I don't read the trib everyday, this column, however, I couldn't resist commenting on-another forwarded by Mark. The two counterpoints I want to make are that A: Compassion is not contingent on accepting any and all practices within a culture, and B: Why should the Catholic Church (or any non-governmental organization, i.e. Boy Scouts) be required to accept any and all practices. The full article is here.
Regarding point A, people often confuse compassion with the acknowledgement that there can be no wrong, i.e. people and their actions are not morally good or bad. In this case the Archbishop clarifies the Church teaching that homosexual acts are considered immoral--wrong, but that those living within the homosexual lifestyle are to be treated with compassion and love in the same way that those living in other immoral states would be, i.e. cohabitation, infidelity. Coleman jumps on the Church's teaching as incompassionate, and societal norms negotiating morality. It seems that his beef is simply that he doesn't want the Catholic Church to decide, for anyone, even believers, what is right or wrong. Nick Coleman doesn't have to agree with the Catholic Church, but why fight against it?
My second point is closely tied with the first. It can be downright difficult to live a Christian lifestyle, and to be carrying the cross of a homosexual person within a church that doesn't accept the lifestyle their drawn to I could imagine to be incredibly alienating. The Catholic Church has compassion for these people, but that does not equate acceptance of that lifestyle. The Catholic Church is a religious institution, it does not attempt to be scientific or political, so why is Nick Coleman pressuring the Church as if it needs votes to sustain itself? My point is, the Catholic Church doesn't teach in order to please the people, and many people, especially unbelievers, feel that it should.
I believe in right and wrong, based on natural law, and unapologetically from God. This is a moral code, not a rights issue. Therefore, compassion is not part of the discussion. It is assumed that all people should, by 'virtue' of us all being sinners, to be treated with compassion.
The blog formerly known as "The Hesitant Homemaker"
Won't You Be My Follower?
My Blog List
-
-
What’s a good next book?5 years ago
-
-
-
Happiness Is...10 years ago
-
-
Blog Archive
-
▼
2007
(31)
-
▼
December
(21)
- Score
- Confession
- A People Person
- Time Out
- Guilty Pleasures
- 'Till You Drop!
- A Steal
- Abortion
- Doorbusters
- Indoor Fun
- Can you relate?
- Save the Earth
- I Played My Best for Him
- Peanut Butter & Jelly
- This is How Cool I Am
- Deal...or No Deal
- Heaven Sent
- Shower Power
- Snowed In
- Can of Worms
- My Ridiculous Christmas (wish) List
-
▼
December
(21)
About Me
- Mallory
- Mom, Wife, and more recently, advocate for rare chromosomal abnormalities.
"A woman by her very nature is maternal -- for every woman, whether ... married or unmarried, is called upon to be a biological, psychological or spiritual mother -- she knows intuitively that to give, to nurture, to care for others, to suffer with and for them -- for maternity implies suffering -- is infinitely more valuable in God's sight than to conquer nations and fly to the moon."
- Dr. Alice Von Hildebrand
4 comments:
Asking whether someone should or should not fight against a tenet of faith does not hit the issue. It is fine by me to attack tenets of faith so long as you properly present what the actual tenets of faith are. Coleman and many other's in the homosexual agenda are so caught up in their advocacy, that they resort to ad hominem means of arguing. If that doesn't work, than they merely set up the argument based on false premises. By doing that, their arguments are logically sound and, therefore, intriguing to the average reader. He is being an irresponsible journalist by basing his conclusions on improper premises, or understandings of what the Catholic Church actually professes. These people don't care, they just want to fight until certain lifestyles are justified. Homosexuality can never be justified; their best arguments are frought with emotion and lacking in reason. The Church has proven her wisdom over and over throughout the centuries (ie contraception, abortion and now homosexuality).
I pray for homosexuals just as I pray for heterosexuals who engage in pre-marital sex, contraceptive sex, masterbation, or unnatural sex which reduces the act to that of animals. These are all grave matters that could have a damning effect on the soul.
Great contemporary issue to blog about ... good job. I would suggest that you tip the reader off about what the article is about before giving your editorial on it though... just a friendly suggestion.
Good points, Mark. The main point I was trying to get across you stressed in your comment, and that is the emotional argument versus the Church's teaching. When it comes down to it, it isn't a matter of fairness or feelings. I understand your other comment, too, and I originally 'briefed' the article, but the posted is already long, so I cut it out and left the reader to use their savy and follow the link on their own.
Post a Comment