www.byzcath.org Forums General Discussions Town Hall Pelosi won't condemn 'gay' slur of Last Supper

Anti Christian people was whom I was referring to.
Stephanos I

Gordo, I agree about praying quietly. It may do more to send a message than the "ravings" of "just another judgemental Christian." If anyone in the area would like to join me, send me a PM! We'll be done with Mass at St. Dominic's at around 12:45-1:00ish.

Father Stephanos:

With all due respect, the gesture you received does not necessarily mean the man was a homosexual. There is a lot of anti-clericalism stirred up in this country since the clergy sexual abuse scandals have hit the airwaves. My pastor has lamented to me that everyone seems to think that every celibate Catholic priest is either a homosexual, a pedophile, or some kind of damaged individual who has someone--male or female--on the side and just hasn't come clean.

And anti-clericalism isn't just restricted to the U.S. Some 25+ years ago a priest friend of mine went home to Milan to visit his mother. While walking down the street--without any clericals to identify him--he witnessed a man run across the street, knock down a priest walking along in cassock, and beat him unconscious, all the while yelling about how the dirty priests had hung his great-grandfather for not paying his taxes (during the time of the Papal States in the 19th century).

Being a priest, as you well know, is an act of courage in being a radical prophet to a reality and way of looking at and living life that is at odds with the world. The Lord warned we would all be hated for being part of Him. Be glad that you were able to be thus humiliated. Your Master was spit on.

In Christ,

BOB

Actually Bob I was not inferring that he was a homosexual.
Stephanos I
But given the are in which I live there is a large possibility he was.

Mark Shea's blog had a link to a site with some pictures from the "event." I have never seen such vile displays of depravity in my short 31 years of being on this planet.

I definitely saw many things that stripped these people of their dignity as humans. (Pun intended.)

I'd just caution about being judgemental.

The "Folsom Street Fair" (I know people who have gone) is essentially 'street theater'. Like many 'artists' their point is to push the envelope to generate attention and reaction that ultimately leads to $$$$ in response to their outre representations. They know the buttons to push.

Working with the gay community (and the black community, and the disaffected kid/punk community in AIDS prevention) for more than 20 years, I know for a fact that most gay folks reject this sort of stuff as being beyond the pale of human decency. In fact, many gay folks are church-goers, and there is even a gay-friendly denomination - the Metropolitan Community Church - all over the country that uses sort-of basic Prot identity and welcomes the 'disenfranchised' gay folks who are both believers and in many ways quite traditional.

It is analogous to saying that Fred Phelps and his folks represent American Christianity when they vocally picket the funerals of deceased military because their deaths are a punishment for America's sins - including 'acceptance' of homosexuality.

They're all nuts. Our Lord cautioned us that the poor would always be with us, but he never mentioned our having to deal with the Looney Tunes. And dealing with them - of whatever ilk -is for me and many of us Christians a major cross.

Blessings!

Dr John

I'm sorry, but I don't agree. Digging hooks into the subcutaneous tissue of another person's back, attaching wires to those hooks, and making the person mush like a sled dog as another whips him is not "art." And it is degrading to both parties involved.*

If the average gay person condemns this trash, where are they, why haven't they spoken out against it? We see Muslims who speak out against Islamofascism, yet we don't see anyone from the "gay community" speak out against these kinds of perverse displays.

*I can find the pictures from Mark Shea's Blog if you don't believe me. Caveat.

Dr. Eric:

So do we condemn all gay people on the basis of the actions of some? Surely that's not what you're suggesting?

Ryan

No it's not.

But, where is the outcry condemning this behavior?

I think most people choose just to ignore it.

Why?

If there were Catholics blowing up Planned Parenthood facilities and shooting abortionists I'd make sure that everyone knew that they didn't represent the stance of the Church or Catholics in general.

Well, if we are going to insist that gays who don't engage in this sort of behavior condemn those gays who do, we'll need to be consistent in the application of this principle across a whole host of sins and social groupings. For example, the USA has an unfortunate history of foreign policy decisions (and I'm not singling out President Bush here-I think this problem is one that is truly bipartisan) that are morally questionable at best and have the result of increased suspicion and hatred of Americans. Yet, I notice that there are millions of Americans who are not occupying themselves with condemning these misguided decisions, and I don't really hear much of an outcry within the Church about this. Another example has to do with wealth and poverty. Is it the responsiblity of those who are wealthy and generous constantly to condemn those who are wealthy and fail to follow the teachings of Christ and the Church concerning our duties towards the poor? How often do you hear this? What about sexual discrimination? Do men have the responsibilty (as a group) to cry out and condemn every instance in which a man is guilty of chauvinism? I'm afraid if we get into this, then we'll have to spend all of our energies determining every single instance in which we're required to speak out and condemn the actions of others. For me, that's problematic.

Ryan

Homosexuals could be the nicest friendliest people on the planet (and I'm sure some are) they could all be in long term monogamous relationships, and trying to make the world a better place for everyone, but it wouldn't change the fact that homosexual activity is always a mortal sin in any and all instances. So realistically speaking, whether a university professor and his concert violinist 'partner' have been togather for 40 years or whether it's just two guys in leather, whipping each other in public, it's still mortal sin.

"in any and all instances?" I don't think any sin is a mortal sin in any and all instances. I thought that according to Roman Catholic scholastic theology there has to be 1) grave matter 2)sufficient knowledge 3)sufficient freedom. Am I wrong?