Crannoggy Island - The Future?
Crannogs are houses built on artificial islands over water, usually with a bridge or causeway joining them to the shore.
When I set up this little blog it was envisaged as a place for friends who had formed relationships on the Archbishop Cranmer weblog to meet, keep in touch and exchange ideas, share what's happening in our respective lives, and even share the odd bit of 'gossip'. To me, this was what I enjoyed most on the site. It was 'friendly rivalry' and there was plenty of good humour among the disagreements. Not 'good disagreements' (heaven forfend!) but an underlying friendship despite our differences.
Some 90 posts, 30,000 visits, and 3,000 comments later, it's time to reassess. Please let me know your thoughts and ideas on the following:
Has it served its purpose and it is now time to move on?
Where do folk want to take the blog - if anywhere?
If we continue, what type of posts would you want to read?
Can others contribute guest posts (on any subject) to make it more varied and more of a community?
Gadjo would like Jack to know that it works very well for him here personally. I prefer the intimacy of a place where one knows most contributors and respects their intellects and theological positions, and even when one doesn't agree with them they are regularly enlightening.
ReplyDeleteJack is of course more than at liberty to post pieces relating to his own theological concerns here, and one would comment on them or not as one is able.
One is not so used to writing about theological issues and would probably prefer to choose a subject of ecumenical interest, e.g. perhaps apologetics, if one was asked, though given work and family commitments one could not guarentee the swift delivery of such a piece.
@ Gadjo
DeleteThank you for your feedback, Gadjo.
HJ thought for a while you were Eastern Orthodox and doesn't quite know what "faith tradition" you follow. (Note the ecumenical framing where in years gone bye it would have been "heretic").
Something from you would be appreciated - your faith journey (sorry, Clive) and how you ended up in, is it, Romania? No rush. Just forward it via the contact button. Click the 3 lined icon at the top left of the blog site it opens a menu, scroll down and the contact form is there titled "Message in a Bottle").
Thank you very much for the invitation, Jack!
DeleteI am a member of the Romanian Baptist Church - yep, that is the country I live in - and have been in such denominations since I became a Christian (in Denmark) 20 years ago. (I have been reading Eastern Orthodox books, and enjoying what I have found there, but you probably caught me arguing their positions from an ecumenical standpoint). Not sure my "faith journey" would be so interesting, and I might prefer to write about subjects of more general interest.
Maybe I should run a few ideas by you here before I start writing anything that might be wildly inappropriate:
Delete1) Wearing headscarves in church again: Ladies, you know you it makes sense
2) The Baptist Succesionism Theory
3) Whither Thomism? (Drawing on Catholic philosopher Ed Feser)
4) The life and works of Colombian aphorist Nicolas Gomez Davila
...there are more
Anything will do ......
DeleteJack, I'm presently in the throes of a major house renovation, but as soon as its done -- in the next few days -- I'll be putting some new material together for my own blog. I'm sketching out a piece on the death penalty and Francis's revision of the catechism. If your interested, you may repost once I've put it up.
Delete@ Bell
DeleteBe happy to do so - post a link here to your blog too.
I enjoy this site. I like the absence of Linus style trolls. I think a wider mix of contributors would be good, I'd be interested in different angles
ReplyDeleteBlast I accidentally pressed publish 😲 I meant to say having different contributors would give different perspectives on issues.
DeleteI'd look forward to Lain supplying an article.
But you're doing a good job.
My commissioning rates are incredibly reasonable!
DeleteI'd be happy to supply something, although it would probably be more reflective than current affairs-y (I've pretty much resigned myself to the fact that the world is burning outside my window, and the best I can do is occasionally dampen down my lawn...). I don't know if there an appetite for that, or if people prefer to talk about what's in the news.
We could also perhaps have something like a regular open post that's more like a free forum than a discussion of a specific topic, where people could share anything they've come across, or heard in church, or what's going on with them, or prayer requests etc. - stuff that doesn't warrant a full post. Maybe on a Sunday starting with sharing the gospel reading with a short reflection - there are plenty of websites that offer free daily Bible reflections if Jack doesn't feel like preparing a Sunday sermon every week.
I'm glad that this little slice of community has been preserved; I'm sad that so many other ex-Cranmerites have vanished into the aether, but as Kermit the frog noted, 'life is made up of meetings and partings. That is the way of it.'
雲水,
DeleteYes, there rather is the feeling that the world is burning outside one's windows! One tries sometimes to tell people to open their curtains, but I guess it is what it is.
I join Prof Clive in saying that I'd be happy if Jack could be pursuaded to let you write some posts.
"a regular open post that's more like a free forum than a discussion of a specific topic, where people could share anything they've come across, or heard in church, or what's going on with them, or prayer requests etc. - stuff that doesn't warrant a full post. Maybe on a Sunday starting with sharing the gospel reading with a short reflection"
Sounds OK to me. Jack might like to set some rules for that.
Seconding @Lain twice over. Yes, Jack, please take full advantage of Lain's kind offer to write a reflective blogpost from time to time, and I think it's also an excellent idea to open an occasional blank thread for anyone to comment on anything at all, as you did once before.
DeleteI also second @Gadjo Dilo's appeal to @Clive to keep us abreast of his news and views.
@ Gadjo
DeleteYes, the occasional Open Forum is a good idea.
Absolutely no persuasion needed for guest posts! HJ would welcome posts from "Crannogites" on any subject. Just post them to him using the contact form ("Message in a Bottle") - accessed by clicking on the 3 line icon on the top left of the blog and scrolling down.
And, yes, any articles from Lain would be appreciated.
@ Lain
DeleteHappy to receive guest posts on any subject from you. Also like the idea about a reflection of the Gospel readings on a Sunday, separate from the 'Open Forum', an idea HJ also likes.
... on any subject
DeleteMy 15,000 word thesis on the correct placement of the semicolon in Jn 1:3 will be with you shortly.
Or even the colon ...
DeleteAh, the Colonic Heresy promulgated by the Old Punctuationists...
Delete🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
DeleteI'm certainly enjoying the blog, and hope Jack keeps it going, although I do appreciate it's more time consuming than it appears to the casual onlooker. Perhaps a regular rotation of contributors might help?
ReplyDelete@ Bell
DeleteThank you.
Please keep it going, Jack. And no, it's definitely not time to "move on", if that is a euphemism for "chuck it in and do something else instead".
ReplyDelete@ Ray
DeleteThank you, Ray.
What happened to the Contact button that used to be on the right of the page? I don't seem to see it anymore.
ReplyDeleteI think the open thread suggestion is a great idea, and would also give Happy Jack a breather!
Btw, does anyone know if Avi Barzel knows about this blog?
@ Right Angle
DeleteIf you click the 3 lined icon at the top left of the blog site it opens a menu, scroll down and the contact form is there.
Avi Barzel has gone quiet and his Disqus account hasn't been used for years - so its unlikely. It's a pity because HJ enjoyed his posts.
PS - HJ has called it "Message in a Bottle" to maintain the Crannog theme!
DeleteOK, I see it now, thanks!
DeleteHJ I'm sure (sort of) that not long before Cranmer's demise Avi mentioned he had a new disqus account?
Delete@ Clive
DeleteAdrian Hilton has an older and now long abandoned blog.
Yes but that was a blogger account. I think the conversation was with Carl
DeleteAnyway it's all a bit academic 🙂
You are doing a great job Jack ! I think others should contribute to share the load .Lain is right...the world is burning outside one's window so it is difficult to write something not depressing and a bit cheerful. There is so much insanity on a daily level...well there is in my world. A demented 94 year old woman built like a stick insect with a walking frame was tasered by police in her nursing home at 4 am because she was brandishing a steak knife.She is dying in hospital because of her injuries. The police will not release the body camera footage. Please pray for her. She was considered to be a gem in the community. Her parish priest is very upset.
ReplyDeleteAlso our weather (Still Autumn) is freezing and one has to wear a coat with a scarf which is unheard of here at almost any time of year....people live in this country to escape this type of northern hemisphere weather.
Good news the visiting Indian Prime Minister was treated like a rock star here. Everyone loves him and he doesn't even speak English....I don't think that is the reason.
Anyway this is my contribution Jack...Cressida's Ramblings
I thought the Indian premier was a Hindu Nationalist who views Christianity as a foreign imperialist import which he is trying to discourage?
Delete@ Cressie
DeleteThank you, Cressie. What shocking news from Australia! Clare Nowland is in my prayers.
Poor thing having to wear a scarf and coat!
She died today. Shocking!
DeleteIt is appalling ....
DeleteGod rest her soul.
That's awful. Grant her, O Lord, remission of sin and memory eternal.
DeleteI know dementia can make some people violent, but this woman was 95, she required a walking frame to move and the officer discharged his Taser after she began approaching "at a slow pace". I see that the officer has been charged. Appalling behaviour. Something nasty seems to have collectively infected our police officers over the last few years.
Maybe contact Adrian Hilton and see if he'd like write an article.
ReplyDeleteExcellent idea! How about Mrs Proudie as well? Does anyone have a contact address for him/her?
DeleteThat's a good idea. Who are you and what have you done with the real Chef?
Delete@ Chef
DeletePerhaps you'd do the honours and contact Adrian Hilton.
@ Ray
DeleteMrs Proudie posts occasionally on The Conservative Woman.
Reply to Bell....Yes Chef seems so well adjusted and normal now...I prefer the other Chef with the long curls doing all that arm waving to Protestant music at youth camps or the Chef hurlling horse dung from the turrets at the Catholic army attempting to storm his castle walls.....Cressida
ReplyDeleteChurch Militant has been "downsizing", as they say, apparently since some time late last year. Is Jules Gomes' job as their Rome correspondent safe, I wonder? Does anyone here have inside information?
ReplyDeletehttps://www.ncronline.org/news/right-wing-catholic-outlet-church-militant-downsizing-after-years-expansion
Gomes now considering joining the controversal publication Tridentine Militant. His first article will be a piece that is critical of the Latin language and its syntax.
DeleteIt was always on the cards since itsfounder was "outed". CM was always a vehicle for Michael Voris, and one-man shows have limited run times. E Michael Jones -- himself an erratic, although brilliant, force -- cut all connection with CM after Voris's homosexuality came out. Jones' reasoning was that the same narcissism which drove Voris to homosexuality would infect everything else he did unless it was addressed. Jones asked Voris to step back into a more offscreen role and let others come forward. He wouldn't, and I think we're seeing the results. CM itself does good and much needed work, and broadly speaking, it has the right attitude towards our absolute disgrace of a hierarchy, but Voris himself is the problem.
DeleteIt was always on the cards since itsfounder was "outed"
DeleteI don't know why EM Jones is, but is the implication here that Voris is still tainted by his past transgressions? My understanding was that Voris considered himself a 'recovered' gay man. I can see that there might be a concern that Voris might feel the need to atone for his past by hyper-focusing on figures like James Martin and sexuality within the Church to the exclusion of other issues, but this does read like he's been 'outed' for the 'unforgivable sin'.
🙄 I also don't know who EM Jones is. Why EM Jones is, is a much deeper question.
Delete@ Lain
DeleteBackground to this here, here, and here.
Church Militant's response:
"Homo-Narcissism'
Jones spends a great deal of time playing psychologist, diagnosing Voris with an illness he calls "homo-narcissism," an apparently lifelong affliction, according to Jones, disqualifying him and others who have indulged in serious mortal sin from any public ministry or apostolate.
Jones promotes the message of "once gay, always gay" — that the disorder of same-sex attraction has so marred a man's soul as to never be able to escape it.
It is a message strikingly similar to that propagated by the likes of Fr. James Martin, SJ and his pro-LGBT cohorts. It is a diabolical message, one entirely opposed to that of the gospel, which teaches that those redeemed by God are "a new creation" in Christ."
@ Bell
Delete"Erratic" .... and then some!
Nobody ever stops having a particular appetite, which is what homosexuality is, but that's ALL it is. It is not an identity or some kind of third sex, nor does it define a person. You don't have to live by it, any more than a man who has a an attraction to, say, Hispanic women has to marry a Spaniard. The difference is that, thanks to decades of propaganda, homosexuals think they ARE special, and if it doesn't come out in sexual practice, it's likely to come out elsewhere. Jones isn't far off the mark with the whole "homo-narcissism" thing. This IS what Voris is doing at CM.
Delete@Jack
DeleteJones promotes the message of "once gay, always gay"
As I thought, Voris is untouchable because of his past. Very antithetical to the Gospel...
It strikes me that the 'horseshoe' theory of politics applies to religion as well - the extremes of both camps (i.e., the liberals and the traditionalists) aren't actually at opposite ends of a linear scale - they curve back towards each other and end up indistinguishable. They both know better than the Church, they both excommunicate those who fall short of their ideological purity shibboleths, and they both end up eating their own. I'm increasingly seeing 'traditionalists' and figures on 'the right' doing just what they criticise 'woke liberals' for doing.
@ Bell - what's the difference between homo-narcissism and hetero-narcissism?
Delete@Lain,
DeleteThe difference is that heterosexuality is the default. A heterosexual man is one amongst billions, and few if any would assume their sexual appetite makes them in any way special or somehow different from "ordinary" people. The whole point of being a homosexual is that somehow, you hurt deeper and bleed redder than "ordinary" men. By the way, the terms "homosexual" and "heterosexual" are hugely misleading. They were coined in the nineteenth century by an Austrian journalist named Karl Maria Kertbeny, and of the two, "heterosexual" is the more troubling. Kertbeny coined the word "homosexual" to semi-medicalize the orientation and take the sting out of the more traditional word, "sodomite", but his real genius was in coining a cognate, "heterosexual". By creating two "balancing" words, he inserted an unspoken assumption in people's minds that there were two sexualities, rather than one. In fact, the words "sodomite" is, I think, more accurate, not so much because of its judgmental overtones, but rather because it indicates an action rather than a state of being. One is not a sodomite if one does not practice sodomy. On an unrelated point, do you really think it's a sound idea for a member of the Orthodox communion to be critical of people excommunicating each other?
I don't know, you'll have to ask a member of the Orthodox Communion. I'm a member of the Orthodox Church.
DeleteThe whole point of being a homosexual is that somehow, you hurt deeper and bleed redder than "ordinary" men.
Citation needed...
In fact, the words "sodomite" is, I think, more accurate ... One is not a sodomite if one does not practice sodomy.
So what would you call two men who live together in sexual intimacy without practicing that particular act?
@ Bell
DeleteYou can simply be a narcissist - without the homosexuality. You're actually suggesting all those with homosexual inclinations are narcissists. Some will be; others wont be. That said, Voris does seem rather full of himself. Then again, so does EM Jones.
There is more than one manifestation of intrinsically immoral sexual behaviour. For example, not all homosexual men practice sodomy. There are other genital activities they engage in. Women with same sex attraction are not sodomites. There is also man on woman sodomy, and woman on man sodomy (albeit with objects).
@Jack, 雲水 & Bell,
DeletePossibly "too much information!" but, yes, we should consign the 'S' word as a cognate for homosexuality to the bin for the reasons given.
Same-sex attraction is a fact of human existence - and some animal species also engage in it, apparently, and it wouldn't really be a 'choice' for them - and I'm sure has existed throughout history and in all societies. The question is what to do about it if one is determined to live as God desires us to live. The Jesuit poet Gerald Manley Hopkins clearly suffered from it and yet kept it under control and channeled his energies into higher matters. And there are Protestant pastors who have it and yet have managed to marry women, have families and keep the thing in perspective. One should be understanding and pray for all such people.
@ Gadjo - we should pray for all people. All are broken, all are delusional and all are sick from sin. The sexual appetite is one of the hardest to tame (especially, dare one say, for men), whatever its orientation.
Delete@雲水,
DeleteYes, yes to all that.
The Catechism of the Catholic Church says:
Delete“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” (No. 2358).
“These persons are called to fulfil 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” (No. 2358).
“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” (No. 2359).
It's interesting how many of our politicians and senior Clerics rage against those vices they are most attracted too.
ReplyDeleteAnyway it's heterosexuals who have babies and abandon them, it's heterosexuals who put their selfish desires before their family, it's heterosexuals who's sexual incontinence leads to abortion.
In comparison homosexuals mainly only damage themselves.
It's a form of defensive projection - attempting to slay in others the demons that one cannot slay within oneself, and a sign of an unbalanced inner life. If a person does not work on their own inner life and track down their own sin, then they tend to go hunting for other people's sins instead. I can't possibly be X, look how angry I get with people doing X!
DeleteIt's comforting to establish a hierarchy of sin, it makes us feel better to know that there are 'worse' people out there: 'yes, I might be married and my eyes wander all the time, but thank you God that I'm not like that homosexual over there!'
@ Clive and Lain
DeleteAgree with the general sentiment but one is assuming there's no connection between the normalisation (and now celebration) of homosexuality and the acceptance of all other forms of sexual activity outside of God's design, i.e., within a lifelong marriage between a man and a woman directed at union between the couple, procreation and the raising of children. Break this and man's sexual appetite, in all its forms, is given free licence.
It's complicated, there are a lot of factors at play. Although some fundamentalist insist on saying otherwise, I think it's pretty much a given that some people are same-sex attracted, and that's just the way that they're wired. I suspect that this section of society is larger than many people previously thought (given its prevalence in the ancient world), and the legalisation and societal acceptance of homosexuality has led to more people feeling comfortable with presenting as such in public, so there has been a perceived increase in people identifying as homosexual (who would have previously practiced 'in the closet').
DeleteAs well as this, there's the fact that sex, gender and sexuality has become the myopic obsession of both society and Church since, what, at least the 60s? Every 'norm' has broken down: sex, like cake, is just for casual enjoyment - have as much as you can and does it matter who you have it with? Add in the internet's influence on hookup culture and endless ocean of porn, and you have a society that's become obese on sex because it never runs out of food for its insatiable appetite and it doesn't know how to stop. Throw into that mix that everywhere is pushing the message that being straight is for squares and giving attention-grabbing labels to normal adolescent problems (it's not that it's normal to feel weird because your body's started growing breasts - it's because you're really a man, dear!) and young people are suddenly deciding they're LGBTQ+ in their droves (25% of Gen Z's by some surveys). It's the latest societal contagion, like fidget spinners.
That said, the Church does need to acknowledge that there's more than one sin, and act like it. Some of the 'conservative' Christian coverage of homosexuality comes across to me as being borderline voyeuristic.
@HJ
DeletePersonally I think that any belief in a time when society behaved in a sexualy responsible way, is wrong. Scratch below the facade and you will see vice, rape, sexual immorality of all forms. Looking back and you will struggle to find a time when prostitution was rife and men didn't behave like sexual predators.
So I think the normalisation of homosexually is simply an extension of the general normalisation of extra marital sex etc. That has happened since ww2.
When frankly people who didn't feel they had long, wanted what they could get
Of course the above is a sweeping generalisation. But I really wish it didn't obsess on this one sin over all others.
@Clive
DeleteThat has happened since ww2. When frankly people who didn't feel they had long, wanted what they could get.
That's a good point, and we've been living with the background threat of some extinction level event ever since: the Cold War nuclear, climate change etc.
But I really wish it didn't obsess on this one sin over all others.
It's become politicised, largely thanks to our friends across the pond. 'Where do you stand on the LGBT issue' is a shibboleth to find out if you're a good conservative (or liberal). Unfortunately, the Church (and most other religions in the west) has sleepwalked into doing exactly the same thing. The blind have led the blind into a pit, and I'm not quite sure how we get out again.
The Christian tradition (see here) speaks of four peccata clamantia, ("sins that cry out to heaven for vengeance"): murder, sodomy, oppression of the poor, and defrauding workers of their wages. The list derives from Scripture passages.
DeleteThis is not an arbitrary collection of sins. The link between the four peccata clamantia are explained by Aristotelian philosophy: They are all sins against nature. Aristotle identifies man as a social animal that naturally forms a number of communities, including the family and political society. Murder is extreme anti-social behaviour, a negation of man’s natural tendency to collaborate with others for the sake of achieving common goods. Sodomy, or perverse sexual activity more broadly, is a violation of the natural order of procreation, for it makes barren humanity’s natural fruitfulness.
Aristotle saw usury seeing it as a violation of natural and just rates of exchange. Since it is usually the poor who require loans, usury makes profit from those who already do not have enough. Defrauding workers of their wages also violates the idea of a just exchange. A worker has a right to the fruits of his labour. When he works the soil to produce a harvest, the use of the grain is his natural due as a result of his work. Therefore, to defraud workers of their wages, or to pay less than what their work merits, is also a violation of the nature of commutative justice.
Murder, sodomy, oppression of the poor, and defrauding workers of their wages are sins against nature and against the fraternal justice required for a human society to function harmoniously.
@ Lain
Delete"At present the Church, and all Christians of a traditional sort, coexist in a false and uneasy truce with the sexual revolution. There has always been sin in the world, of course, and Christianity and sin are always incompatible, but increasingly our world is one of sin normalized, institutionalized, made official. Think of the almost unbearable moral contradiction baked into abortion law, for instance. And of the inescapable conclusion that what the state says about abortion falsifies Catholicism.
Same-sex marriage, I think, will magnify this tension, perhaps to a point where it can no longer be smoothed over or ignored. The state and the culture say two persons of the same sex can marry; the Church says they can’t. This condition can’t endure. The Church’s position is just too great an obstacle—an insult—to the sexual liberation project, of which homosexuality has become the popular symbol."
(Four Ways Same Sex Marriage Will Affect You)
Interestingly, Dante put sodomites and usurers in the same circle of hell in his "Inferno" because both pervert the natural order, one making a sterile act -- moneylending -- fruitful, and the other making a fruitful act -- sex -- barren. Of course, Dante is not speaking for the Church or the magisterium here, but his poetry is reflective of Church teaching.
Delete@ Bell - but, presumably from what you've said, homosexuals who don't practice that particular act are fine? I also look forward to the condemnation of usurers. For some reason, bankers don't seem to rouse the same ire as homosexuals among traditionalists.
Delete@ Jack - murder, sodomy, oppression of the poor, and defrauding workers of their wages.
And which of these is disproportionately addressed by the modern Church? Pope Francis is dragged over the coals as a communist when he strays close to mentioning the last two.
Homosexuality is also the one on the list that least affects the average Western Christian - our comfortable lifestyles being largely founded on treating the lives of the (foreign) poor as disposable, oppressing them and defrauding them of their wages. I'm sure our lack of interest in these peccata clamantia is purely coincidental.
Apparently, usury is not a big concern to the Orthodox either. In the west, there is at least a papal encyclical condemning it, Vix Pervenit. Homosexuals who are not active are, by definition, not guilty of any sexual sin, however, the point of this sub-thread is that the attitude of mind which gives rise to the homosexual attraction often leads to other sins where it is not given expression though sodomy or other homosexual practices. The Orthodox are a pick'n'mix kind of group, but the Church has always had a more definitive attitude to sin, despite the best efforts of Francis and his Jesuits. If it appears the Church is overly concerned with sexual sin, that's merely your opinion. Perhaps, right at this moment in history, usury is not so immediate a concern as sexual depravity.
DeleteWhen has sexual depravity ever been of less a concern? When was sexual depravity not an issue?
DeleteMy assumption is you are saying these issues are more of a problem now then they were in the past.
They are. No society to my knowledge has elevated homosexual relationships up to the same level as marriage, nor has the mutilation of children been a state-protected activity. It's worse now than it's ever been and is the most immediate threat to our civilization.
Delete@ Bell - this is called the tu quoque fallacy, which is to attack another when one is incapable of defending one's own position. Colloquially, it's called 'two wrongs don't make a right'. Yes, the fact that many Orthodox Christians see no issue working in banking is a scandal. You are of course right that we Orthodox don't look to a monarchal figure whose word is law (except when one disagree with it, in which case one founds entire websites and funds apostolates to rail against it - I'm sure there's a name for those who protest against the papacy). But then, I also don't recall dancing around a statue of a pagan fertility goddess in the cathedral gardens lately, so - swings and roundabouts.
DeleteYou do understand that homosexuals can engage in other kinds of sexual contact, I presume - ones forbidden to heterosexual couples. Are you ok with those? And you still need to furnish a shred of evidence to substantiate the claim that 'the whole point of being a homosexual is that somehow, you hurt deeper and bleed redder than "ordinary" men'. Rather than, say, the point of being homosexual is to have sex with other men.
This current monomania with sexuality serves only to tell the wider world that the Church has nothing more to offer than a hyper-fixation on one's genital activity and an unhealthy interest in what goes on in one's bedroom. This, somehow, puts it apart from the world, which has a hyper-fixation on one's genital activity and an unhealthy interest in what goes on in one's bedroom. I'm not sure when copying the world became an effective evangelistic tool. And, since the Church seems to have difficulty in controlling the genital activity of its own clergy, it's perhaps a case of practicing what one preaches and getting one's own house in order before lecturing the rest of the world on how to live. Physician, heal thyself...
@ Lain
Delete"Homosexuality is also the one on the list that least affects the average Western Christian."
That's just not the case. Look at the damage its inflicted on Western churches through numerous child abuse cases which have been demonstrably male on (teenage) male abuse - and covered up by those 'sympathetic' to the proclivity. Then there's the harm from the normalising of homosexual relationships which affects children and young people, their outlook on sex, family life and parenting responsibility.
And the Christian churches are not standing their ground! They're increasingly backing off challenging the normalisation of homosexuality (and contraception, divorce and remarriage, abortion, euthanasia).
@ Bell
Delete"No society to my knowledge has elevated homosexual relationships up to the same level as marriage, nor has the mutilation of children been a state-protected activity. It's worse now than it's ever been and is the most immediate threat to our civilization."
Agreed.
You might find this of interest. It's lengthy but worth the effort. It covers Pope Benedict's Light of the World regarding sexuality and homosexuality.
Of more interest and on the money is his comments as Cardinal Ratzinger, in 1985 describing the changes in the understanding of sexuality as a series of three successive fractures.
Firstly: "In the culture of the developed world, it is above all the indissoluble bond between sexuality and motherhood that has been ruptured. Separated from motherhood, sex has remained without a locus and has lost its point of reference: it is a kind of drifting mine, a problem and at the same time an omnipresent power."
In the past, sexual activity outside the boundaries of marriage was seen as something shameful or sinful. Even within marriage, prior to the Lambeth Conference of 1930, contraceptive intercourse was rejected almost universally by Christianity - Catholic, Orthodox, and Protestant. With the development of the birth control pill the risk of an unwanted pregnancy was eliminated; and such behaviour could be hidden. Now there was no perceptible shame in sexual activities outside marriage. In fact, the situation was reversed. There existed a means, which were scientifically and medically regulated and promoted, to limit births; this was labelled “responsible behavior” at that time by those who were concerned about overpopulation.
Ratzinger identified a second rupture between sexuality and procreation with the development of artificial reproductive technologies: "The movement, however, ended up going in the opposite direction: procreation without sexuality. Out of this follow increasingly shocking medical-technical experiments so prevalent in our day where, precisely, procreation is independent of sexuality. Biological manipulation is striving to uncouple man from nature. There is an attempt to transform man, to manipulate him as one does every other ‘thing’: he is nothing but a product planned according to one's pleasure."
A third and final fracture results in the uprooting of man from his very nature whereby sex is severed from any reference to objective reason: "No longer having an objective reason to justify it, sex seeks the subjective reason in the gratification of desire, in the most “satisfying” answer for the individual, to the instincts no longer subject to rational restraints. Everyone is free to give to his personal libido the content considered suitable for himself. Hence, it naturally follows that all forms of sexual gratification are transformed into “rights” of the individual ... Homosexuality becomes an inalienable right. ... an aspect of human liberation."
As HJ said, the whole paper is worth a read.
@ Lain
DeleteTo be fair, HJ understood this comment of Bells: 'the whole point of being a homosexual is that somehow, you hurt deeper and bleed redder than "ordinary" men', as a reference to the victim culture that has surrounds homosexuality. This can't be denied.
"They are. No society to my knowledge has elevated homosexual relationships up to the same level as marriage, nor has the mutilation of children been a state-protected activity".
DeleteWell let's remember I was talking sex and sex orientation and as bad as the situation with trans mutilation of children is, it is neither of these things.
Same sex marriage may now enjoy official recognition, but it doesn't mean that people are more or less sexualy active. Either as homosexuals or hetrosexuals.
Extra marital sex has been rife throughout the history of Christian Europe. Sometimes it has been better hidden than it is today, reflecting the respective social norms, but whether the middle ages, regency, Georgian, Victorian or any other era in history you would like to mention, there has been vast amounts of extra marital sex.
But I find your comment interesting in that it reveals a lack of real concern for proper sexual relationships and an obsession with improper homosexual ones. Your measure of whether society is sexualy more or less moral is based on your perception of the level of homosexual activity.
I rather feel this proves my point.
"Proper sexual relationships",by definition, require no concern. And I must differ with you on the trans issue. It is certainly a sexual issue in that the root of is is autogynephilia, the sexual arousal of a male by the thought of himself as a female. Thomas Aquinas held that lust darkens the intellect; you cannot think straight when you are in its grip. I think the trans issue is the worst example of this ever. At least so far.
Delete@Jack,
DeleteThanks for that link, Jack. I think Benedict's star will rise as time goes on. He was a truly great theologian. Being a pope requires you also be something of a player, however, and he was probably more honest than was good for the job. Such a pity he stepped down when he did. I would have like to see him push as far as he could in the direction he was going. In fact, he would not actually be considered a traditionalist, but rather, a moderate. He just looks extreme compared to Francis.
@Lain,
DeleteLain, if you're going to take Catholics to task for the tu quoque fallacy, you shouldn't the bring up Pachemama (which I assume you're referring to). I would remind you that the idol in question ended up floating down the Tiber because the Catholic laity wouldn't wear it. We're all well aware of the damage that thing did to the Church. As to homosexuality, yes, the point is to have sex with other men, but that's like saying that the point of the Battle of Britain was to knock out the RAF. It was, but that was only to serve a greater purpose, invasion. WHY would a man have sex with another man? What is the purpose behind it?
@ Jack - That's just not the case. Look at the damage its inflicted on Western churches...
DeleteThis is entirely a self-inflicted injury: it's like a person bashing themselves on the head with a saucepan and bewailing the evils of cooking utensils. It's not homosexuality that's inflicted this damage, it's predatory men and complicit power structures that have inflicted it - the Church has damaged the Church. The proportion of homosexual v heterosexual abuse in the Church is roughly in inversion to that of wider society - this suggests that it's a Church problem rather than a homosexual one per se: probably largely down to the fact that, when the majority of these abuses took place, access to vulnerable young men was far easier for predators in a predominantly male system - altar servers, seminarians etc., and predatory and compromised bishops surrounded themselves with their own kind.
And the Christian churches are not standing their ground!
This is, again, the fault of the churches. The early Christians were martyred for standing against society, modern Christians go with the world so that they won't get banned on Twitter.
@ Bell - Pachamama would only be a tu quoque fallacy if I'd use it to deflect against an accusation that Orthodox churches dance around pagan fertility idols.
The whole point is that tradcaths spend half their lives telling the Protestants and Orthodox that the True Church is only to be found in submission to the bishop of Rome, and the other half of their lives rebelling against the bishop of Rome when he does something they don't like. You can't have your cake and eat it: he's either has supreme and immediate governance over the universal church (in which case, complaining that he's a compromised Marxist when he changes the Catechism is an act of sinful disobedience), or he's not (in which case, he's simply the head of the Roman Communion).
WHY would a man have sex with another man? What is the purpose behind it?
I presume that they enjoy it? Why do men want to have one night stands with any woman who wanders past (I doubt it's to make lots of babies)? If the multi-billion dollar sex industry is anything to go by, the male sex drive is a chaotic and rather indiscriminate force, much like a tsunami that consumes whatever happens to get in its way. Certainly, most of the men I knew in college and university (and not a few in various churches) would have sex with anything that said 'yes'.
@Bell
DeleteAre you saying that autogynephilia plays a major part in the issue of body dysmorphia in minor's? Because it seems at best unlikely.
By proper sexual relationships, I simply meant hetrosexual, I wasn't meaning biblically proper, but I was unclear.
@ Clive
DeleteThis disproportionately affects young girls, who are already much more vulnerable to body issues during adolescence than boys are. My feeling is that, in minors, this is usually not gender dysmorphia but the natural alienation one feels towards one's body when it starts doing weird things, which is being exploited by ideologues. 'Is your first period weird and upsetting? You must be a boy'. Either that, or there's a sudden and inexplicable epidemic of boys being born in the 'wrong bodies', which - what are the odds? - just happens to coincide with classes on gender theory being taught in schools (quite what it is that's 'born in the wrong body', I don't know).
If I had kids, I'd homeschool.
@Lain -- you seem to think that Catholics look on the Pope as some kind of Hobbesian Leviathan, an absolute monarch whose word is law because it's his word. We don't, which is why we throw pagan idols in the Tiber when he brings them into a church. The Pope is bound by sacred tradition as much as any Catholic. If he tries to drive a coach and horses through the magisterium, he is still offside, pope or no pope. What do you imagine Catholics would do if he suddenly demanded we start practicing bestiality? Or tried to make abortion a sacrament of the Church? Just do it because the pope says so? Every Orthodox on the planet knows we are in union with the Pope only to the extent that the pope is in union with the magisterium, yet they keep peddling this "Pope as demigod" nonsense for reasons of historical enmity which run entirely in one direction. Catholics do not hate the Orthodox. Will you vouch for the converse?
Delete@Prof Generaliter,
DeleteNo, I'm not saying autogynephilia plays a major role in the body dismorphia of minors, I'm saying that a number of wicked and predatory people who DO have autogynephilia use the body dismorphia of minors to spread that wickedness.
@ Bell - an absolute monarch whose word is law because it's his word
DeleteSo it's untrue that the Pope 'by reason of his office as Vicar of Christ, and as pastor of the entire Church has full, supreme, and universal power over the whole Church, a power which he can always exercise unhindered'?
This is a straw man (and also not a Hobbesian Leviathan, while we're at it). I expect that Catholics regard the Pope's law as his law, and not pick and choose and endlessly protest about him exercising his power to change the catechism or the liturgy like, well, Protestants do.
The Pope is bound by sacred tradition as much as any Catholic.
The Pope's teachings are only correct insomuch as they agree with the Magisterium as interpreted by whom? Lay internet Catholics and armchair theologians? And if they don't like it, they'll ignore your teachings and chuck your stuff in the Tiber? What's the point of the Pope, then, if every individual can apply the Magisterium for themselves (rather Lutheran)? I didn't realise that the Catholic Church was Congregationalist.
Every Orthodox on the planet knows we are in union with the Pope only to the extent that the pope is in union with the magisterium...
'Every Orthodox on the planet'? Really? I'd imagine a fair number of Orthodox are more concerned with having their churches blown up and bishops abducted by Islamists than they are in the minutiae of Rome's magisterial machinations.
Catholics do not hate the Orthodox. Will you vouch for the converse?
I mean, as you seem to struggle to engage with basic questions from an Orthodox poster without triggering your persecution complex, I'll take the first half of that statement with a pinch of salt. As for the second half, asking me to vouch for the feelings of 300 million people is just silly. Some Orthodox hate Catholics (especially in those countries with historical grievances against Rome), some love them, but I'm afraid to say that most just get on with their lives without giving the Catholic Church a second thought. Personally, I don't really have the energy to hate anyone. I increasingly find most institutions, religious or otherwise, absurd and I thank God that he's placed me on the fringiest of fringes of one. An attachment to any form of Church (or religion), rather than to God, is, I think, to spectacularly miss the point.
But to return to the topic - Christianity is not activism. This obsession with homosexuality is simply aping the world by dividing the Church into pro-LGBT activists and anti-LGBT activists; neither position seeming to me to have much to do with Christianity except for appropriating its Scriptures and outward forms. Nobody's going to reach Christ's judgement seat and hear, 'well, you didn't feed me when I was hungry, clothe me when I was naked or visit me in prison; you didn't bring good news to the poor, liberty to the captives or sight to the blind ... but you did spend a lot of time online raving about the 'Lavender Mafia'. In you go!'
@Lain,
DeleteI understand that another large group is those with autism. As other vulnerable group, who need proper protection.
I said to my wife when our son started senior school that our job was to ensure as little damage came from the experience as possible.
@ Clive - yes, you're right. I find your last paragraph quite sad; what an indictment of our education system. I'm increasingly convinced that more people survive school than benefit from it, it's definitely the way I feel about my schooling.
Delete@Bell,
DeleteGrooming of any sort is evil, but as far as I can see certainly not limited to homosexuals. I wonder what the evidence is that would support your claims about those with autogynephilia, if it's a thing, being particularly active. And even if they are, why that would be an issue to do with homosexuality'.
@Lain, well tbh after a couple of hiccups, he loved it and in the main was very happy.
DeleteThe hiccups were quite serious ones at the time.
Homosexuality is a disorder. There are theories why it happens medically and sociologically or both but not a lot of research has been done.In genuine cases (which exclude bisexuality) I think the percentage population wise would be low. There is no doubt that homosexual men were discriminated against particularly in work situations. The need to hide their situation was imperative if the wanted to succeed in certain professions . This often resulted in marrying an unsuspecting woman to gain societal approval resulting inevitably in dire consequences for the wife and the children. Relinquishing the shame of homosexuality has spared the unsuspecting women. Sadly it has all gone too far. Wnen a male talks about their" husband to be" on tv I feel as if I have entered the science fiction zone along with societal sanctioning of mutilation and the attempted normalisation of it through the education system. Indoctrination through education is very effective (see Nazi Germany and the Jews)
ReplyDeleteWhen I was young being in the arts field I had homosexual friends and I witnessed first hand how they suffered. Their heterosexual platonic girl friends did their best to protect them from all kinds of abuse (physically included )They would have been just happy to have the laws changed so they could enter into a civil partnership with the accompanying legal rights. Homosexuals of that era did not want children. They preferred life style. It has all gone horribly wrong. Having said this I must say that the kindness and friendship extended to me when most needed was by my homosexual friends (sadly now passed ) As a Catholic even before the Catechismal edict every Catholic should have known it is wrong to discriminate to cause injustice and suffering to others...all intrinsic stuff... How could any Catholic not know that ?
The above is from Cressida.
ReplyDeleteI have been paying quite frequent visits to the Crannog, but for a month or two my brain hasn’t been in writing gear.
ReplyDeleteNot to worry, Irishman! Thanks for visiting.
DeleteHJ
DeleteSo is tomorrows post going to be about Carey's views on euthenasia? Should be fun, I mean enlightening!!
Done ....
Deletehttps://www.spectator.com.au/2023/05/misgendering-is-the-new-blasphemy/........Cressida
ReplyDeleteInstead of rational and balanced dialogue and debate any who question or refuse to conform to Woke ideology are vilified and attacked. Celebrate Western Civilisation, notwithstanding its sins and faults, and you are guilty of ‘white supremacy’, suggest women can be feminine and you are a ‘misogynist’.
ReplyDeleteIf you are a man defending traditional beliefs and values you are labelled ‘male, pale, and stale’. Such is the extreme nature of thought control universities, government departments, and businesses now have diversity and inclusivity language guides to ensure no one is guilty of thoughtcrime.
Proven by what has happened to Joshua Sutcliffe in the UK as well as Australia’s Israel Folau and Margaret Court plus the principal of Brisbane’s Citipointe Christian College and Cardinal George Pell, those of religious faith are especially vulnerable to attack.
While the situation is not as extreme in Western nations like Australia, one wonders whether Chicago’s Cardinal Francis George is correct when he writes, while ‘I expect to die in bed, my successor will die in prison and his successor will die a martyr in the public square’.
Dr Kevin Donnelly is a senior fellow at the ACU’s PM Glynn Institute and author of The Dictionary Of Woke.
Cressida