Pope Benedict XVI
Maybe you heard about this yesterday:
VATICAN CITY, Dec. 22 (Reuters) - Pope Benedict said on Monday that saving humanity from homosexual or transsexual behavior was just as important as saving the rainforest from destruction.
Too bad that's not what the Pope said.
Here's an accurate translation of Pope Benedict's entire address:
Since faith in the Creator is an essential part of the Christian Creed, the Church cannot and should not limit itself to transmitting to its faithful only the message of salvation. She has a responsibility for Creation, and it should validate this responsibility in public.
In so doing, it should defend not just the earth, water and air as gifts of Creation that belong to everyone. She should also protect man from destroying himself.
It is necessary to have something like an ecology of man, understood in the right sense. It is not outdated metaphysics when the Church speaks of the nature of the human being as man and woman, and asks that this natural order be respected.
This has to do with faith in the Creator and listening to the language of creation, which, if disregarded, would be man's self-destruction and therefore a destruction of God's work itself.
That which has come to be expressed and understood with the term 'gender' effectively results in man's self-emancipation from Creation (nature) and from the Creator. Man wants to do everything by himself and to decide always and exclusively about anything that concerns him personally. But this is to live against truth, to live against the Spirit Creator.
The tropical rain forests deserve our protection, yes, but man does not deserve it less as a Creature of the Spirit himself, in whom is inscribed a message that does not mean a contradiction of human freedom but its condition.
The great theologians of Scholasticism described matrimony - which is the lifelong bond between a man and a woman - as a sacrament of Creation, that the Creator himself instituted, and that Christ, without changing the message of Creation, welcomed in the story of his alliance with men.
Part of the announcement that the Church should bring to men is a testimonial for the Spirit Creator present in all of nature, but specially in the nature of man, who was created in the image of God.
One must reread the encyclical Humanae vitae with this perspective: the intention of Pope Paul VI was to defend love against consumer sex, the future against the exclusive claim of the moment, and human nature against manipulation.
Note the complete absence of the words "transsexual" and "homosexual" or anything about "saving the world from gays."
Maybe Reuters balked at having to report the stuff denouncing "manipulation."
After all, Reuters "misreports" the news time and time again.
Comments
You should add this to your "Worst Liberal Lies" section!
There is a big difference between paraphrasing and lying. Reuteurs is not quoting the pope verbatim. His words are paraphrased accurately.
"Reuteurs is not quoting the pope verbatim. His words are paraphrased accurately."
In other words, Fake But Accurate!
So Michael, why not just quote the Pope accurately and avoid paraphrasing? Oh wait: cuz that wouldn't be as exciting.
When Reuters ran photoshopped pictures, was that also "photoshopped accurately"?
Clearly Reuters, and you, are confused by the Christian concept of "salvation". Reuters seems to think the Pope wants to either "save gays from their own behavior" or "save the world from gays." This is how the story is being reported and read around the web and in offices and living rooms around the nation.
However, this is not the way the Pope is using the word "save". It sucks to be theologically illiterate but such folks should stay away from reporting stories they don't understand.
Note the complete absence of the words "transsexual" and "homosexual" or anything about "saving the world from gays."
Still, these were the sentiments expressed. See the London Times for a more rational analysis
I don't need a bunch of London atheists "analyizing" the Pope for me, BigLiz. I already speak "Catholic" and understand exactly what he said. If you're not Catholic, and therefore, don't, then myob.
the last time I saw a bunch of trannies in public, they were kind of nervous like I might still see them as guys with their major operations hanging out. the pope along with all his sub-popes are a bunch of queens, why else would they enjoy robe-ing themselves like that. save us from them, not god or the rainforest or the environment.
we have an afro-american president, a gay Pope is still missing
Retrogade persons err good to feed lions
He just took the long way of say it.
It black and white mixed together , he could have said grey.
The church follow castration techniques early to get more beneficial through mass control (repression and fear). The Catholic Church is full of plagiarism, barbarian and irrational costumes, enough to say, an invention made by pervert persons.
Protestant snark reporting in! Actually, I am a bit disappointed by this news. I was ready to post something along the lines of "Pope claims homosexuality is as great a danger as global warming... Agreed!" but you have ruined my fun. I insist the Pope dumb down his addresses to Archdruid of Canterbury quality ASAP.
Tim, thank you for your totally ignorant mischaracterization of everything about the Catholic Church.
Do you people ever put down your freebie "independent" newspapers and look around you and just sort of THINK and observe and try to be rational?
Tim, thank you for your totally ignorant mischaracterization of everything about the Catholic Church.
Do you people ever put down your freebie "independent" newspapers and look around you and just sort of THINK and observe and try to be rational?
Being Catholic lifelong, as I am allows one to "read" the pope's speech, along with its context, as a defense of traditional marriage. If, however, one reads Matthew, Chapt. 19 carefully, one notes that after teaching about marriage and divorce (his actual focus), Jesus explains that some "men" are not able to marry for three reasons: they are "eunuchs" born from their mother's wombs; they are "eunuchs" made eunuchs by castration; or they make them selves castrati, (as did the followers of the Syrian goddess). He thus affirms that homosexuality (there was no specific word for homosexuality in the entire New Testament, but Jesus's generation regarded "eunuchs" as non-heterosexuals. Here Jesus affirms that some people are born homosexual. Yet the church limits its interpretation of this passage on human sexuality as a reference to a celibate priesthood. That refers to only the third aspect, and one that did not refer to a celibate clergy, but to another mystery cult.
Jean Rosenfeld
historian of religions
Jean Rosenfeld, historian of religions? Surely not <i>the</i> Jean Rosenfeld?
No, seriously, are you the Jean Rosenfeld who thinks describing Scientology as a cult is unenlightened? If so, I have some waterfront property on Marcab you might be interested in.
See, now Jean may disagree with the Pope on this, but at least she brings something intelligent to the table!
Flea, at least she presents an argument for crying out loud!
PatrickP: So you are saying Marcab has no place in this debate? How entheta of you.
As to Jesus, if you could trouble yourself to read the sentences immediately preceding and following the passage Rosenfeld cites, you will discover Christ is enjoining those who can accept the Word regarding faithfulness in marriage. His reference to eunuchs is rhetorical, not exemplary.
I am not opposed to gay marriage, btw (and think global warming is a leftist fantasy, in case that earlier subtlety escaped). I just don't think the state should have anything to do with proscribing religious belief. And I find it irritating when Scripture is tortured on some academic altar.
And, Jean, if you are still lurking: I am a Protestant. To me, authentic religion must necessarily lead to the good and the ethical, is radically personal and is only necessarily social and communal to those who cannot grasp Scientology is a cult.
"Manipulation": that does sound like a reference to men undergoing operations to "become women" and vice versa. It might also mean splicing human genes with pig genes, etc. Maybe also sex-selection abortion and whole-scale destruction-in-womb of people with Down Syndrome?
We used to read Mary Shelley's "Frankenstein" as a warning of what might happen if human beings started fiddling around with the biological processes that create life. I'm not sure Mary Shelley could have pictured a world where everyone was supposed to pretend that men who had "sex-realignment" surgery were now (hey presto!) women.
Meanwhile, isn't there a shortage of (real) women in China? Male fertility is down, too... Something in the water? Female hormones, perhaps?
Oh, and I have an M.Div. and still I can't find the word homosexual in that speech. I'm not sure what "transsexual behavior" is, beyond men having expensive and unnecessary surgeries and then discomfiting women by using our restrooms, invading our women-only spaces, and claiming to be women too.
I'm a bit confused as to what the point of the article is... are you arguing that the Pope does not condemn homosexuality or just not in this article?
Even if he did not do so in this article, he does, quite regularly and quite singularly condemn it. So that is the context that people are reading this in, so forgive people if they jump to the likely conclusion that he was making an oblique reference to it. It's not as if it would have been his first one.
And for those combing through his speech for the words "homosexual" and declaring some sort of 'aha!!' victory moment when none are found, I suspect that you are not used to reading the circumspect, subtle language put in the mouth of Catholic Popes. Heck, it's only recently that we got them to stop using latin (although Benedict would happily return to it).
Mark, it is with some consternation I find myself - so not Catholic - having to defend the obvious: Nobody puts words in the mouth of this Pope. For better or worse, Benedict is an intellectual. I happen to think this is not only excellent entertainment (I would much rather be challenged by someone with whom I necessarily am going to disagree) but exactly what Christendom needs in this dark hour. Benedict embodies the mustard seed about which he has so eloquently written.
Finally, I'm a bit confused as to what the point of your comment is... are you surprised the Pope condemns "homosexuality"? You will forgive me if I jump to the likely conclusion you are making an oblique reference to opposing this view but for some reason are reluctant to just say what you think and stand by what you say.
The Dalai Lama condemns homosexuality and "consumer sex" too, but oddly enough, never gets compared to Hitler. Weird, huh?
Seraphic: You clearly have absolutely NO understanding over what transsexuality IS, let alone the slightest insight into what the condition does to a person.
I do wish people would limit their discussion of medical conditions to those conditions that they actually know something about.
Next you'll be complaining about those "men" who had their ambiguous genitals surgically mutilated at birth invading your space. Newsflash for you: a man is more than two legs with a penis in the middle, and being born with a vagina is not the be all and end all of womanhood either. Such a view might be comfortable for you - of course it would be as it supports your black and white view of the world. Unfortunately, however, the world is not black and white.
Intersex people, if not transsexual people absolutely and undeniably prove it. After all, they demonstrate the fact that either God did not make human kind as only man or woman, or that god makes mistakes (or that he doesn't exist)... take your pick.
...but Oh! Satan's influence! Well, another newsflash: God created Satan too, and being omnipotent, he'd have known what the result of that would be and as such, Satan's influence is (*shock horror*) also God's work and part of his plan.
... and if God doesn't exist, well, thre's a great many people far cleverer than you in the fields of human sexuality and biological sex telling you how wrong you really are. Not only are intersex conditions genetic, but transsexuality in both men and women (yes - it affects both sexes!) is being found to have biological factors in it's causality AND its natural occurance.
In short - take a reality check, and stop worrying about these women "invading" womens only space and threatening you with their non existant penis' under the influence of their non existant aggressive tendancies produced by their non-existant testosterone, and get on with your own life in peace while letting others have theirs, like every other respectable compassionate and civil person out there. At the very most, it's none of your business, and it does you no harm... and if you knew and understood the half of what transsexual people have to go through and what they have to face in their lives, perhaps you wouldn't be so quick to judge.
Thanks for publishing the Pope's comments in context. I think you have to twist his words to make the 'gay bashing' argument. (By the way, I'm Methodist and have long supported gay right.)
What else can we expect from so called Journalists who most would not know the difference between an Aztec heart ripper & a Christian let alone Buddism or Islam .
Which I have to say the latter is more like the Aztec Religion. Only their into heads not hearts. Both like lots of blood though.
No these "Champagne Journalists" could care less about Religion than assume all have the same opinion. Its only for the old or stupid. No truly sophisticated personage would believe in a Magic man is the refrain.
Yet most of history has been about Religion or Politics. By concentrating on the latter to the detriment of the former, they only get half the story, With unhappily no awareness of the most important part. Its why papers are dying. They are so out of touch with authenticity, because the folks who work for them have been brainwashed .They will never know as its called education now. Journalism schools are just names for indoctrination centers for future leaders. After all these day's to make it. You have to be in politics as well writing.
This is why there is such a gulf between what’s really going on & the ideological blinkers of the so called news gathers. Particularly on Religion. I think this subject frightens a lot of them. They have no experience or insight in this realm. Its why ignorance about Catholics with other Christians is so abysmal. They don’t know the rules, so ignore this subject. Some are just malicious with a hate on for a singular belief. In the end it all adds up to Ignorance at a colossal scale.
JMO
Smack me upside the head and call me stupid, but as a Catholic it has always been a sin to commit homosexual acts in the eyes of god.
Me I could careless what two consenting adults do in private, however Krissie's rant on transexuality is just her opinion not founded on science. Confusing a mental health issue with sexuaity might be the rage with the "Anything goes if it feels good crowd" but in the long term it will do untold damage to those suffering from dellusions of being another gender.
I think you're dead wrong about the press not reporting this story accurately. They absolutely did. The Pope was saying that the aberration of human kind's Divinely-designed heterosexual marriage naturally invites destruction, just as the burning of the rainforests invites negative environmental consequences.
Yes, orientation towards homosexuality is technically not a sin, according to Catholic teaching. However, Ratzinger himself previously said (in "Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church on the Care of Homosexual Persons") that homosexuality is an "intrinsic moral evil." Indeed, it IS the position of the Catholic church that a homosexual orientation (though not a sin) is "disordered." A homosexual orientation is considered to be a "trial" that homosexuals must endure by being chaste. (See the Catechism of the Catholic Church, P. 2357-2349)
So what does that mean for actual gay people? Well, it means they don't get to have romantic relationships of any kind. Romance and all it's particular joys and sorrows are "out of bounds" for the gay person. Stepping into that territory IS a sin and could be grounds for a one-way ticket to Hell.
Now, I understand exactly what the Pope is saying here. He is an intuitive, philosophical man. He loves his theology and loves how it all fits together. He's a very cerebral person.
Here's what he's saying. He's saying that man is designed for woman, just as man is designed to live in harmony with his natural environment. He is saying that the aberration of ANY natural law invites destruction. Burn down the rainforest, and you get global warming. Burn down the notion of clear gender roles, and the result "would be man's self-destruction and therefore a destruction of God's work itself."
Just because the Pope did not explicitly mention homosexuality doesn't mean that it was exactly what he was talking about, along with transgendered people too.
The basic point of this article is that, the Pope didn't *really* say that saving humanity from homosexuality is as important as saving the rainforest from destruction.
I totally disagree with that. The Pope said, "[The Church] should also protect man from destroying himself." He goes on to say, "when the Church speaks of the nature of the human being as man and woman, [she] asks that this natural order be respected... if disregarded, [that] would be man's self-destruction. The tropical rain forests deserve our protection, yes, but man does not deserve it less."
The news organizations have reported this story accurately. I don't see why you're so upset.
What else can we expect from so called Journalists who most would not know the difference between an Aztec heart ripper & a Christian let alone Buddism or Islam .
Which I have to say the latter is more like the Aztec Religion. Only their into heads not hearts. Both like lots of blood though.
No these "Champagne Journalists" could care less about Religion than assume all have the same opinion. Its only for the old or stupid. No truly sophisticated personage would believe in a Magic man is the refrain.
Yet most of history has been about Religion or Politics. By concentrating on the latter to the detriment of the former, they only get half the story, With unhappily no awareness of the most important part. Its why papers are dying. They are so out of touch with authenticity, because the folks who work for them have been brainwashed .They will never know as its called education now. Journalism schools are just names for indoctrination centers for future leaders. After all these day's to make it. You have to be in politics as well writing.
This is why there is such a gulf between what’s really going on & the ideological blinkers of the so called news gathers. Particularly on Religion. I think this subject frightens a lot of them. They have no experience or insight in this realm. Its why ignorance about Catholics with other Christians is so abysmal. They don’t know the rules, so ignore this subject. Some are just malicious with a hate on for a singular belief. In the end it all adds up to Ignorance at a colossal scale.
JMO
`protecting human nature against manipulation`
By the MSM?
Methinks the battle is with those who manipulate truth and science (biodiversity)in an open attempt to reduce man to the level of all other species -denying, by so doing, that he is made in the image of his Creator.
Those earth worshippers who deny the creator but worship His creation are being misled by the diabolical or as St. Paul called them - the powers and principalities shall roam about the world seeking the ruin of souls.
All of God's gifts are not of the same value -you can live without the sense of taste but you can't live without breathing etc. Man is the purpose of God's creation - snail darters far less so!
When Obama's chief scientist sees humans as the problem of the world and Obama supports their death even if they survive an abortion, we are morally corrupt - and merely recreating prep-war Germany with a new mask.
I'm in agreement with Adam's comments of December 24, 4:43 PM and couldn't possibly disagree more with
"Seraphic." It is more than fair to characterize the Pope's comments as disparaging gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered people and the fact that he didn't use any of these words doesn't change his obvious and long-standing intention to characterize us as destructive. I was studying to become a priest some forty years ago and I put up with the distortion that the Roman Catholic Church teaches about gay people until a few years ago when I became an Anglo-Catholic (Episcopalian.) Distinctions without any practical difference that the Church makes between homosexuality which is tolerated and homosexual activity which is condemned, are nothing short of ludicrous. Try that on heterosexuals. Also the lame attempt to justify this by repeating the Church's condemnation of all sex outside of marriage is hypocritical to gays until the Church not only withdraws its disapproval of civil marriage, but also allows marriage for us blest by the Church, itself. Needless to say I'm not waiting for the Church to become more Christian about this matter, but I've got little doubt that as in the case of Galileo, eventually it will get it right.
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!