (78) Vatican (74) Psychology (72) Physics (70) Christmas (64) Holy Eucharist (61) Christian (59) New York City (59) President Obama (59) Protestant (52) Vatican II (49) Health (47) Politics (46) Biology (45) Women (44) Gospel (40) Racism (40) Supreme Court (35) Baseball (34) Illegal Immigrants (32) Pope John Paul II (32) NYPD (31) Death (30) priests (30) Astrophysics (27) Jewish (27) Priesthood (27) Religious Freedom (27) Space (27) Eucharist (26) Morality (26) Donald Trump (24) Evangelization (24) Christ (22) Evil (22) First Amendment (21) Pro Abortion (19) Child Abuse (17) Divine Mercy (17) Marriage (17) Pedophilia (17) Pro Choice (17) Easter Sunday (16) Holy Trinity (16) Police (16) Autism (14) Gender Theory (14) Pentecostals (14) Sacraments (14) Angels (13) Poverty (13) Blog (12) Cognitive Psychology (12) Muslims (12) September 11 (12) CUNY (11) Hispanics (11) Pope Paul VI (11) academia (11) Evidence (9) Hell (9) Massimo Pigliucci (9) Personhood (9) Podcast (9) Barack Obama (8) Big Bang Theory (8) Evangelicals (8) Human Rights (8) Humanism (8) Condoms (7) David Viviano (7) Eastern Orthodox (7) Ellif_dwulfe (7) NY Yankees (7) Spiritual Life (7) Encyclical (6) Gender Dysphoria Disorder (6) Babies (5) Baby Jesus (5) Catholic Bloggers (5) Cyber Bullying (5) Donations (5) Pope Pius XII (5) The Walking Dead (5) Ephebophilia (4) Plenary Indulgence (4) Pluto (4) Pope John XXIII (4) Death penalty (3) Founding Fathers (3) Dan Arel (2) Freeatheism (2) Oxfam (2) Penn Jillette (2) Pew Research Center (2) Cursillo (1) Dan Savage (1) Divine Providence (1) Fear The Walking Dead (1) Pentecostales (1)