Why Do I Often Write Against Catholicism? The Catholics Make Me!

Share on Facebook0Tweet about this on TwitterShare on Google+0Share on Reddit0Share on Tumblr0Email this to someone

After my post last week about the lie-ridden Catholic propaganda being distributed to young people, an acquaintance of mine inquired as to why I feel the need to write anti-Catholic posts so often. Among the comments he made on my Facebook profile were:

Could you go a week without bashing – just let us be who we are?

Well, I could, except that that is exactly what Catholicism does not do for gay people. It’s amazing how often leaders of the Catholic Church (or its messaging) glibly rail on gay people. (These are the same folks whose salaries are paid by your tithing, by the way.)

I don’t know if you’ve noticed what the cultural environment is like for gay people right now, but we’ve finally been hearing about the many suicides committed by people who are persecuted for being perceived as gay. Where do all those bullies get their message?

The Catholic Church is a big source. Take a look at this Catholic Action insight from Cardinal-Designate Raymond L. Burke (hat tip Joe Jervis). You’ll note that commenting on the video has been disabled. Opponents of the gay community thinks this gives their message more power because there is no room for dissent; I think it just shows how insecure they are.

Did you catch that? First he said:

There is a discrimination which is perfectly just and good and namely that’s the discrimination between what is right and what is wrong.

Then, he goes onto say that “people with same-sex attractions” are people who “suffer” and that this attraction is “not right” that they should “correct in themselves” this attraction.

So discrimination between right and wrong is okay. People who are gay are not right. Thus, it’s okay to discriminate against gays. See how obvious the message is?

And if you don’t agree with my conclusion, you don’t have to. The good Cardinal goes on to make it for us:

And so it’s not at all an unfair discrimination to say, “Well, no. Persons who are attracted in this way…”—we can’t do them any good by making up a new idea of marriage contrary to the way in which God has created us.

[Church teachings, scripture, and tradition help us understand why] same-sex behavior is always and everywhere wrong.

I couldn’t quite make out all his words there, but his point was obvious. You can listen to the whole spiel for yourself.

Now, to all you folks out there who say, “Those are just beliefs,” you’re wrong. They are fallacies and they are incredibly hurtful. They’re not just different point of view; they are, in fact, wrong.

So yes, every time religious organizations try to use their beliefs to perpetuate discrimination against gay people, I’m going to call it out and hold the religious organization accountable for the harm it propagates.

Maybe if Catholic Church leaders stopped demonizing us and spreading the message that we’re sinners and in great need of help I wouldn’t have to keep writing about how archaic and dangerous it is.

Share on Facebook0Tweet about this on TwitterShare on Google+0Share on Reddit0Share on Tumblr0Email this to someone
Back to Top | Scroll down for Comments!

There are 8 Comments to "Why Do I Often Write Against Catholicism? The Catholics Make Me!"

  • Anastasia says:

    It particularly makes me mad because that’s not how the church used to be. Back when I was a practicing Catholic, it was all “Catholic means universal” and “love your neighbor” goodness. We welcomed people into the church no matter what. Of course, no one was standing up for gay rights back then but it wasn’t really something that anyone was even talking about then. Pope John Paul was embracing science and multiculturalism and interfaith communication – and that trickled down all the way to everyday priests. What happened? Is it all Pope Benedict’s fault? I actually had a Catholic try to tell me that most Catholics don’t follow what the Pope says so it’s ok that he’s promoting a ton of horrible things and letting his Cardinals promote horrible things. That doesn’t make any sense at all. Either the Pope is infallible and he’s right or he’s a jerk and people should call him on it. Sigh. The few parts of the dogma that used to make sense to me have all been turned on their heads.

    PS: I just noticed I’m in your blogroll 🙂 Except the link is old 🙁 Please change to http://geneticmaize.com

  • Ahab says:

    I’m fine with all the Catholic-related posts, personally. As long as the Magisterium promotes homophobia, you are fully entitled to condemn them for it through your blog.

  • Charles Anselm Bolton says:

    Beyond the Ecumenical: Pan-Deism?

    ~~ by Father Charles A. Bolton*

    A new phenomenon in religion is becoming more prominent as each year passes. It is a syncretist movement aiming at the union of all those who believe in God. This phenomenon goes far beyond the so-called ecumenical movement, which strives to unify all those who call themselves Christian. Before the Roman church took the ecumenical movement seriously, she generally alluded to it disparagingly as pan-Protestantism. The new movement is blessed by some of the hierarchs of the Roman church as the pro Deo (for God) movement.
    To promote to the full the objective of this new trend, the Vatican has this year set up an organization as yet in embryo, a Secretariat for Non-Christian Religions. This new establishment, which will operate in Rome under the direction of Paolo Cardinal Marella as another arm of the Curia, parallels the Secretariat for Christian Unity.
    It is interesting to note in this connection the changing vocabulary of the Vatican. Some recent popes have made much use of the terms Il Padre Commune (“The Common Father”) and La Casa del Padre Commune (“The Father’s House”–the Vatican) in their appeals to bring Christians back home. In establishing this new activity, the Pope now describes Rome as the Patria Commune, the “Common Fatherland” for all believers. However difficult it may be for Muslims, Buddhists, and Jews to regard Romes as their “common fatherland,” the idea is that the new secretariat will make them feel that they now “belong.” It seemed as though Paul VI was reaching beyond the history of the papacy and the Roman church to the universality of the old Roman Empire embracing many nations when he said:
    “By the institution of this organism, no pilgrim will henceforth be a stranger in Rome, where the Church faithful to her history and her catholic faith shall always be the ‘common fatherland.”
    The activities of the pro Deo group, which no doubt paved the way for the new secretariat, seem to have been chiefly confined to organizing international banquets, called agapes or love-feasts, thereby changing the character of the meetings of the early Christians, which were certainly closed to non-Christians.
    Fraternizing With The East
    To those familiar with the history of the Roman Catholic missions in recent centuries, the idea of fraternizing with oriental religions is not completely new. Throughout the seventeenth century and well into the eighteenth a bitter controversy raged between certain Jesuit missionaries and their opponents about what is sometimes called “Chinese rites.” In fact, the desire to transform Catholicism into an oriental cult, though within certain limits, began with the Jesuit missionary De Nobili early in the seventeenth century. He assumed the saffron robe of the monk, observed Brahmanic rites and fasts, and tried to be as much like a Brahman as possible. In China the Jesuit missionaries later attempted to use similar methods in order to make themselves as completely oriental as possible.
    Despite fierce opposition, the methods of De Nobili were approved for a time. But all these attempts to “naturalize” Roman missions in the East were finally suppressed by the bull of Pope Benedict XIV, Omium Sollicitudinem, in 1744. After this decree, the Roman missions in the East were destined to become like so many Latin colonies planted on foreign soil. This has often been deplored in modern times, and no doubt the recent Vatican approach may be seen as a return to the “assimilation” attempts of previous centuries.
    Evangelicals do not always realize how spiritually satisfying to some Roman Catholic intellectuals is the idea of assimilating and adapting all human cultures–and to some extent all religions–inside one vast theocratic Roman Catholic Church. Karl Adam in his Spirit of Catholicism has tried to show how much this is a part of the modern Roman Weltanshauung.
    An increased impetus in this direction comes from a growing consciousness that the Catholic-Protestant divisions seem to be lessening and that many world cultures are still outside the range of Catholicism, especially of a Catholicism identified with Western culture. Some have begun to ask if African and Asiatic cultures might have something in their philosophy, theology, and mysticism, as well as in the less difficult fields of music and art, that might be included under the name “Catholic.” Certain Roman apologists might boldly assert that these cultures “belong” to the Catholic idea.
    Teilhard de Chardin, chiefly through his posthumous book, The Phenomenon of Man, has become the prophet of a new evolutionary outlook, centering the climax of world development in the formation of a new creation in Christ. This would imply for some–among them, no doubt, Arnold Toynbee with his synthesis of world history–the idea of a convergence of religions, however repellent this might seem to many.
    I first came upon this extension of ecumenism into pan-deism among some Roman Catholic scholars interested primarily in the “reunion of the churches,” Roman, Orthodox, Anglican. This was just before Pope Pius XI brought out his encyclical, Mortalium Animos (1928) which was seemingly directed against the World Council of Churches and the ecumenical movement generally. These were condemned as “pan-Protestantism.” Yet even then a number of Roman scholares had already made public the idea that the Church Catholic is “Jewish, is Moslem, is Buddhist, is Taoist.” The idea behind this was the concept of a true catholic or universal order of religion that must be able to include the highest aspirations and achievements of all religions and cultures. It was felt that the same ecumenical spirit that sought to bring together the historically separated Christian churches should be able to reach out the religions of Asia, of Africa through Islam, and to the Jewish diaspora.
    An obvious bond with Jews and Muslims through the Old Testament was recognized. The “Our Father” of the Christian was also the God of the Jews and the Allah of the Muslims. It was explained that to unite with Hindus and Buddhists, Christians should explore the hidden reality–the “ultimate reality,” the infinite, the absolute, the everlasting, the all-pervading spirit that marks the religious experience of the Orient. Many felt that Western culture has lost the sense of a living and inspiring presence in intimate religious experience and “knowing,” because this is not regarded as something for the ordinary believer but is rather the privilege of an esoteric few, called “mystics.” Some religious observers in the Roman church have believed that just as contact with non-Roman churches might have a salutary and broadening influence on many Roman Catholics, so also for people of Western culture, contact with the religious experience of the East might lead to the vitalizing effects of the “inner light” and the “inner presence,” which seem so essential a part of the oriental religious outlook.
    Surprisingly, some have seriously declared that this universal outreach should include even atheists, on the plea that many so-called atheists are in reality seekers after God in their own perverse way.
    What Is The Goal
    We may perhaps ask what is the ultimate aim of the Curia in promoting the pan-deist movement. Undoubtedly, certain Roman Catholic thinkers have a sincere desire to promote greater unity and peace in the world. Such thinkers envisage ecumenism as a fulfillment of Christ’s prayer, “That they all may be one.” Their beliefs and education convince them that unity implies submission to one authority, and this submission is taken to be a divine mandate to include everybody in the one sheepfold of the pope. The same thinkers accept as a natural prerogative Rome’s promotion of world unity by any religious means whatever. Thus they do not necessarily discern in Rome’s ecumenism and pan-deism a project for world dominion. Yet this danger certainly exists.
    Evangelicals should remember that the bull of Pope Boniface VIII, Unum Sanctam, still exists and is generally taught as an infallible utterance in Roman seminaries. In this bull the pope proclaimed that to attain salvation every soul must be subject to the Roman pontiff. He also promulgated the doctrine of the “two swords”–the spiritual and temporal–by which he affirmed the pope as vicar of Christ had supreme power not only in religion but in all things temporal.
    Evangelicals should also remember that Paul VI was crowned in June, 1963, with the same symbolic emblem of dominion invented by Boniface VIII, and with the admonition (in Latin): “Remember that thou art the ruler of kings and the father of princes.”
    And finally, evangelicals should not forget that the basic justification for the world ambitions of the papacy as interpreted by the Curia is still a misinterpretation of Jeremiah 1:10: “See, I have this day set thee over the nations and over the kingdoms, to root out, and to pull down, and to destroy, and to throw down, to build, and to plant.”
    On August 6, 1964, Paul VI published his first encyclical, Ecclesiam Suam. Several passages in this lengthy message confirm all that has been outlined above about Vatican approaches to the great non-Christian religions. The following is the most relevant:
    “‘Then we see another circle around us. This too is vast in its extent, yet it is not too far away from us. It is made up of men who above all adore the one, supreme God whom we too adore. We refer to the children, worthy of our affection and respect, of the Hebrew people. They are faithful to the religion which we call that of the Old Testament. Then there are the adorers of God according to the conception of monotheism, especially the Moslem religion, deserving of our admiration for all that is true and good in their worship of God. Then there are also the followers of the great Afro-Asian religions. . . .

    • ZackFord says:

      Yawn. I wasn’t really interested in reading past, “by Father Charles.” I’m sure the same is true of most ZFb readers.

      Note: Don’t comment if you don’t have something relevant to say for yourself. Otherwise, you’re just wasting the effort.

  • Buffy says:

    Could you go a week without bashing — just let us be who we are?

    You (and your anti-woman, anti-gay, anti-atheist church) first.


    There is a discrimination which is perfectly just and good and namely that’s the discrimination between what is right and what is wrong.

    Raping children and covering it up is wrong.
    Telling people dangerous lies (“Condoms spread disease”) to perpetuate your dogma is wrong.
    Promoting the notion that women should sacrifice their own lives for the sake of a cluster of cells is wrong.
    Pretending something you choose to believe is The Truth and everyone else must kowtow to it–or else–is wrong.
    Etc, etc, etc.

    If Catholics want people to leave them be, they need to stop meddling in the lives of others. They can’t use their chosen religious lifestyle as a battering ram then cry persecution when their victims fight back. It isn’t “anti-Catholic bigotry” to say “I’m not Catholic and please stop trying to force me to be”.

  • Ben says:

    I didnt watch the video but from your article, the idea presented is not catholic. Yeah i would discriminate against evil and what is wrong, but a human according to catholic theology cant be intrinsically evil, so I cant discriminate a human beign, i must respect and love him simply because he is human. But on the other hand according to catholic theology the act(deeds) of humans may be evil and the catholic church clasify homosexual sexual activity as sinful, please note that been a homosexual is not sinful but have homosexual ‘sex’ is sinfull just as stealing is sinful. So the church teaches that homosexual should aviod those sexual activities. Besides nothing stop a homosexual from been a practicing catholic.
    I hope this clarify some things.

  • Ben says:

    Anastasia i church hasnt really change but people have. Few teach that gay people show be respected, others omit it, while have their own story, i dont think it has anything to do with pope Benedict, he condemns gay marriage because he believes that the bible and 2000yrs of tradition discribes marriage as a union for man and woman, he holds that gay should be respected and there have been letter to make sure they are respected im not sure if everybody follow the letters.
    Bluffy you made your point abusing children and covering it is wrong, but i cant find any catholic research that say condom spread disease (did u make that up?) everybody know that it is not 100% reliable, and nobody is saying a woman should sacrifice her life all the church is saying is that a woman should respect life not kill it and alway remember that you came from that cluster of cell. And lastly what is the use of religion of she doesnt tell humanity about a better way?

Write a Comment