This is my response to RE's post, "Sacrificial Sunday with Pope Busta: "Condom Distribution Will Fuel AIDS Epidemic" - Screw You Benedict [expletive deleted]"
Hi RE and All,
I won't go on about that. I use harsh or hard language too on a certain level.
What I will address is that Joseph Ratzinger (aka, Pope Benedict XVI) doesn't know how to say what he means. He's really trying to say that the message must be abstinence. Jesus holds with abstinence for the unmarried and for faithfulness for those who are. Benedict doesn't know how to just say that and leave it alone. Condoms to him suggest condoning anti-Christian behavior. On a certain level, that's true. He is absolutely wrong though to be inconsistent. While he bungles his call for sexual near-purity (as pure as it can be while still being married in the mundane sense), he doesn't call for all the other things for which Jesus stands.
Joseph confuses (knowingly) the temporal, fallen, worldly state that is nearly all secular now) with his church (lower case; lower case on account of his confused and confusing message).
Jesus is for harmlessness. If it is harmful and there is a less harmful or ultimately harmless way (and there is), then that's the strait gate and narrow way. What Jesus does not do is side with war makers or the greedy while he preaches the absence of sexual sin. He also does not promote coercion in any case. He does not hold with homosexuality, which is clearly sin since he spoke directly against fornication and homosexuality was, and remains, fornication in Jesus's eyes and in his Church. However, he does not fry the homosexuals. He rather says that in a softer generation or age, they would turn from what is ultimately their selfish and harmful behavior.
This is asking much. It is asking for the perfection of God to enter into every heart.
There are right now millions, even billions, who are not sexually faithful. What is the real Christian to do? He or she is not to lie or speak carelessly. Condoms, per se, do not promote HIV/AIDS in the sense in which the vast majority of people would take it. The semantical work has not been done sufficiently to bring understanding with the language. The Roman Catholic Church regularly fails in this (avoids it for worldly political reasons).
Condoms do fall far short of the New Commandment in its fullest context. Condoms are an artificial means to sin without the greater more apparently negative consequences. There remain, however, spiritually fatal consequences. The emotional mindset behind condoms is not the emotional state that leads all the way to God, who is righteousness.
I realize this is a difficult (even trying) subject for the vast majority. They just don't want to hear it. Benedict cannot rise to the occasion because to do so, he would have to risk (there is not real risk in it) offending more than he already has and does offend. He's in a popularity contest he cannot win.
The Roman Catholic Church is doomed to failure. It was dead on arrival.
Where does this leave the RLCC in terms of the label "homophobic"? Well, phobias are irrational. They have no basis in fact. What do I fear? I fear that people will suffer for experimenting that is testing whether or not the admonitions against certain (all) selfish and harmful behavior, as taught by Jesus, are true.
They are true. One finally comes to understanding that or one continues the fall into the proverbial bottomless pit.
Bless you, RE, for being brave enough to allow the likes of me to comment on your site. Many won't risk the wrath of those who hate others voicing that letting go of iniquity is the only right thing to do.
Peace, Love, and Truth Are One,