Cosmos-Liturgy-Sex

“all people are members of one and the same family” Pope Benedict XVI Jan 1st, 2006

“Primetime” video reveals trail of clues in the mystery of a possible female Pope.

According to ABC’S search for “Pope Joan“.

“Ninety percent of me thinks there was a Pope Joan,” says Mary Malone, a former nun who wrote a history of women and Christianity (remind me never to get that book). She also reports”Popes killed each other off, hammered each other to death,” “There were 12-year-old popes and we have knowledge of a 5-year-old archbishop. It was a very odd time in history.”

The more the article goes on, the more evident the interviewed characters are victims of wishful, feminist delusions. I could go on and on and on, etc… but it would be the same ol’ garbage. Whats that old saying?..keep throwing mud at a wall, and eventually enough will stick.

“Pope Joan won her election as pope under the name John in 855 (some say 1100). After reigning less than three years, she bore a child during a papal procession and died immediately, either from childbirth or stoning.”

Although this is a myth and has been disproved by historians, this scandalous legend is reborn again, but its relevance has been renewed by the clamor for women’s ordination and contemporary enthusiasm for gender-bending.  Joan even found her way into the tarot as the popess trump, thanks to the example of the Gugliemites, an Italian sect suppressed in 1300 that worshiped a female incarnation of the Holy Spirit led by a popess and cardinalettes. To no one’s surprise, Pope Joan.com claims a MAJOR movie is forthcoming . Maybe if they hurry, they could have an old fashioned double feature with the daaah Vinci hoax .

Amy is still pumped today, about the HuffPo thread from yesterday and started up a new one, same issue, today. Today’s specific focus was the uniformed presumption that the buffoons on the HuffPo thread were making that the Church was anti-science (modern sense of the term). She then provided a litany of evidence that the Church embraces science and dared anyone to say otherwise in the face of the evidence. Well, that is where Ian rushes in ahead of the Angels I am afraid. Well, poor Ian got piled on to with this one, 80 posts strong and still going, and as far as I can tell he was hammered on almost all of them. Ole Ian did not give up though. He is still holding onto his off base assertions. I provided my own thoughts over there for those who might want to take a look, but here I would like to mention something that Marco intuited from Ian’s musings.

Marco found that Ian seemed to embrace a very unhealthy enthusiasm for the good of “science” to the public welfare. I for one am not ready to give up my heated waterbed but still, there are cautions about our interaction with technological advances that have to be considered. Marco does a good job of pointing them out. There is an article in Reuters today that seems to bear out some of the negative ramifications that an unreflective assimilation of technological advances can have on a society. It seems that in our advanced society in the U.S., where even the poorest among us are well off by much of the world’s standards, almost 10% of teenagers suffer from major depression. O.k., I cannot prove that it is directly related to the affects of technological advances on society. In fact, I would guess it has a lot to do with what is happening to the family. However, we can show that much of the dissolution of the nuclear family does have an indirect correlation to unreflective embracing of technology. Any way, it does show that it takes more than a highly technologically advanced society to make people happy. When we try to fill up the emptiness with material things, our momentary satiation in inevitably replaced with an even greater barrenness. What’s the answer? St. Augustine said it: “Our hearts are restless until they rest in Thee, O’ Lord.”

Well, I’m off to Dayton for the weekend. Tricia’s dad is still in ICU, will probably be there for another day or so at least. Kidneys are not coming along very well yet but he did finally get off the respirator. Thanks to those who have sent kind words and especially prayers. They are, and will continue to be, very much appreciated.

I am often times astounded by the intellectual acumen of the anti-religious, anti-Christian, anti-Catholic crowd. Open Book posted a thread from the Huffington Post criticizing B16 for having the nerve to say that we must be careful not to make technological acheivements our gods. The responses from most of the brain surgeons who read the rag, range from inane to just plain stupid…with a lot of immature vulgarity thrown into the mix. They say that one of the biggest dangers is under estimating your opponent. Perhaps this explains it. Their exhibition of adolesent rants is simply an attempt to lull us into a false sense of security.

In Ramah is heard the sound of moaning, of bitter weeping! Rachel mourns for her children; she refuses to be consoled because her children are no more (Jer 31:15).

Today is the feast of the Holy Innocents when we celebrate the deaths of those babies Herod slaughtered for the sake of holding onto power. If one contemplates the pathological megalomania of a person who has no hesitation against killing little babies to assert his “will to power,” it is obvious that we live in a fallen world. As much as we have progressed from the days of Herod, in learning, in technology, in modes of travel and communication, even in our understanding of the human person, our society does not appear to have progressed much in terms of authentic humanity.

The Brussels Journal published a story last week about recent statements from a European Union advisory panel which found that the right to kill an unborn baby trumps just about every other right, including the right of doctors who understand that this is murder, from refusing to perform abortions. The opinion was given in response to a proposed treaty between Slovakia and the Holy See in which it was agreed that Catholic hospitals in Slovakia would not be forced to perform immoral procedures, including abortion. In response, this panel of “experts” asserts that EU agreements with countries acknowledging conscientious objection is a violation of EU law because it may deprive women of an international right to abort their babies.

What’s wrong with this picture? I mean besides the obvious absurdity that the slaughter of innocent children is an international right or that some how even if it were generally acknowledged as being a right, that sovereign countries should be required to submit to morally corrupt international rights. The first thing is that it attempts to deprive the human person of his fundamental means of acting as a human. The faculties which distinguish us from animals and allow us to act and love as we were created are through the use of intellect and free will in order to make moral decisions and choose morally good actions. This panel wants to replace this fundamental process we call conscience, a process which makes us human, with an automaton’s blind following of state edicts. Paradoxically, this is what these folks accuse obedient Catholics of doing.

This type of thinking has much more in common with Robespierre and his reign of terror than with the lofty ideals of equality, fraternity, and liberty that both claim to support. They cloak the tyranny of their oligarchy by promoting sexual license as true freedom but they limit freedom of thought and action to likeminded ideologues. It is no coincidence that these folks exhibit such a paranoid fear of losing their “freedom” that, like Herod, they resort to killing human beings as a means of holding on to their power. For Robespierre it was killing those who represented any sort of potential ideological threat to his new Republic. For the dark angels of the culture of death, they demand the deaths of the gifts of life because babies give lie to their claims that sexual copulation has a more fundamental end than pleasure and self-gratification. Rachel continues to bitterly weep for her lost children: those deprived of mortal life and those depriving themselves of eternal life.

Touchstone magazine published an article by R.V. Young (available on-line) this month that studies the linguistic development of the term “homosexual” and its correlation to claims made about what it is and how it has been understood throughout history. Some important/interesting points Young makes (some of which I harp on constantly here):

a. Homosexuality is what someone does not what he is
b. There is an inherent contradiction among activists who want to reduce sexual differences to social constructs but assign to the status of “nature” that which causes same sex attraction
c. Linguistically homo-sex is oxymoronic based upon each term’s original etymology
d. A change in meaning of the term “sex” and its replacement with “gender” helps explain and undermine the ideology of feminist and “gay” activists

Two beefs I have with the article:

a. Perhaps this can be interpreted correctly, but his use of the phrase “sinfulness of our nature,” can suggest an ontological change to human nature due to the Fall. I admit that this is not an unusual phrase but it leads to misunderstanding and is in fact in correct, if interpreted to mean that we have a different nature than our first parents.
b. I may disagree with Young’s belief that some may be born with a proclivity to same sex attraction among other problems. Again, if he means by this that genetic factors combined with environmental stimuli make some more susceptible to same sex attraction disorder than others than I would agree. If this is interpreted to mean that a genetic transcription problem is the sole causal factor in SSA than I would argue that the data I have seen to this point, make me think this unlikely.

NBC will begin airing a series called, “The Book of Daniel“, written by Jack Kenny, a practicing homosexual who describes himself as being “in Catholic recovery,” and who is quoted as saying that he doesn’t know if “all the myth surrounding him (Jesus) is true.” NBC has ordered 13 episodes which focus on an Episcopalian priest who “… regularly sees and talks with a very unconventional white-robed, bearded Jesus,” AFA said, adding that the Webster family also includes “a 23-year-old homosexual Republican son, a 16-year-old daughter who is a drug dealer, and a 16-year-old adopted son who is having sex with the bishop’s daughter. At the office, his (Webster’s) lesbian secretary is sleeping with his sister-in-law”. As a “recovering” Catholic who happens to be a practicing “homosexual”, Jack Kenny, probably has a distorted image of himself, and how he is valued as a human person by the Church. Some are formed by false perceptions, desires, and a distorted sense of love. Truth and love are dependent upon one another, and without truth, love is guided by personal feelings and desires. Unfortunately, I think the emotions of a confused and injured man will prevail in this new series.

On a personal note: the fingers are nice and warm again today. The HVAC guy came today and replaced the bad ignition switch–happy days. My landlord who was in town on Christmas break was kind enough to stay let him in. On a more sober note, it looks like multiple by-pass surgery for Tricia’s dad will take place tomorrow. Serious stuff, but at 83 it is quite so. Prayers would be much obliged if anyone is so inclined. As Tricia will be helping her parents during her dad’s recovery, it looks like I will continue to be what we used to call a “class-B bachelor” in the Air Force, for some time to come. By the way, thanks to those who have already kindly inquired on this. On to the liturgical post…

Sandro Magister said in his article today that B16 has confidentially directed the Neo-Catechumenal Way to begin to purge their liturgies of those innovations which are at odds with the current rubrics. This group, highly favored by JP the Great, had said that John Paul gave them verbal authorization for the innovations. I do not doubt them but I have to admit that I think their innovations are by and large, problematic for the same reasons, apparently, as does B16. This presents another data point supporting my sense that we are going to see a reform of the reform in earnest under our new Holy Father.

Before I get to the subject of this post I will thank Shelray and Chris for taking up the slack while I was goofing off over Christmas. I was off with the Mrs. to Dayton to spend Christmas with her family. We had a great time with everyone until about 2 am this morning. That was when Tricia woke me up saying she needed to take her dad to the ER and for me to follow with her mom. Her dad had chest pains and, after about 19 hours in the ER, was finally admitted. Trying to find a cardiac doc on St. Stephen’s Day can be a challenge. We had already planned that Tricia would stay in Dayton and I would go back for during the New Year break so that is what we did. I stayed on a few extra hours to help with what I could and then left on the normally peaceful drive. It was not this time. A couple of very bad accidents, one with frozen meat scattered all over I-70 in Indianapolis had things quite backed up. Then I arrived home to find the heat not working. All in all, I suppose that I could sit here with my winter coat on, struggling to type with gloved hands and play the martyr. But that would mean I did not read Christopher’s post well enough. When one thinks about families that have no heath care and so few options for their loved ones when emergencies strike, or those folks in accidents who will not make it home tonight, or those who do not even have a home of which to worry about trying to get the heat working, there is so much for which to be thankful. I will try not to complain. Well then, on to the topic . . .

Just before Christmas, Sandro Magister published the English translation of Benedict’s speech to the Curia that summarized what he sees as an important problem with the reception of the teaching of the Second Vatican Council and what is impeding its authentic reception. This was the second time this Pope has talked about the implementation of the Council this month, which makes sense since this is the 40th anniversary of the closing. However, as Magister infers, here B16 seems to be going directly after the Bologna school and the many who support this defective view of the Council. I have mentioned the Bologna school before. Though he doesn’t mention them by name, the boloney school can be identified in B16’s speech as representing those who hold what he calls the hermeneutic of discontinuity or rupture. These folks try to make the case to ignore the Council texts as written as nothing but the flotsam of compromise and so they say one must look deeper to find the spirit of the Council.

B16 says such a view is fraught with logical problems. A biggie is that it reflects a lack of understanding of the nature of a Council. He says the boloney school folks consider it an assembly of the representatives of some constituent group. However, for such an assembly to change a constitution it would have required a mandate and a mandator. For the Council there could be no mandate because the Mandator could only have been Christ Himself. Then the Council Father’s mandate was given by the Good Pope John which required faithfulness to the truth as it had already been expressed by the Church. B16 points out the fundamental issues around which many of the boloney school proposals arise and he presents the way forward which is true to the Church and the Council. These surround the understanding of the human person and the relationship between faith and the modern world in its many aspects.

B16 has said that his mission is to continue to implement the authentic reforms of the Council following the path laid by his predecessor JP the Great. Is it anything less than providential that he would have this auspicious anniversary so soon in his pontificate in which to begin to reassess the good and bad which has come from reform in the wake of the Council? I am hopeful that B16 will be successful in rooting out the boloney hermeneutic that remains among too many Catholics today. Now, as way of explanation not complaint, I had to get rid of the gloves so now that my hands are numb . . . I’m done.

On this feast day of St. Stephen, I am reminded that the life of a Christian is spell out so very profoundly in Acts 7:54 – 60. Our mission is to pray for and to serve one another as well as God. St. Stephen with his last breath professed this servitude to his Christian brothers and sisters by praying that his own murders would not be held accountable for his death. He did not strike out, or curse them. He simply prayed for deliverance and forgiveness for those that did not understand the message of Christ Our Lord. And then he gazed up into heaven, and asked to go home. “Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.” St. Stephen did not act this way out of courage or bravery, but in response to the graces given him by our Lord Jesus. He responded to his persecution with Christian charity, the virtue born out of love for neighbor above self. St. Stephen pray for us that we may follow your example of love of neighbor and look longingly to be brought home at the end of our work here on earth.

 Peace & Prayers,

 CLS

 Anne Rice’s Theology:

(1) God - “He is trans-gender” (2) Abortion - “I think it’s killing. But I think it’s a woman’s choice.” (3) Birth Control - “The Vatican’s birth-control ban too is a patriarchal anachronism”"It was an obvious advantage for men for women to be passive with regards to procreation,” (4) The Dignity of Women - “The Church dictates on sin to be harsher to women, though “I have never taken misogyny personally,” …”Most people hate women, including women” (5) Saint Mary Magdalene - “She was shortchanged by a patriarchal church that defamed her” (6) On Same sex marriage - “It can only strengthen our society to have gay people in committed relationships rather than going to bars.” (7) Politics - “conservative Christian politicians are distorting Christ’s message by politicizing such issues as abortion.”

“Where there is love, light shines forth in the world; where there is hatred, the world remains in darkness.”. Merry Christmas Pope Benedict XVI!! His reference to light rings so clearly as Jesus is the Light of the world. Love, purity, clarity, peace were all the messages of “light” given during his first Christmas Mass. I love and trust our new Pope, and have seen his light of optimism, strength and love. The light of truth shines so brilliantly right into the face of darkness, as can be expected, our Pope is hated by those who revel in darkness and deceit. There are those who cannot even bear to hear the world Christ(mas). I am optimistic when I see such full Churches on Christmas Eve, and I pray for those who make their bi-annual appearance to Mass, that they will experience a spiritual awakening this year, and begin their journey of seeking God with a sincere heart. I can tell you by experience, that the dark side really stinks.

A deacon of the Russian Orthodox Church, Deacon Andrej Kuraev has invited, among others, the youth branch of a right-wing ultranationalist movement, described as “ÂPutin-Jugend”, to organize, a Christmas eve demonstration/picket outside the The Mother of God Cathedral “in defense of the Russian Christmas”. The event is to initimidate and oppress the Catholic Church’s celebration date of Christmas. With the Gregorian calendar reform, the Roman Catholic Church celebrates Christmas on December 25. The Russian Orthodox Church, which still follows the Julian calendar, celebrates Christmas on January 7. The logic behind his motivation is baffling, to say the least.

The overall opinion of this demonstration by the Russian media was both skeptical and negative, and he has since made a rather private “cancellation” of the demonstration, with a short one liner on his website. There has been no public cancellation or press release of this well publicized event scheduled to take place tomorrow.

A major concern is that this activity has already been set in motion, and that many of the youths in the Nashi movement may continue with the original plans, with or without the participation of the Orthodox. By the way, “Andrej the Instigator”, is out of town. Way to evangelize Kuraev! An impressive demonstration of tolerance and humility to further the cause of Christian unity. Here’s to you A.K.(47) MERRY CHRISTMAS!!

Sources: Picket planned by ultra-Orthodox

Lavonne Cobb says she forgot all about being sexually abused by a Catholic priest more than 40 years ago, but recent headlines about church sex abuse cases brought it all back. Since this has happened so many years ago she cannot bring up criminal charges, but plans to sue the alleged priest AND the Church. How many claims have come against many dead priests? My question is to the alleged victims of abuse, who have waited 20 - 40 years after the incident, why now? I don’t think I am going out on a limb in guessing many of these accusations are bogus, providing some with extra spending money and the ability to financially damage the Church. The doors were opened by the weakness of a few in the Church, there are real victims who suffered from sex abuse, the faith of many have been damaged by a scandal cover up. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to know that there are not those who are profiteering monetarily and agenda wise from encouraging the continuing onslaught of new victims, some of which are innocent priest.

Canadian law has recently declared that group sex and “swingers clubs” are not socially dangerous!! Well for that matter there must be actual gentlemen in so called “Gentlemen’s Club’s”. “Criminal indecency or obscenity must rest on actual harm or a significant risk of harm to individuals or society…” How can there not be “actual harm or a significant risk of harm” in these activities to individuals and society?

Psychologically speaking these activities is extremely deviant, degrading and dehumanizing contrary to what the judge in this case thinks!! When laws are so loosely interpreted, as in this case, it leads individuals to believe that it is okay to be self indulgent and to objectify others. This precedent says it is okay to objectify other members of society and then wishes to punish individuals when they take the next step and forcibly objectify others with out their consent. Aren’t we drawing the line a little to close to the edge of the cliff? Isn’t that what is happening when we say anything goes? Shouldn’t laws be made to protect individuals in society not tease them into seeing how close to the edge they can step? Laws should raise individuals and society up, not lead them further into immorality.

There are mountains of statistics that show individuals entering into activities such as this are at great risk for AIDS, HIV, and a myriad of other Sexually Transmitted Diseases that can cause Death, decreased ability to procreate just to name a few. Just this sheer increased risk of disease creates “significant risk of harm”. Harm to individuals bodies as well as to society in the form of loss of life, increased health care costs when these STD’s are passed on. These activities do harm individuals and society!! Laws are meant to protect everyone in society, even protecting us from ourselves if need be. Explain to me again how these acts do not cause “actual harm or a significant risk of harm to individuals or society”!!

CLS

On Tuesday of this week, the USCCB Committee for Ecumenical and Interreligious Affairs released a synopsis of the Fall Consultation, held in November, between delegates of the USCCB committee and the National Council of Synagogues. The meeting celebrated the anniversary of Nostra aetate, the Second Vatican Council Declaration on the Relation of the Church to Non-Christian Religions. It seems at this meeting, the Jewish delegates raised the question of Cardinal Keeler about a recent article by an “eminent Catholic theologian” they thought appeared to run counter to the Vatican II document. This was undoubtedly a reference to Avery Cardinal Dulles’s article in First Things from that month.

It is not clear in the USCCB release whether Cardinal Keeler’s response was contradicting Cardinal Dulles or simply poorly attempting to be diplomatic. In any case, it appears that the result was to mislead the Jewish delegates in the same apparent way they have been by the dialogue with the USCCB committee. Here the Jewish delegates seemed to think that Nostra aetate taught that, in essence, the Church now teaches that they should not accept Christ. In other words, that God has two Covenants; one with Jews and another with Christians. It is this mistaken view that Cardinal Dulles so ably refutes in his article.

Rather than repeating the details, I would like to use the theme of marriage that he correctly points out in his article as the model for the relationship of God with His people. Explicitly, the Covenant is a marriage. God from all of creation has wanted to marry us. In the Old Testament, He shows that He had in fact, betrothed Himself to Israel via a Covenant with them. However, we need to understand that marriage in the context of the times. It was a betrothal marriage, which was a real marriage, but often times this marriage happened well before the husband and wife came together to live. It could be compared to an engagement I suppose, but it was more permanent than that. The betrothal carried with it rights and obligations different from the completed marriage. The marriage was not complete until the final ceremony and of course, the consummation.

This is exactly what we have as the relationship of the Old Covenant to the New Covenant. God betrothed Himself to His Church in the Old Covenant and this betrothal marriage was consummated when Christ suffered and died for His Bride (cf. Eph 5). The consummation, the ineffable unity that we have with God is possible only because we are members of a Church which is the Bride united to Her Bridegroom. Thus, the relationship of the Old Covenant to New is not supercessionist. The Old was NOT done away with to make way for the New. Rather, the promise of the betrothal was fulfilled in Christ. The now consummated marriage brings with it the fullness of the promise, but also it brings with it a different way of relating of Bride to Her Bridegroom. Some obligations from the betrothal carry over, some do not. The consummated marriage also brings with it new obligations.

There cannot be two separate Covenants. God cannot be both betrothed and married at the same time. He is a faithful Bridegroom, not a polygamous Lord Baal over different concubines. Of course, therefore, the Covenant God made with the people of the Old Testament is still in force, but like a fulfilled marriage, the manner of relationship has changed. It now carries with it all of the privileges and responsibilities of the completed marriage. The fulfilled marriage is here waiting for everyone, Jew and Greek alike, who by God’s grace will come to embrace the Bridegroom.

This image from the Angry Twins blog has been burned in my mind for the last 2 weeks. How blessed are those who , through no fault of their own, suffer so severly. For what purpose was this little boy born? “Now there was a certain rich man, and he was clothed in purple and fine linen, faring sumptuously every day: and a certain beggar named Lazarus was laid at his gate, full of sores, and desiring to be fed with the ‘crumbs’ that fell from the rich man’s table; yea, even the dogs come and licked his sores. And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and that he was carried away by the angels into Abraham’s bosom: and the rich man also died, and was buried. And in Hades he lifted up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom. And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am in anguish in this flame. But Abraham said, Son, remember that thou in thy lifetime receivedst thy good things, and Lazarus in like manner evil things: but now here he is comforted and thou art in anguish. And besides all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed, that they that would pass from hence to you may not be able, and that none may cross over from thence to us.” (Luke 16: 19-26)

Merry Christmas!

So is the title of a new analysis on a controversial document. Inside the Vatican has done an analysis of the recent Instruction from the Congregation for Catholic Education on the inadmissibility of those with “deep seated” homosexual tendencies to the seminary. This will be published in their January edition but they have provided the analysis by e-mail, the text of which can be seen here. I will say that the analysis provides helpful insights and perspectives. However, I find that it falls short in one area.

The analysis looks at whether or not the Vatican has softened its policy on seminary admission standards of those persons with same sex attraction. It compares the 1961 instruction from Pope John XIII with the recent document and does see some significant differences. In the end, looking at the contradictory reactions of different parties and the concerns and words of JP the Great and B16, this assessment finds that it is not clear if the new Instruction reflects a softening of the policy or not.

The weakness I find with this analysis is that it looks at the development of the new Instruction almost exclusively from a political/public relations perspective. Certainly this perspective is an important part of the analysis; however, without explicit knowledge of the internal machinations of the document’s development we are left with speculations as to, for example, why this 1500 word instruction took 10 years to publish and why it provides more nuance than the 1961 policy.

What I find missing in this analysis is any consideration of the anthropological implications of same sex attraction (SSA) or an investigation into the possibility that experience from the medical profession treating the disorder may have indicated a more nuanced approach. The analysis consistently uses the term homosexuals. The Vatican Instruction does not, which I believe is important. The Instruction consistently talks about persons not homosexuals or homo-sexual persons.  Thus, the Instruction implies that these tendencies are a disorder that persons have. In other words, homosexuality is NOT something that someone is.

This observation leads to the focus of the Instruction. The Instruction begins with what the priest is; a spiritual father who must be mature in his effectivities. This aspect of priestly identity sets the stage for assessing the disorder of SSA and why it is incompatible with the priesthood. The Instruction finds SSA to be incompatible because it indicates that there is a serious problem with ones affective maturation. Something has gone awry, which if left on resolved, with create manifold problems in personal development and in interpersonal relations with others. The Instruction does not go into a discussion of the difficulties this affective disorder presents from a perspective of theological anthropology, the pragmatic issues are enough. However, it does present a nuance which is troubling to some and used as a loophole by others: the three year criterion. Some misread this criterion as saying that the person must be celibate for three years. That is not what it says. It says that the candidate must be free of transitory homosexual tendencies. In other words, the candidate must have resolved the issues which had led to the affective immaturity, manifested as same sex attraction. To be sure that this has been resolved, SSA must not have returned for three years. This time frame, I believe, was the consensus of those who have treated this condition by which it would confidently indicate that regression was unlikely.

In my own humble opinion, the Instruction is nothing extraordinary. It is the Church using all of the resources of medical science understood in light of the truth of the human person revealed by God, to prudentially develop guidelines for discerning acceptable candidates for the priesthood.

“After the rape, and before he and his assailant returned to a main road, they made an agreement. While Leonard vowed never to tell others of the incident, his attacker vowed never to attack another boy and to go to the next confession and communion.”

(Very peculiar vow, wouldn’t you say?)

Tom Leonard, one of Scottland’s most renowned literary scholars, holds the Church’s “cult of virginity” accountable for his life long silence of a childhood rape because of their lack of understanding sexuality. According to Tom, it is somehow the Church’s fault he did not know that he was raped because it was sexual in nature. He blames the Catholic Faith for confusing “maintaining purity” with “resistance to rape”. He even goes on to say that the church’s attitudes regarding sexuality is unhealthy and questions the canonisation of women who have been murdered after resisting rape.

he award for the most assinine invented Church teaching goes to this gem…

“So long as ‘virginity’ is perceived as the acme of virtue, and thus conflated with ‘purity’ meaning not having sex“ the church will be unable to deal properly and fully with its own rape cases.”

Whether or not this story is true or not, isn’t the real issue of this agenda driven marketing piece. The real issue is the unrelenting and intensifying slander and confusion which leads so many away from the Church. The Church is our great hope that shines the light of truth in our dark world. Sin thrives in the dark, and find the light repulsive and will continue to do anything possible to extinguish it.