Remember O'Connor? Sinéad, anyone?

Humans responded all over the world
February 21, 2019 by Fred Clark
https://www.patheos.com/blogs/slacktivist/2019/02/21/humans-responded-all-over-the-world/

What was I doing myself, late 1992?

I was not supporting Sinéad. But I was also not attacking her. I was preparing to go to a monastery (vocation cancelled, no eternal vows, not even a normal novitiate, though later, an improvised one "at home" which was interrupted without my becoming a monk), I moved from where I was renting a room to my grandmother, which delayed everything, she died the year after.

And I had taken my distance from "John Paul II" over other things, perhaps not thoroughly enough, but I was hardly in his fan club, even though still kind of recognising him as Pope. Back then.

If I had had the possibilities to back her or let her down, I might have let her down. As I hadn't, I didn't./HGL

What About Bishop Amvrosios ....

Greek Bishop Amvrosios Found Guilty of Homophobia and Hatred
By Nick Kampouris - Jan 28, 2019
https://greece.greekreporter.com/2019/01/28/greek-bishop-amvrosios-found-guilty-of-homophobia-and-hatred/

Amvrosios, the Greek-Orthodox bishop of Kalavryta, was found guilty of abuse of ecclesiastical office and incitement to hatred by a court in Aigio on Monday.

Is it for a secular court to decide on "abuse of ecclesiastical office"? As to incitement to hatred, read on:

The northern Peloponnese bishop had advised people to spit on gays in 2015, saying ”do not go near them! Do not listen to them! Do not trust them! They are the damned members of society!”

Did he say so about all who are or are considered to be homosexual? Or did he say so about homo-liberals?

Court and reporter Kampouris seem to take the former view, but the reporter at least allows the view of the bishop to be heard:

During the trial, Amvrosios stated that he never said these things against homosexuals themselves. He claimed that his remarks were made against the politicians who voted in favor of the extension of civil partnerships to LGBT people, back in 2016.

The latter is at least understandable. Homoliberalism is a ruin, for society at large, due to encouraging not just homosexual but lots of other kinds of contraceptive practise, and often allied to the still graver evil of abortion. It is also a ruin for homosexuals who get into administrational positions where overcoming their bad propensity and making a real marriage (to someone of the opposite sex, obviously) is made extra difficult for them.

Amvrosios has sparked reactions many times, as he has described homosexual people as ”monstrosities of nature,”

It might perhaps sometimes rather be of nurture. Or even mostly.

arguing that they are ”psychologically and spiritually unwell.”

I am sorry that the flirting with psychology and psychiatry is being encouraged.

Spiritually, yes, definitely in those who want to act on their evil propensity, it is called mortal sin.

But I'd say that the heresies of Romanides promoting psychology and psychiatry are also mortally sinful. Matthew 5:22.

Note, perhaps "psychologically unwell" is however not meant as synonym of out of their minds, but simply as meaning disharmonious, in which case it would be often fairly accurate and not involve flirting with psychiatry or with Romanides. However, in that case, mentioning it is perhaps not the most necessary, except when confronted with people claiming homosexuality was a road to stability. In some cases, it could be to one, in the sense that someone living only for his own happiness and somewhat that of others here on earth could be stable.

I'm not sure if it was Bob Kane or someone else speaking of the dynamic duo saying "they are not homosexuals, but they would be a lot healthier if they were" ... I do not share that view of health. But some psychologists do. And that is why flirting with them is a bad idea. Even if you contradict them on that one.

Now, is he a freem man or is he in gaol or prison, or what has happened?

Amvrosios was sentenced to a seven-month imprisonment, with all time suspended.

All time suspended - he does not spend one day in gaol or prison, see what this means:

A suspended sentence is a legal term for a judge's delaying of a defendant's serving of a sentence after they have been found guilty, in order to allow the defendant to perform a period of probation. If the defendant does not break the law during that period, and fulfills the particular conditions of the probation, the judge usually dismisses the sentence.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suspended_sentence

I was looking this up in Swedish wiki too, no, "Villkorlig dom" (see above) and "Villkorlig frigivning" are two different things. The latter corresponds roughly speaking to "on parole" except it does not imply the prisoner serving a sentence actually agrees to sth. In Sweden release to a kind of provisional freedom is basically automatic after 2/3. I was seeing a probation officer for about one year, from 2000 to 2001. I was told the probation as such would last five more years, to 2006. We are in 2019. Some people are treating me as still on probation. Sure, I did leave Sweden without notifying the probation officer, either at leaving or when getting settled in ... 2006, in Aix, but this would not be a valid cause for prolonging the probation period indefinitely. In English "on parole" means one has agreed to sth in order to get the conditional release, while the Swedish term is "conditional release" meaning I could go back to serve the last third (up to 2006, probably) if making a new "crime" (I don't consider my act was one), but I did not sign any paper or speak up solemnly before a judge to get this. I have therefore not actually broken any given word by leaving Sweden.

Well, arguably, a bishop should not be in this kind of humiliation, but also arguably, the guys who are supporting Amvrosios should not be judging me for having been to prison.

And as for what he said, I'd like to see full speeches with accurate translations (my Attic and Koiné is worse than rusty and my Dhimotiki is non-extant) before taking a stand on whether he was promoting private mob justice against simply homosexual people. On the level of shunning and even spitting, this is not necessarily illicit. But I can see how it could be illegal in a modern state having legalised abominations. I read Abortion in Greece and considering the context of the news I did not really need to glance at LGBT rights in Greece to know my words were not too strong.

Take this as cautiously supporting Amvrosios.

Hans Georg Lundahl
Nanterre UL
St. John of Matha
8.II.2019

In other words, end the probation./HGL

Trying to Sign for Zodhiates and Failing

On the Holy Family as Refugees · Trying to Sign for Zodhiates and Failing · As Said - Will Trump do the Right Thing?

Click to enlarge this picture for full text:



Some may think it's imprudent on my part to show the email hgl@dr.com - but no, it's my so to speak public communications email.

But the really funny thing is, while it is the email the petition was sent to - it says in red:

Email is not accepting messages from us.

This is the first time this happens with this email (or others that I recall).

That said, I think YOU should sign for Zodhiates.

Here is the email to the petition:

https://lifepetitions.com/petition/zodhiates-scotus-vote

Please sign, since I can't! Not right now, at any rate!/HGL

Dear Japan, Don't Sterilise Transgenders

Simply don't allow them to change gender.

They may change their mind and return to saner ideas, and then it would be tragic for them to have either changed gender or be sterilised.

Same as gay marriage should not be allowed, if a homosexual recovers, he should not be required to go through a divorce procedure in order to marry a woman, or she to marry a man./HGL

To Ramzan Kadyrov

I saw news of your having vowed to eliminate gay population of Chechnya. I also saw you had denied the reports.

I have neither of these news from your own mouth.

Now, if the vow is true, at least give them this alternative, to give up sodomite life and marry, like any gay couple could do a partner switch with a lesbian couple.

I owe gay community in Paris, just as I owe Muslim community in Paris, some gratitude./HGL

No, I'm Not Going Gay Community ...

I saw a little list ... well to some people I have lived with, liking of music such as Gilbert and Sullivan, when age peers preferred ACDC and Iron Maiden and highways to hell and stairways to heaven (the latter is musically good, but doctrinally insipid).

Quotes from Thom Senzee in Italics.

Other quote, or quotes if more than one, indented. Even in relation to general indention.

Own comment straight. No more indented than the text in Italics.

I give upper case Roman Numerals (I, II ...) for those I do not agree were "queer" and lower case Roman Numerals (i, ij ...) for those I agree were so.

I Alexander the Great

Although historians point out ad nauseam the so-called inappropriateness of applying modern constructs such as "gay," "bisexual," "homosexual," or "queer" to an ancient king like Alexander, no serious historian doubts that history's penultimate warrior-monarch was attracted to men.

Right ... not one single indication he was committing sodomy with anyone, only that there was a per se non-sexual context in which he liked male company. An indication he was "gay"? No, an indication the writer is rabidly suspicious of contexts in which men gather together.

II Hatshepsut

Transgender because in Egypt "ruling queen" is expressed as "female king"? Who not "Emperor Eirene" (genuine Byzantine title of the Empress who helped defeat Iconoclasm, but in doing so was barbarious enough, though a Saint, to blind her own son, which was why Charlemagne considered East Rome had fallen into Barbarism)?

III Leonardo da Vinci

Acknowledgement of Leonardo' gayness is almost universal.

Almost. Especially among the sex role "fundies" who consider androgynity as necessarily homosexual.

There is a little village of unreducable Gauls, however ...

i Alan Turing

Without looking at text : yes, I know. He was also bright enough to feel guilty about it.

He was also non-Christian and fatalist enough to feel incapable of getting out of it. His way out was suicide.

Who but a computer geek royal would give Alan Turing as an example to set before men?

My source is of course not this gobbledigook by Thom Senzee, but straight old wiki!

IV Michelangelo

Before looking : let me guess, he scultured a David as a nude ... in his day that was convention.

Not quite wrong, not quite right. Pietro Aretino, an atheist, had "suggested pederasty", and we are left wondering whether the allegations of Aretino about contemporaries were true and that drove him to atheism, or whether his atheism and misanthropy drove him to allegations simply over unreasonable suspicious.

Apart from that, the University of Illinois has an expert assessment of where his erotical interests lay:

"None the less, the physical beauty of many of his monumental male nudes ... gives a clear indication as to where Michelangelo’s erotic interests lay."

OK, if he had been in love with women, all his male nudes had been ugly? Would that have made him straight or just incompetent as a workman?

"In addition, in 1532 Michelangelo met and fell in love with a young Roman nobleman, Tommaso de’ Cavalieri, described by the humanist Benedetto Varchi as possessing ‘not only incomparable physical beauty, but so much elegance in manners, such excellent intelligence, and such graceful behavior’. Tommaso married in 1538 and had two sons, but Michelangelo remained devoted for the rest of his life, dedicating numerous poems and several presentation drawings to him (e.g. The Rape of Ganymede, 1532)."

Supposing there was an "affair", Tommaso is proof homosexuals can marry - a thing I have been saying for quite a while.

The scientific article is not citing very precise evidence "fell in love with" is an accurate description of what happened to them.

"However, when Michelangelo’s nephew and namesake eventually published over one hundred poems in 1623, any suggestion of homosexuality was effaced by altering the gender of the poems’ subjects and addressees."

OK, so the published version has female adressees?

"John Addington Symonds‘s translation of a selection of the poems, together with his biography of the artist, sought to redress this suppression of Michelangelo’s homosexuality which, even if largely unknowable, was none the less a key aspect of his art."

I sense a lack of epistemic coherence.

If it is unknowable whether Michelangelo was homosexual, or whether something else was going on, it is also unknowable whether "his homosexuality" or something else is a "key aspect" not of his art, but of his making of the art.

You see, a work of art is distinct from the artists personal secrets about its fabrication and guesses on the latter is not a valid form of art criticism.

If his art strikes some moderns as homosexual, that may furthermore be their modern outlook, not that of Michelangelo who lived in the Renaissance.

Also, it seems we must rely on Symonds to know that original adressees were indeed men, Tommaso and others. And that they were so tender the intention must have been erotic.

I suppose the foreword of his translation does explain why he has other gender than original published adressees. If he did find these in preserved original manuscripts, that would be explained in Symond's foreword. Or footnotes or endnotes.

It is at least not explained in the page I am looking at.

"Increasingly recognized as a notable literary achievement in their own right (despite their density of language and often complex construction), Michelangelo’s poems also provide useful insights into his beliefs and aesthetic precepts such as the broadly Neoplatonic notion that physical beauty could be a conduit to transcendent spiritual beauty, for example ‘beauty … moves and carries every healthy mind to heaven’."

Fine enough, as long as he is not primarily meaning that of male nudes.

"However, while Neoplatonism was part of the culture of the Medici circle, and of Michelangelo himself, and may also have fostered an emergent homosexual identity (see Saslow), ..."

OK, why should I believe Saslow on it?

They don't even give the reference, they presume Saslow is a known name in "queer studies" or sth.

Here we should however look at the rest of the story, I'll give it in full:

"... claims that Michelangelo’s art illustrates a fully developed Neoplatonic system (see Tolnay) have been downplayed in recent scholarship. Neoplatonic influences upon Michelangelo should also be placed within a broader framework of Christian belief affecting his art, particularly from the late 1530s; indeed, the contrasting moral codes of Neoplatonism and Catholicism may partly account for Michelangelo’s ambivalent sexual feelings. In his later years Michelangelo also witnessed the emergence of the austere spirituality of the Counter-Reformation, especially in Rome, where he had settled permanently in 1534. His Christian faith was reinforced by his friendship with Vittoria Colonna, the Marchesa di Pescara, whom he met in 1536 and with whom he remained in close contact until her death in 1547. Her dedication to Catholicism strongly influenced his own devout religiosity as expressed, for example, in his sacred poetry that gave voice to a growing preoccupation with death and salvation.

In 1563 Michelangelo was elected an academician of the Florentine Accademia del Disegno and, despite his old age, he continued to work on a number of projects (principally architectural) until his death in Rome(“The Gay 100”, p68)."

ij Barbara Gittings

She was a lesbian and did half of a good job : 1973 American Psychaitric Association revoked its designation of homosexuality as a disorder.

Good.

Sodomites should be punished, or not punished, preferrably punished.

Cyprus had a good law up to 1998 or sth.

But Homosexuals should not be brought to mental institutions for evaluation. Especially not when the mental institutions are evaluating whether they are Homosexuals or not.

iij "Christine" Jorgensen

No, his name is George Jorgensen. He had fought the Nazis. He's American, not Danish, check out Jorgensen (Statten Island spelling) versus Jørgensen (Danish spelling of his ancestors' name.

Also, a Dane is responsible for committing the crime. You know, the nation which, unlike Sweden, resisted the Nazis.

He "literally became a guinea pig for Dr. Christian Hamburger, already a renowned Danish endocrinologist."

A Scandinavian medical doctor ...

iu Sally Ride

A proof positive homosexuals can marry.

"Although she had been married to a man until the mid-1980's, by thetime of her death in 2012, Ride had been in a 27-year old relationship with a female partner, Tam O'Shaughnessy."

"Ride only came out as a lesbian posthumously. But that had more to do with her very private nature, according to her sister, Bear Ride, than it did with a lack of being gay. Bear Ride is also a lesbian and, as an activist and an ordained Presbyterian minister ..."

Say. No. More.

This just confirms my prejudices against astronauts male and female, NASA or its counterpart in Baikonur, and against female ordination, and against Presbyterian ministers.

Just mentioning, the Swedish Church I was into for about two years after rejecting Evangelicals was close enough to these Presbyterians - among my surroundings, but not on my part. Such people tend to invoke what the Reformation was about and believe they frighten conservatives into compliance by telling them "if that is how you feel why not as well become Catholic".

u Harvey Milk

I am in favour of the Briggs Initiative if it was about people who openly identified as gay themselves. I am against it if it also includes people just suspected of being so.

If he was assassinated, could it be because he staved off the Briggs Initiative and gave one man the opportunity to approach one boy whom his murderer had reasons of family to care about?

uj Tammy Baldwin

She agreed multiple causes were involved in Orlando. Obviously her priority was about freedom for gay nightclubs, not freedom for normal people to have guns.

Or, perhaps not quite:

The focus is on legislation introduced by Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California “that would allow the attorney general to ban gun sales to suspected terrorists, including those on watch lists, if there is ‘reasonable belief’ the weapons may be used to carry out an attack,” as USA Today reports.

However, as with being stamped as gay so also being stamped as a potential terrorist.

A mental patient who would use a gun in legitimate self defense would perhaps be barred from buying a gun? Or, perhaps that is nothing new ...?

So, if she would not disarm normal people seen as normal people, she would perhaps encourage more and more discriminations about who was seen as normal and not.

How about closing down gay nightclubs, as police tried in Stonewall?

uij Wachowski sisters (?) have come out as transgender

Does that mean they are really Wachowski brothers?

uiij Ellen DeGeneres

She and Obama (on same picture) are really an incitament for me to believe that LGBT community does recruit members.

My situation seems to indicate they have wanted to recruit me, for very long. God help them to failure if so, and to seeing it quickly!

So far, they have fooled psychiatrists or had accomplices who were so, the psychiatrists have fooled Catholic Church men about me. And these have fooled girls in their parishes I had fallen in love with.

ix Barney Frank

Wants openly homosexual people to be not discriminated.

Do they really want to suggest he had an ulterior motive?

x James Baldwin

Seems to have suggested it as openly as Jonas Gardell did in Sweden. Except Jonas Gardell is blond and blue eyed. And not working class.

Much as I like reading, they are not on my reading list!

xj Bayard Rustin

Proof Martin Luther King was sometimes in bad company. And I don't mean because he was black.

xij Troy Perry

Before looking at text. The "minister" on the picture wearing a rainbow stole reminds me of the fact that God's next action about sodomites won't be a world wide deluge. Doesn't mean there isn't coming any at all.

Looking, yes, Troy Perry is that "minister", he is styled "Rev". I am not likely to visit the Metropolitan Community Church, even apart from the fact that as a Catholic I can't.

xiij Harry Hay

"In order to earn for ourselves any place in the sun, we must work collectively ... for the first-class citizenship of minorities everywhere."

Sorry, but Geocentrics and Gays won't work collectively for each other's first-class citizenship.

Perhaps you are too much of a Commie to appreciate that "collectively" doesn't rule every human endaveour.

Or were.

xiu "Laurence Michael" Dillon

No, Laura Maud Dillon.

Buddhist "monk" and author of two books about spirituality ... I don't feel like emulating her in any respect.

xu Oscar Wilde

God grant his repentance was valid! RIP!

V Deborah Sampson

If she was a tomboy, that doesn't make this hero lesbian. Even though it seems she had an episode.

In the article "20 LGBT People Who Changed the World" By Thom Senzee which I am not linking to, I am glad I didn't find Queen Christina, even if the person linking to the page mentioned her in connection with the people on this one.

"This is changing now and people can read all they want about Oscar Wilde's or Queen Christina of Sweden's homosexuality."

Except, she arguably was a tomboy but not lesbian.

I'll check with a friend who is historian, just to be sure, but as I recall, her evaluation (and she did some research, since Christina of Sweden was also a post-Reformation Swedish convert to Catholicism and a very famous one) was that lesbian she was not.

I see a little problem with the list. Maria Supplisson linked to.

It seems to have the intention of giving "great men of renown" as role models for budding homosexuals. Such an idea is at least one type or degree of recruitment of homosexuals.

If I hadn't had other ideas about who the great men of renown were (see Mahabharata, the heroes of which are very renowned in India, some even accepted as gods, at least Rama and Krishna, though they were men), the compilation of such a list as this would have given me an idea, if not of who, at least of what kind.

Most of them, including Sally Ride, I had no idea about anyway. They weren't great men of renown to me.

Most of those I did know, I don't think the writer presented very credible evidence for homosexuality.

Most of them I accepted as homosexuals were nobodies before I read to me and after I read became moral equivalents of cold coffee heated without milk. I spared my readers some of the worst. If you want to read the article in full, which I don't recommend, you are free to google it.

Two homosexuals I do like, despite this, Oscar Wilde (who I hope is where such things are no longer relevant, beyond Purgatory, in Heaven) and Gittings. Her fight against psychiatry was a good deed, if not totally without ulterior motives. Not because homosexuals are specially good, but because psychiatry is too bad even for them.

Hans Georg Lundahl
Nanterre UL
Thursday after
Second Lord's Day in Lent
16.III.2017

In one of the three links, the then American Consul to Russia Speaks on Beyliss Case

Pedophilia/Child Murder More than Just Blackmail
Henry Makow's official web site. Exposing Feminism and the New World Order
https://www.henrymakow.com/2017/02/evil-for-its-own-sake.html

Quoting:

The author, Francis, is a longtime practitioner of white Voodoo. I can't pretend to understand the black magick he describes and welcome explanations. Warning:

This is gruesome.

Links to:

Athens: Cradle of Pedophilia and Mind Control
Athens, supposedly the cradle of Democracy, was the most perfect mind-control-based totalitarian state in An . . .
https://www.henrymakow.com/2016/11/athens-cradle-of-pedophilia.html

Commenting:

I disagree when Jews as opposed to Phoenicians are singled out as the initiators of these evils in Athens.

If King Solomon participated, that was after marrying some non-Jewish wives.

I also think Judah was fairly free from them (have not read the relevant portion of Jeremiah, though).*

And first link also links to:

Jewish Occult Murders How and Why Jews Have Sacrificed Non-Jewish Children
as Part of Their Religion
Rev. Dr. (of law) Matt Hale
Copyright 2002
http://antimatrix.org/Convert/Books/Matt_Hale/Jewish_Occult_Murders/Jewish_Occult_Murder.html

Commenting : I disagree on the reasons for diverging dates between Russia and US being unknown. Russia as an Orthodox country had simply not accepted the Papal calendar reform. This is known and not unknown.

But Matt Hale has said so just before citing the report of the U. S. Ambassador to Russia, for 1911.

When hearing that a stepfather of mine was Jewish, a friend of the family said "Jesus, Maria, hilf!"

I can only agree.

Hans Georg Lundahl
Nanterre UL
St Mathias, Apostle
24.II.2017

* I recalled that there was of course Athalia, in Juda, and asked whether Jeremiah was contemporary:

In Noord Israël werd Athalia’s broer verwikkeld in een oorlog met de Arameeërs en op advies van zijn raadsheren sloot Achazja zich bij hem aan. Joram werd gewond en toen hij Achazja, zijn oom, bezocht bleek dat Jehu zich van de macht had meester gemaakt. Hij doodde Joram en na een spannende achtervolging werd ook Achazja (immers ook een Baäldienaar) door Jehu gedood. “In zijn ijver voor de Here” doodde hij al de Baälpriesters. De Baäldienst bleek zo diep geworteld te zijn, ook in Juda, dat hij onuitroeibaar was. Nog vlak vóór de ballingschap kwam ze voor onder Manasse (2 Kon 21: 3) en Achaz (2 Kron 28: 2) en hebben Jeremia, Hosea en Sefanja daartegen geageerd.

Van : Athalia, de vrouw van Joram op Aantekeningen bij de Bijbel October 14, 2006 in Personen by admin http://www.bijbelaantekeningen.nl/blog/2006/10/14/athalia-de-vrouw-van-joram/

So, no, I was wrong. Juda was not totally free from it either./HGL

Bergoglio était écuménique avec qui?

Avec ceux-ci:*



Comprenez, peut-être, pourquoi Bergoglio n'est même pas Chrétien, encore moins pape?/HGL

* L'image pris du site national-socialiste Nordfront.se, d'un article contre le lobby homosexuel:

https://www.nordfront.se/nordiska-motstandsrorelsen-den-sista-utposten-kampen-mot-homolobbyn.smr

Best wishes to Cardinal Cañizares!

I received this letter from CitizenGO:

From Caroline Craddock/CitizenGO to me

7/4/16 at 8:15 PM

No unjust condemnation...

Hello Hans-Georg,

Congratulations! Thanks to you, we were able to stop the vicious and uncalled for attacks against Cardinal Cañizares in Spain.

The radical LGBT lobby in the city of Valencia announced a few weeks ago that they would be filing a motion to condemn the Cardinal. The Cardinal asked for our help and support, and I knew that the CitizenGO community would come to his defense.

Thanks to you and your signatures, the Cardinal will not be unjustly condemned! We delivered your signatures to the Valencia City Council, and they knew that concerned citizens around the globe would be watching to ensure that Cardinal Cañizares was not punished for his support of the natural family.

Nearly 200,000 CitizenGO subscribers joined this campaign, and now the City of Valencia has dropped the charges!

Cardinal Cañizares wanted to write to you personally with his thanks. I’ve included his message below:

“Your signatures and your support ​have touched m​e​, ​you have moved my heart​. Thank you very much. ​I know ​that you have ​joined this CitizenGO ​petition with affection for me, but I also know that you are aware that what is at stake is not me, but religious freedom and the right of ​Christians ​to publicly express our faith and our convictions. It's time to stand up and not be afraid. Coraggio and avanti​!​”

This is an important victory, but we will not rest. We will continue to defend the freedom of expression of all people. This is not just a victory for Catholics—or even just for Christians—it is a victory for all religious individuals who want to see their freedoms preserved.

Thank you for making this victory possible. Without your signatures… without your support… this would not be possible.

With sincerest thanks,

Caroline Craddock and the whole CitizenGO team

P.S. Here is a photo of CitizenGO's President, Ignacio Arsuaga, delivering your signatures at the Valencia City Council.

VERY Happy that I Left the Swedish State Church

It is basically the same as the Norwegian State Church and look here:

mail dot com : Norway's state church votes in favor of same-sex marriages
https://www.mail.com/int/news/europe/4268036-norways-church-votes-favor-same-sex-marriages.html

Rosaries, Please!

I saw over internet there was / is going to be a Satanic ceremony over all of LA.

Please pray rosaries, to repair for the sins and to counteract the curses and hexes with graces, both of repentance and other graces needed!

Hans Georg Lundahl
Nanterre UL
St Norbert
6.VI.2016

Are there Republicans in an Antichristian Conspiracy? Perhaps not.

1) Is there a conspiracy? How about 7-Eleven? · 2) Are there Republicans in an Antichristian Conspiracy?

Here is what one of them said:

Discussing the state’s public assistance programs, Pearce declared: “You put me in charge of Medicaid, the first thing I’d do is get Norplant, birth-control implants, or tubal ligations…Then we’ll test recipients for drugs and alcohol, and if you want to [reproduce] or use drugs or alcohol, then get a job.”

Story from Arizona Republican Suggests “Sterilizing Women As A Condition For Receiving Food Stamps”
Written by Alex Stevan May 29th 2016
http://politicops.com/arizona-republican-suggests-sterilizing-women-condition-receiving-food-stamps/

However, this is contrary to:

• Genesis 1:27-28
  
  [27] And God created man to his own image: to the image of God he created him: male and female he created them. [28] And God blessed them, saying: Increase and multiply, and fill the earth, and subdue it, and rule over the fishes of the sea, and the fowls of the air, and all living creatures that move upon the earth.
  
  God did not specify, here or elsewhere, that being poor and receiving alms merited an exception from this blessing!
  
  
• Pope Pius XI's Casti Connubii:
  
  Papal Encyclicals : Pius XI : CASTI CONNUBII
  ENCYCLICAL OF POPE PIUS XI ON CHRISTIAN MARRIAGE DECEMBER 31, 1930
  http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Pius11/P11CASTI.HTM
  
  Please note that Mussolini was not involved in the evils described in it and condemned in it, and was still not in 1935 when he gave an interview to Chesterton.
  
  Hitler who was going to flout this teaching was not yet come to power.
  
  What a pity he did not remain just a painter!
  
  It was precisely a few states of US and Canada who were culprits back then, later joined by Hitler and Scandinavia, at least Sweden and Norway. And these continued longer than Hitler, who was put out of political business in 1945.
  
  
• And, like defrauding a labourer of his due wages, what these guys would ask poor people to do is actually a sin crying for the vengeance of Heaven.*

Apart from these religious condemnations of what Russell Pearce proposed, his proposal is also against the interest of the workers.

If getting to live without a wage becomes such a devilish chore, people will of course hurry and hustle to get a work, and the labour market will be much more of a market biassed in favour of employers than in favour of employees.

The problem with Democrats is that by saying abortion and contraception should at least be an option, they are endorsing poor people to commit by themselves acts which ask for vengeance of Heaven (and their conditions have worsened, Heaven has taken a vengeance!), but at same time also making it possible for people in roundabout ways through networks to force and bully selected unfortunates the way that Russell Pearce wants to force everyone on the dole.

Hans Georg Lundahl
Cergy Préfecture
St Angela Merici
1.VI.2016

Update, Pearce has resigned:

The comments were quickly repudiated by Republican candidates for several statewide offices.

In a written statement, Pearce said that while discussing “abuses to our welfare system,” he referred to “comments written by someone else and failed to attribute them to the author.”

“This was a mistake,” Pearce added. “This mistake has been taken by the media and the left and used to hurt our Republican candidates.”

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/top-arizona-goper-resigns-after-sterilization-comments

* Catholic Answers is not always reliable, but here it is spot on:

There are particular mortal sins that are so evil that they are said to be sins that cry to heaven for vengeance: murder (Gn 4:10), sodomy (Gn 17:20-21), oppression of the poor (Ex 2:23), and defrauding workers of their just wages (Jas 5:4).

The message is not being sufficiently preached that no one is created by God as a homosexual. - Michael Voris

Michael Voris on the matter:

ChurchMilitant-TV : NOT Born That Way
The truth needs to be said, because the lie is too destructive.
April 27, 2016
http://www.churchmilitant.com/video/episode/not-born-that-way

Some might perhaps be actually born that way, due to hormonal dysfunction due to stress during certain parts of pregnancy.

But even they do not have a genome pointing to sodomy or lesbian acts.

Even in that case, human evil choices are behind homosexuality, namely whoever put too much stress on the mother. The verdict of St Paul that desires against nature come from idolatry is not overturned. If certain ways of becoming homosexual are by the persons own idolatry, either of "rolemodels" of his own sex (in that case perhaps not sufficiently integrated) or of a sect that humbles the human nature, as in the case of Oscar Wilde being a freemason (he was buried masonically, so it is a fair guess), other ways affecting people earlier are from someone else's idolatrous choice.

But whether one is "that way" or not is not a measure on whether one cannot or can marry, usually. An unfortunate perverted desire for one's own sex does not absolutely preclude a natural desire for the opposite.

God predestines no one to evil:

We not only do not believe that any are foreordained to evil by the power of God, but even state with utter abhorrence that if there are those who want to believe so evil a thing, they are anathema.

Council of Orange (529 AD)*

God may predestine someone to chastity, even against his will, like by denying the normal function of genitals, but this is generally not the case with homosexuals. God is not predestining them to a situation in which they are both unable to be chaste and unable to marry, as other men and women. This means that the presence of a known homosexual predesposition is not an impediment to marrying someone of the opposite sex.

And this means sth about the pastoral which has on one hand brought some to fifteen years of therapy and on the other brings certain homosexuals in Paris to continuing their evil ways "because they have a right to be loved and to love" - indeed they do, they do have a right to turn back from their bad ways and to do the normal thing.

This also means, precisely as Voris implies, those who do not do so, do not have the excuse of saying "that's how God made me". No, you or some other men did so, not God.

Hans Georg Lundahl
Cergy St Christophe
Sts Peter of Verona
and Catherine of Siena
29.IV.2019

* Viva Catholic : Predestination in Catholicism
https://vivacatholic.wordpress.com/2007/08/12/predestination-in-catholicism/

Dangerously obsolete?

Just a few lines from a post on lifesite:

After a lengthy debate over coffee, muffins and cantaloupe, French wrote, “it eventually came down to this. [My friend] looked at me and said, ‘Your beliefs are so dangerously obsolete, they should be silenced.’”

“You’re forgetting the small detail that conservatives have constitutional rights,” French shot back.

“The constitution,” her friend said coldly, “should be amended.”

Wrote French, “She ended the conversation and our friendship by saying she didn’t want to discuss this further because my status as a Christian meant I lacked the mental skills to have an intelligent debate. Her last words spoken to me were ‘You only believe in faith … not logic.’”

A view can hardly be dangerous if it is obsolete!

It can only be dangerous if it is current, at least in some degree.

Obsolete means "out of use":

obsolete (adj.)
1570s, from Latin obsoletus "grown old, worn-out," past participle of obsolescere "fall into disuse, be forgotten about, become tarnished," which probably is from ob "away" (see ob-) + an expanded form of solere "to be used to, be accustomed" (see insolent).

Obviously, any view which at any time is dangerous is one which at the time is NOT obsolete, one which IS in at least some limited use!

It is the moderns who, not believing in faith, do not believe in logic EITHER.

In the Western world, except among very poor villagers and similar subcultures, if even as much, the view expressed in Tolkien's chapter "Of the Sun and Moon and the Hiding of Valinor" that Sun and Moon are a kind of lanterns carried about by a kind of angelic spirits was obsolete, and therefore not at all dangerous when Tolkien expressed it.

But by now, it is becoming dangerous again, since I have put it back in use. My fellow Geocentric Sungenis is very eager to ... well, silence it:

HGL's F.B. writings : Debating with Sungenis, Mainly
[see sections I, III, V and VI]
http://hglsfbwritings.blogspot.com/2016/03/debating-with-sungenis-mainly.html

If he had been dealing with "Of the Sun and Moon and the Hiding of Valinor" in original context, he would probably have been less .... incoherent and over eager. He is seemingly NOT ready for letting scholastic philosophy judge scientific paradigm, unless VERY well and clearly supported in Bible and Church Fathers, which he thinks, with some right, angelic movers are not.

Hans Georg Lundahl
Nanterre
Friday after Laetare Sunday
11.III.2016

Answering Krzystof Charamsa

Who is he?

A priest who is not just same sex attracted but confesses to being in a (presumably) sodomitic relationship.

What happened? He got fired (I haven't read all the details, normally he should be defrocked, but what interests me is what he said).

And, what did he say?

I want the Church and my community to know who I am: a gay priest who is happy, and proud of his identity. I’m prepared to pay the consequences, but it’s time the Church opened its eyes, and realised that offering gay believers total abstinence from a life of love is inhuman.

From: Catholic Vote : Vatican’s firing of gay priest puts “Who am I to Judge” to the test
Stephen White on October 3, 2015
https://catholicvote.org/vaticans-firing-of-gay-priest-puts-who-am-i-to-judge-to-the-test/

And what is my answer. To his wanting people to know who or what he is, that is not my business. To his being proud, that is not my business. To his being willing to pay the consequences, that is not my business. This is not primarly said as fraternal correction to save his soul from sin and damnation, but as polemics, to save other souls from heterodoxy.

What I want to answer is this: "it’s time the Church opened its eyes, and realised that offering gay believers total abstinence from a life of love is inhuman."

And the answer is that the Church, as far as ordinary believers are concerned, with no vows of chastity, never HAS been that inhuman.

Or not to recently.

Montini of unhappy memory said something about homosexuals being "called to chastity". He did not put it as "called to some degree of chastity as anyone else", but as "called to chastity", which may very easily be interpreted as called to celibacy and sexual abstinence.

No, a person who is same sex attracted traditionally has a choice whether he thinks abstinence or doing it with a person of the opposite sex the worse chore. Traditionally he or she has a choice whether to prefer his lack of spontaneous attraction of sexual nature to someone of opposite sex or to prefer his lack of willingness to be alone and abstinent.

Also, abstinent does not always mean alone.

However, if a gay man, self identified or rumoured by others as being in the closet says he doesn't want to be alone, as long as he is not obliged to celibacy, he traditionally has and even now should have the choice whether to prefer a chaste friendship with someone his own sex or to prefer making a marriage with the opposite sex, i e with someone of it and therefore not having to be abstinent.

The rules for who can marry whom do not state "a heterosexual, not even slightly bisexual, man, with a heterosexual, not even slightly bisexual woman", they state "a man with a woman". There are conditions beyond that (man at least 14, woman at least 12, traditionally, neither bound by a valid previous marriage to a person still alive, neither having vowed finally celibacy, both [or neither] being baptised, both [or neither] being Catholics, both intending to do what the Church intends with marriage, viz. Genesis 1:28, Matthew 5:31-32, Ephesians 5:22-33, and to parent together as in Ephesians 6:1-4).

So, Krzystof Charamsa put the problem in entirely the wrong terms - unless the "Church" he belongs to differs from the Catholic Church which Christ founded, as its Tradition has been for two millennia. I believe it does, and that Montini of unhappy memory chose words that COULD be interpreted as the Church had always believed, but WOULD be interpreted by many as what Charamsa (if we take his words at face value) is complaining about.

Hans Georg Lundahl
Nanterre Univesity Library
Ember Friday of Lent
19.II.2016

Un peu de catéchisme pour des bienfaiteurs et des connaissances

Je viens de passer des soirs avec des hôtes un peu mal catéchisés.

Bon, faisons un peu de catéchisme. L'hôte peut avoir été l'un ou l'autre, parfois une personne que j'ai rencontré par internet, mais la réponse est la mienne, quoique parfois l'autre a été un peu trop exubérant et moi un peu trop poli pour que je l'ai déjà dite à l'occasion.

Hôte:

La Bible est une Mé. Ta. Phore.

Réponse:

Non.

[La Bible peut contenir des métaphores, elle peut même contenir des métaphores à chaque page, mais entre histoire réelle et le signifié, pas juste entre mots et signifié.]

Hôte:

Il n'y a pas de barbu dans le Ciel.

Réponse:

Tu veux dire que Jésus se soit rasé la barbe en arrivant, ou tu nies l'Ascension?

Hôte:

Jésus de Nazareth, il avait un autre nom, mais j'ai oublié lequel.

Réponse:

[Il n'a certes pas voulu dire qu'il ait oublié le titre Le Christ ou Ha-Meshiakh - mais ça ne s'oublie pas. Non, il a précisé "nom". Restons un peu sur le titre de Messie. Roi. Prêtre. Prophète. Christus Rex, Summus Sacerdos, Propheta. Meshiach ha Melek, ha Cohen Gadol, ha Nabi. Non, mais le nom peut être inféré de là, depuis l'inscription sur la Croix:

Jeschua
Ha-Notzri
Ve-Melek
Ha-Jehudim.

Il a bien dit qu'il a oublié cet autre nom. Il a oublié que Jésus le Christ est Dieu avant d'être Homme, mais par là il a aussi oublié comment prononcer ce nom. Peut-être Hénoch et Élie nous renseigneront sur la bonne prononciation du Nom-des-quatres-lettres.]

Hôte:

Dieu est tout.

Réponse:

Non. Il a créé tout sauf Lui-Même, mais Il n'est pas tout. Il a créé le reste qui par le fait de création est distincte de Lui.

Hôte:

Dieu a créé le Bien et le Mal.

Réponse:

Dieu a créé des choses qui sont toutes bonnes en soi. Il a créé des choses qui sont malfaisantes, mais ceci n'est pas du fait de ce qu'Il a créé en elles. Un feu qui dévaste une maison est une substance créé par Dieu, mais le fait que le feu brûle la maison n'est pas une fatalité pour le feu par le fait d'être feu.

[Parfois, pourtant, Dieu crée le mal physique, comme un feu qui brûle une maison, en punition d'un mal moral, d'un péché : mais le péché, Dieu ne l'a pas créé du tout.]

Hôte:

Dieu a créé l'Enfer et ensuite le Paradis.

Réponse:

Non ..., [Dieu a créé le Paradis, pour le bonheur des créatures douées de raison, pour qu'Il les crée et y amène, mais seulement ensuite l'Enfer, pour punir et pour limiter le mal commis par les anges qui se sont rebellés.]

Hôte:

Si Dieu existe, si cette Force existe, Elle ne va pas nous regarder dessus, nous sommes trop infîmes.

[Ou quelque chose comme ça.]

Réponse:

Dieu nous connaît, Dieu sait tout.

[Tempier condamne la thèse 3, Quod deus non cognoscit alia a se.]

Hôte:

Tu ne peux pas croire ce dogme, t'es au-dessus de ça?

Réponse:

Non, je ne suis pas au-dessus du dogme catholique.

Hôte:

Tout homme sensé comprend que les religions sont une quête de spiritualité, mais les textes ne nous disent rien de précis.

Réponse:

C'est faux.

[Sur quoi il répète "la Bible est une me. ta. phore." - voir plus en haut.]

Hôte:

Quand est-ce que l'âme entre dans le corps? Peut tu le dire?

Réponse:

Quand le sperme humain pénètre l'ovule humaine. Alors, Dieu crée une âme.

Hôte:

Si deux hommes s'aiment ... [censuré]

Réponse:

Ceci n'est pas le pourquoi Dieu nous a créé ces parties du corps, ni l'amour physique.

Hôte:

Si on veut se mettre en extase en brûlant une allumette entre ses orteilles?

Réponse:

Plutôt une allumette entre les orteilles que ... [censuré]

Hôte:

Mais si Dieu nous a créé, c'est pour qu'on soit soi-même, pas juste pour être ce qu'on a été créé comme [désolé pour le syntaxe suédois dans mon compte-rendu - donc, "ou quelque chose comme ça", il a dit la phrase autrement.].

Réponse:

On doit rester soi-même, pas juste CELUI qu'on est, mais aussi CE qu'on est. Un homme, qui n'a pas le droit à ... [censuré].

[On est à Paris, non? Son évêque Étienne II Tempier condamna en 1277 (ou "tard en 1276" selon les divisions courantes à l'époque) l'idée que/166 quod peccatum contra naturam, utpote abusus in coitu, licet sit contra naturam speciei, non tamen est contra naturam indiuidui [non censuré, car la latin n'est pas compris par les très jeunes]. Donc, chaque naturel individuel s'inscrit dans la nature générique de son espèce, y compris la nature individuelle de tel homme dans la nature humaine qui exclut précisément ... péché contre la nature.]

Hôte:

Les animaux sont tous bisexuels.

Réponse:

[J'ai pas eu le temps de lui répondre que les comportements homosexuels entre les par exemple chiens sont, soit une question de sadomasochisme, de dominance, soit une question de manque de femelles ou de mâles, soit les deux à la fois - donc ce ne sont pas des modèles pour nous.]

Hôte:

Je ne veux pas être contrôlé par un dieu tout solitaire, c'est absurde de l'être, de se considérer tel, c'est cauchemardesque.

Réponse:

Un cauchemar dont je fais l'économie en croyant que Dieu n'est pas une personne solitaire, mais Trois Personnes, le Père, le Fils, le Saint Esprit.

Hôte:

T'es idiot si tu crois la Trinité. Ça c'est considéré blasphème aussi.

Réponse:

Par qui? Par les Musulmans? De toute manière, idiot ou non, ça m'épargne le cauchemar d'être régi par "un dieu tout solitaire".

[La première thèse condamné par Tempier est Quod deus non est trinus et unus, quoniam trinitas non stat cum summa simplicitate. Ubi enim est pluralitas realis, ibi necessario est additio et compositio. Exemplum de aceruo lapidum.]

Hôte:

C'est grâce aux immigrés que la France ne se dépeuple pas. Les vrais Français font un fils et une fille. Sans les immigrés la France serait vite dépeuplé.

Réponse:

C'est précisément pourquoi je préconise que les Français recommencent à faire d'enfants.

À quoi me répondit mon hôte:

Là, il y a du boulot à faire.

[Je considère qu'il avait raison.]

Et je ne sais pas

comment, mais on est entré dans la discussion suivante aussi:

Hôte:

Il n'y a pas de différence entre la nature et le chimique. On est tous dans la nature. UN sac en plastique est naturel. Et le chlorophylle des feuilles est chimique.

Réponse:

Vu que j'ai eu un beau-père qui est chimiste, on est tous dans le chimique, par contre, pas tous dans l'artificiel.

Hôte:

Un homme crée un sac en plastique, un arbre crée son feuille sur sa brindille.

Réponse:

Un arbre pousse une feuille, et ne peut pas faire autrement, un homme fait volontairement un sac en plastique, mais aurait pu faire un sac en macramé [je pointe à mon propre grand sac en macramé]. C'est ça la différence entre artificiel et naturel [et dans l'artificiel, il y a le plus et le moins noble].

Il me semble pourtant

que le contexte était qu'il avait confondu les conceptes de "péché contre nature", "artificiel" et, en plus, "chimique".

Et je viens d'omettre pas mal. En plus de mélanger trois personnes sous le seul vocable "hôte".

Hans Georg Lundahl
BU de Nanterre-Paris X
St Vincent de Valence,
diacre et martyr
22.I.2016

Congratulations, Slovenia!

BBC : Slovenia rejects gay marriage in referendum
20 December 2015
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-35147257

What Should You Do If Your Son Had a Gay Wedding?

Boycott it.

Boycott gay weddings, even family, says Baptist leader
By Andrew Wolfson ; The Louisville Courier-Journal October 15, 2015
http://www.cruxnow.com/life/2015/10/15/boycott-gay-weddings-even-family-says-southern-baptist-leader-al-mohler/

Tolkien thought that Joy Davidman was legitimately the wife of William Gresham. Hence, he boycotted his friend's, C. S. Lewis', wedding to her after she had divorced.

However, if you want to give an encouraging word - encouraging to the person, not to the deed - you can also say: "come back when it's a gal you marry."

If I were a priest, which I am not, and two homo couples, a gay and a lesbian couple, came and asked for getting married (which they wouldn't, since it is known Catholic Church considers unions contrary to nature as totally the opposite of marriage), I'd tell them: "if you switch partners, you can come back then."

But I'd recommend one of the such formed couples to move away geographically from their same sex exes.

Someone might tell me I am totally clueless about homosexuality, but is that really a fault?

Hans Georg Lundahl
Nanterre UL
St Hedwig of Poland*
16-X-2015

* Sanctae Hedwigis Viduae, Polonorum Ducissae, quae pridie hujus diei obdormivit in Domino. Święta Jadwiga Śląska / Heilige Hedwig von Andechs.

PS : I did not quote the "boycott it" passage, I just noted my agreement with it. Here I will quote:

Even if scientists prove people are born gay, the “sinfulness of homosexuality” would not be eliminated because human sin taints the world, Mohler said in addressing other topics of sexual identity.

One can certainly prove people are born more or less sex-typical, more or less close to stereotypes which in culture or even nature belong to other sex. But this does NOT mean they are born either gay or transgender, that is only things that by sins may come out of being born androgynous. Also, for homosexual androgynity is not even a requirement. Excessive typicality of own sex can lead to incomprehension of other sex, in some cases even to estrangement from it./HGL

Does the Church Really Ask Homosexuals for a Life of Abstinence from Sex? I think NOT.

That is NOT the words of the Church, when it comes to homosexuals in general.

The priest, Msgr. Charamsa, had claimed that the Church's call for homosexuals to live a life of abstinence is “inhumane.”

Cardinal Ruini responded that “as a priest I too have the obligation of abstinence, and in more than 60 years [of priesthood] I have never felt myself dehumanized, or deprived of a life of love, which is something much greater that the exercise of sexuality.”

Both Charamsa and Ruini seem to take it for granted that the Church does ask that of them.

There seems indeed to be a document by Montini (a k a Paul VI) asking that. In my opinion it is one sign he was an antipope.

But there is a referral back to De horrendo scelere, by Pope St Pius V. 1568. 400 years (if not necessarily on the day) before I was born. I have not been able as yet to get an online copy of it on internet, either in Latin or in translation. I have however read (I think on the wickipeejuh, unless it was die Wikipädie or on la viquipédie, it certainly was not on la biquipedia, since my Spanish is too bad for me to use it on non-Spanish subjects) about its content.

The point is, De horrendo scelere is about homosexual acts or openly showed tendencies (like leering at men, especially at boys) among monks and clergy. The discipline back then was deposing them or expelling them as quickly and as fast as possible. No therapy, no comebacks after therapy, unlike the seventies when a George Gheoghan was very unfortunately, both for others and himself, recycled on the advice of psychologists. Just plain out of clergy or monastery or other trusted positions. And of course, this involved - I quote from memory - either laicisation or doing penance alone and in abstinence. So, the real point is, if you have made an irreversible vow of sexual abstinence anyway, in order to be monk or certain types of priest, you must keep it even if you are thrown out as a homosexual.

The 1568 document, as far as I can see, never ever stated that if the baker or soldier so and so (or even the writer, confer Oscar Wilde), had committed the horror-worthy crime of sodomy - and I agree it is horror-worthy, horrendum as the Latin has it, he also must abstain from all sex for the rest of his life. No. If he disliked women more than celibacy, well, then he must be a celibate, of course. But if he disliked celibacy more than doing it with women, the proper course to take would be, since he was not obliged to celibacy by any vow, to marry, if he could find a wife willing to take him after that, that is.

Ruini is saying what is true enough about abstinent people who are really chaste. Homosexuals usually aren't. In certain cases after certain vows, they are even so obliged to become so, and according to the 1568 document, if it has shown, outside monasteries or holy orders. But in other cases that is not so.

I was noticing how the title came to resemble the words of the serpent. That is why I added "I think NOT" to it. In the serpent's case, the misciting came from the serpent. In my case, I am correcting a misciting already done by "Paul VI" and presumed Cardinal (though not really such) Ruini. And one which has incited people like Charamsa to take the serpent's deal and ask for disobeying the Church.

And of course, those unjustly diffamed as homosexuals also have a right to marry, unless of course bound by an eternal vow.

Hans Georg Lundahl
Nanterre UL
St Colman of Stockerau, martyr
13-X-2015

Will Probably NOT read Matthew Vines' God and the Gay Christian

The review I read of it is enough. Here is the link, I will give the most salient quotes from it and some answers.

Third Way : Review: God and the Gay Christian
http://thirdway.info/2015/09/01/review-god-and-the-gay-christian/

Vines reminds us that a literal reading of the Bible made many Christians oppose Galileo’s argument that the Earth circles the Sun and that the Earth is not the centre of the universe.

As far as I can see rightly so. I feel a bit stumped about delay for radio signals between earth and Voyager 1 changing time span not just for growing distance of Voyager 1 (which is still closer than a light day away, so sphere of fixed stars could be that far off or that close, since that is still five six light hours outside and above Voyager 1), but also with the supposed orbit of Earth around sun. How I as a Geocentric explain this change in delay is a bit of a conundrum, if true. Sungenis might have a tip.

Today everyone realises that Galileo was right.

EVERYONE? No, a brave village of irreductible Geocentrics ...*

Galileo’s observation ran contrary to the received interpretation of the Bible.

Which is why it is wrong.

Vines points out that most Christians have not changed their minds because they lost respect for their forebears in the faith or for the Bible but because they examined evidence not previously considered. They didn’t reject the Bible but clarified their interpretation of its meaning.

While "phenomenal language" might do for "the Sun stood still", it won't do for Joshua's ordering sun and moon to stand still. He was an inspired miracle worker in that order.

Vines asks if the modern understanding of the nature of homosexuality warrants a similar revision of interpretation. The rest of the book seeks to answer this question affirmatively.

That is what comes of Modernism, and that is why I hate it.

Celibacy is the lot – according to the traditional Christian interpretation of Scripture – of all Christians before marriage. If gay Christians are not permitted any possibility of same-sex marriage they must then, Vines argues, be celibate for life. That changes the nature of celibacy as it is traditionally a spiritual gift and calling, not a life sentence.

Wrong.

As already said, and several times over by me, being gay is not a life sentence. And what is more, if Josh Weed is correct in describing himself as still gay, it is not even an obstacle for overcoming undesired celibacy in the NORMAL way.**

Hans Georg Lundahl
Nanterre University Library
St Michael's Mass
29-IX-2015

* See Contemporary Proponents of Geocentrism on my Geocentric Wikia
http://geocentric.wikia.com/wiki/Category:Contemporary_Proponents_of_Geocentrism

** Thinking otherwise is one bad effect of believing Modernist bad science. In this case the ultra bad pseudo science of psychology.