Punditry

WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. – Perhaps you think you’ve seen everything. Alas, no. Apparently the new trend is people marrying … themselves!

We wrote jokingly a few weeks ago that Canada was being narrow-minded for limiting marriage to two people. Unfair to bigamists, doncha know. Also unfair, it turns out, to those who really, really, really like themselves.

The local Palm Beach Post, in a lengthy article dominating the front of the features section, gushes that one Jeannie Macaluso is marrying herself.

She has a wedding gown, bridesmaids, 50 guests, two showers and all the trappings except a groom. The only other thing missing is her father; she’s tearful that he’ll have nothing to do with her “wedding.”
[Full Story]

It does simplify things. No need to worry about if you are going to take your spouses last name. You already know all your bad habits unless you were fooling yourself when dating yourself. You always know when your spouse is lying. You can only cheat on yourself if you develop a multiple personality disorder. Of course since you were cohabitating or living in sin with yourself before marriage your chance of a loving relationship with yourself diminishes; you will have a tendency to take yourself for granted. Of course when you grow tired and disillusioned of yourself you might have a hard time pleading irreconcilable differences when you want to divorce yourself.

I have read more tortured scripture exegesis in articles in the last couple of weeks than I have seen before. There are very few Doctors of the Church, but there is a large amount of self-appointed Spin Doctors of the Church. Any passage that disagrees with their agenda assumes a Matrix like quality where the plain words and context are not the reality and there is a secret hidden meaning hidden way below. Any passage that seems to agree with their agenda on a surface and secular level needs no further examination, such as passages on judging.

Traditionally we have read the Bible employing the four senses of scripture: literal, allegorical, tropological and anagogical. Modern exegetes seem to have come up with a new sense or more correctly nonsense of scripture. I call this the Contradictory Ridiculous And Progressive (CRAP) sense. No matter what the other four senses point to this new sense will have the opposite meaning. This sense is used whenever the interpretation using the other four senses disagrees with your deeply held convictions.

One of the examples being bantered about is that a behavior can be totally accepted despite the previous understanding of Christian teaching. The argument is that Jesus surrounded himself with marginalized groups of people who were disparaged by others. That Jesus totally accepted and loved these people where they were at in a totally non-judgmental manner. So if a group is marginalized than immediately that equates to acceptance by Jesus. I doubt though that they would see groups that are properly marginalized like racists as meeting this condition. I guess you have to be politically correctly marginalized.

Jesus did surround himself with Tax Collectors, prostitutes, lepers, the sick, Shepard’s, fisherman, and many others who were looked down on in society. The main thing these people had in common was not that they were looked down upon and thus acceptable to Jesus, but because they were repentant or open to repentance.

There must also be a liberal Scripture attention deficit disorder (SADD) where only the first parts of a parable are read and not the conclusion. You will hear the story of the woman caught in adultery and almost never the conclusion “go and sin no more.” He did not say “I affirm you in your inclusive marriage arrangement.” The man who had been ill for thirty-eight years wanted to be healed and he was. Jesus then said “See, you are well! Sin no more, that nothing worse befall you.”

The diminutive tax collector Zacchaeus when moved to repentance by Jesus’ invitation said “Behold, Lord, the half of my goods I give to the poor; and if I have defrauded any one of anything, I restore it fourfold.” The prodigal son renounced his debauchery before returning to his fathers house. Peter after witnessing the miraculous catch said “Depart from me, for I am a sinful man, O Lord” and later after denouncing that he knew Jesus, he wept.

Jesus was not just there for the marginalized but worked with Nicodemus a ruler of the Jews, a Centurion, and a rich young man who desired (but not completely) to grow closer to the lord. They did not become disciples since they were not quite ready to give up worldly allures to join him.

Yes Jesus loves us “where we are at” but also desires that we continuously draw closer to him. We separate ourselves from him and this deeper relationship through our sins. We must continuously repent and draw closer to him to grow in truth and the spiritual life. The problems with tolerance and acceptance is that it is in no way charitable when a person is doing acts that are objectively sinful. If your child is laying on the train tracks with a train fast approaching you don’t just love him “where he is at” but shout a warning about the upcoming danger. Too many people are being run over spiritually by a false sense of compassion.

Shameless Mark Shea plug ahead: If you want to know more about the real four senses of scripture I highly recommend Mark’s Making Senses Out of Scripture.

This has got to be the strangest illustration I have seen in an article on Christianity and Homosexuality.

It has the typical explanations why the Bible does not really mean what it says but it is all due to cultural differences and an attempt to attack pagan customs.

It also include this:

Those who support the orthodox argument against not only the ordination of gays but homosexual practice itself look to both the scriptures and natural law.

Father John Fleming of Adelaide, an Anglican vicar-turned-Catholic priest, says the church’s opposition to homosexual behaviour, while understanding homosexual inclination, is simple: it undermines the essential purpose of sex, which is to procreate. Not every sexual act must lead to procreation, he says, but it must not prevent it, either.

He quotes Anglican bishop Charles Gore, who, after the 1930 Lambeth conference of Anglican leaders that approved the use of artificial contraception, concluded that if the church allowed sexual intercourse without the possibility of procreation, it could also support homosexuality.

After the approval of contraception it was never a matter of if the Anglicans would accept homosexuality, but when. Other Protestant Churches who are unhappy with the decision don’t realize that their own foundation has been weakened by endorsing contraception.

On the website iconbusters.com I see that they found my old blog
and published a post I did previously under the heading:

They must not get enough hate mail if they had to go out and find what I had to say about them

I was reflecting on the different news stories in the last week on the increasing acceptance of homosexual acts and a parable from the Gospel of Luke. The parable of the dishonest steward ends with these words from Jesus:

The master commended the dishonest steward for his shrewdness; for the sons of this world are more shrewd in dealing with their own generation than the sons of light. –Luke 16:8

Over the last couple of decades self described gay activists have increasingly presented their cause to the public and have also successfully convinced more and more people that they are in the right. This small part of the population has been extremely victorious in advancing their agenda to the public.

They have done this by both saying they are mainstream and just like everyone else and at the same time parading down the street dressed as Nuns, in chains and leather, or nothing at all. To even question the morality of homosexual acts will have you branded as a homophobe and as a intellectual cave dweller.

As Christians we should be ashamed that we have not advanced the Gospel even a fraction as much during the same time. A majority of people here in the United States identify themselves as Christians, yet year by year our Culture is becoming less and less Christian. There are more Christian book stores now but less substantive books written by Christians in book stores. We live on the edge of society in a Christian ghetto afraid to challenge the culture around us. Activists are able to openly display any perversity, but we are afraid to even make the sign of the cross and say grace before meals in public. The geometrical shape of Pink Triangles has become prevalent in our schools, but if a teacher dares to wear the geometrical shape of a cross – people are offended.

We have shifted the tide a bit in the pro-life agenda but we still haven’t gotten a pro-life President and a majority pro-life congress to get rid of infanticide in the form of partial birth abortion. Bill Clinton in the opening weeks of his administration was able to put through a “Don’t ask, don’t tell” policy on the military.

We try to find Christian equivalents for the culture around us. At the beginning of my conversion I wanted to substitute the hard rock I was listening to with some kind of Christian equivalent. I guess I was looking for music that said on it’s label “Now with 98 percent less pagan and nihilistic influence.” You could go to Christian Music internet stores where you entered a name of a secular band and they would list the equivalents. We don’t want to be the leaven that rises up the whole loaf. We are instead the yeast that stays in it’s package kept comfortable at room temperature, lest not the moisture and wheat of the culture come in contact with us.

“Behold, I send you out as sheep in the midst of wolves; so be wise as serpents and innocent as doves.” –Matt 10:16

My Doctrine-O-Matic has spit out the following revised Bible passage for the Episcopalians.

Now a bishop must be above reproach, the husband of one wife and no more than one committed relationship with someone of the same sex, temperate, sensible, dignified, hospitable, an apt teacher. –1st Tim 3:2

Looking over the Voice of the Faithful� (VOTF) web site I am surprised not to see any statement on the current Episcopal conference. You would think that they would praise this clergy/lay conference as a model to imitate. This conference couldn’t be more democratic and inclusive and would seem to be the standard as to which they would aim. Now of course their decisions are extremely flawed and will continue that way in the future, but so what; they have a high clergy/faithful interaction and decision making process.

It is obvious why VOTF� would not praise this conference, yet at the same time they still don’t see the ultimate path of their own advocacy. They are like every group that proposes a failed ideology. They refuse to learn from history but are convinced that if given the chance that they would do it right.

Mulling over both John Kerry’s and Andrew Sullivan’s statements in reaction to the Vatican’s document on same sex marriages it just makes me want to understand why people who disagree with many Church teaching also have normally no problem identifying themselves with the Church.

If you start with the belief that homosexual acts are a good then you have a domino effect throughout Catholic Theology. If the teaching on homosexual unions is wrong then so also is the teaching that one of the primary purposes of marriage is reproduction. If sex with no biological possibility of reproduction is okay, then the church’s teachings on contraception, masterbation are also wrong. If reproduction is not necessary in a married act then reproduction can also licitly occur outside of it; thus the belief that reproductive technologies such as cloning and In Virtro Fertilization are wrong should also be discounted. It is really no surprise that those who believe in the starting principal have also historically been associated with dismissing the other Catholic doctrines that I have listed.

Believing in the validity of homosexual unions is an intellectual black hole on other Catholic doctrines. For a Church to teach such doctrines as truths and to guide the faithful into such errors would obviously not be guided by the Holy Spirit. Andrew Sullivan writes passionately about “Leaving the sacraments would be a huge blow to the soul”, but why should he believe that the Churches teaching on sacraments is true. If you can pick up the catechism and not be sure about which doctrines the Church teaches as true then the Gates of Hell have already prevailed on the Church since the time of the Apostles and Church Fathers.

Since I am a convert and did not grow up surrounded by any kind of Catholic culture it is harder for me to understand why those who were seem to know so little about the nature of the Church. Maybe that is not quite true, since I grew up in an extreme atheistic family and culture and later I started to believe in things contrary to that belief system. I did not immediately leave my atheistic beliefs when I started to believe otherwise, yet eventually I had to intellectually leave it. I came into the Church not because I was attracted to it’s rituals and appearance, but because I came to believe that the Church was true. Oh and least I forget – hat tip Holy Spirit.

If I came to believe that one of the items that the Church teaches is grave sin was wrong, I would be outta here. If the church as a whole does not have an infallible teaching authority then it is a headless mystical body rampaging the countryside teaching error. Thankfully I don’t believe that to be true and am confident that until the second coming that the Church will be teaching the same truth regardless of the and how modern people feel.

Andrew Sullivan also writes “the pope just called the love I have for my boyfriend “evil.” While that is strictly not what the document said, the problem is the subjectivity of his statement. Many married people have also talked about the love they had for another person in an adulterous situation. Both cases talk about strong emotional attachments to another person, but it is not love. Love as Thomas Aquinas stated is the willing of good towards another. Neither Homosexual acts or adultery are goods.

I have no desire for Mr. Kerry or Mr. Sullivan to leave the Church, only that they would truly understand what the true nature of the Church is and that they would fall into the arms of Holy Mother Church and her loving teaching authority.

On Saturday, June 28 Robert Francis Ray – known locally as simply Robert of the Paul Roberts Salon, one of Boca’s more upscale beauty salons – fulfilled a life long ambition and was ordained as a priest in the Order of Melchizedek by the Most Reverend Terry Gordon Villaire, presiding Bishop of the National Catholic Church in North America. Fr. Robert is now a priest of G-d for the people of G-d. Fr. Robert is also the Community Servant of the Province of the Apostolic Society of Franciscan Communities.
The Reverend Robert Francis Ray, SFI, or Father Robert as he is now entitled to be called, was born in 1953 in Monrovia, California and completed his theological studies at the Sanctus Theological Institute in California. Fr. Robert’s seminary degree is a Licentiate in Sacred Theology. Fr. Robert also holds a number of other secular degrees.

As a priest he will serve G-d’s people with extra emphasis on the disenfranchised, unwelcome and those that feel separated from a faith community.

His many clients will be relieved to know that he will not give up his Present calling but will fulfill his priestly duties in his time off from the salon.
[Full Story]

Wouldn’t a beauty salon owner becoming a priest in the National Catholic Church be a hairesy? It’s no surprise that working around split ends would make you tend towards a schismatic church. Now I usually don’t attack beauty salon owners. My attitude is “live and let dye.”

Looking through all the different headlines on the Church’s new document.

Vatican fights gay marriages

Vatican orders lawmakers to oppose same-sex marriage

Vatican issues edict against gay marriage

Vatican launches drive against gay marriage laws

Vatican battle cry: Fight gay marriages

Catholicism’s latest awful hypocrisy

POPE AND BUSH ATTACK GAY MARRIAGES

Pope’s Assault on Gay Unions

Harsh Reaction to Vatican Salvo

Impact of Vatican Attack Uncertain

Vatican tells lawmakers to prohibit gay marriage

The language used like assault, battle, attack, launch would make you think that the Vatican Army, Airforce, and Navy were about to start a major invasion against the secular culture. That the Swiss Guard were suited up at MOP level four and being dropped into the secular combat zones.

The words like order, demand, tell to describe the document in relation to Catholic politicians is also telling and mistaken. The truth is more inline with the saying “The Church proposes, not imposes.”

These headlines are the same type of headlines we always see every time the Vatican/Pope affirm Catholic teaching.

Breaking News.. The Catholic Church is still Catholic. In other news 2+2 still equals 4.

This attitude is really no surprise. If you believe that the Catholic Church is just a human institution guided only by the whims of it’s modern day hierarchy then it really is a surprise that it’s teachings don’t change in relation to the society. Society should be shocked and amazed that not only has the Church existed for 2000 years but that it has retained it’s constant teaching. Yes are understanding of truth and theology has grown but it has never taken a U-turn. To admit that the Catholic Church’s teaching will never change is to admit too much for people outside of the Church (and unfortunately also for some in it).

One of the main arguments I have read is because of the sexual abuse scandal that the Church has no right to speak out on this topic. So since there are also some in the secular gay community who have abused others I guess they also have no right to criticize the Vatican or to speak out for gay unions. It is ironic that the abuse scandal that has mainly consisted of homosexual acts would be used to silence the Church on this topic.