Picking up some of the very dangerous ideas that Rob Wells has about Catholic Insight….
He argues the material on the magazine’s website “does not represent Catholic teaching” and wants the human rights commission to proceed with his complaint expeditiously.
“It’s hateful, discriminatory and it has to be challenged,” argues Wells, who adds the controversy is not about religious freedom.
“I don’t care what they say from their pulpit,” he says. “But when they put hate messages or messages that are likely to expose minority groups to hatred or contempt, it’s against the human rights legislation.” … (Source)
Isn’t that funny? Rob Wells is telling us that Catholic Insight does not represent Catholic teaching! Well, who should we go to for Catholic teaching? How about the Catechism of the Catholic Church, the official doctrinal “handbook” of Catholicism? Let’s look up what it says on homosexuality:
2357 Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex. It has taken a great variety of forms through the centuries and in different cultures. Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained. Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity, tradition has always declared that “homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered.” They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.
That’s the one thing about liberals: if they don’t like something, they simply redefine it according to their own tastes. The fact is that Catholic Insight is completely consistent with Catholic teaching not only on homosexuality but in everything it publishes. What Wells does not want to do is admit what his complaint is really about. It’s not about Catholic Insight, but about the Catholic Church itself and Her teaching. He’s not ready to go after the Catholic Church just yet because the political winds are not blowing strongly enough, but the days are surely coming.
His other odious remark is really about the ghettoization of the Christian faith. Wells says he doesn’t care about what is said in the pulpit, but has a problem with publication of “hateful” remarks through magazines and other media. Let us reflect on this for a while. First of all, what is said in the pulpit is set within a virtual public arena. The Church is open to the public on Sunday. Anyone can come into a Catholic Church and listen to those “hateful” remarks. Why then should these remarks get a pass within the walls of a Catholic parish but not anywhere else?
The reason, of course, is that the Gay Agenda is trying to muzzle the Church everywhere except within the wall of its parishes. It represents the ghettoization of the faith – pushing it out of respectable society into the crevices of Church walls – thereby limiting the damage the Church’s criticism of homosexuality can do in the political sphere. One of the primary aims of the Gay Agenda is to silence the Catholic Church through incrementalism. They don’t seek to silence it all together in one shot. They take their time and do so gradually: first in the universities and academia, then in politics, then in the greater public arena, and then finally the assault against the Church itself.
We cannot live in a “schizo society” for long. If society believes something is fundamentally wrong or transgresses human rights, then on what basis should this “injustice” be permitted simply because it is within the confines of Church walls? Unfortunately for Catholic Civil Liberties, it will be Catholics who will be one day pushed underground for practicing the faith that helped build this country. But maybe I’m being too harsh. Let’s see what the State-sponsored, fascist imposition of Sodomy and Islamism can contribute to Canada. I’m sure it will far exceed what Christianity has offered.