tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38413397.post4978241145642470371..comments2023-12-19T15:10:02.866-08:00Comments on ex cathedra: RisibleUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38413397.post-16977859603795398162008-12-14T09:44:00.000-08:002008-12-14T09:44:00.000-08:00Well, Trevor, your PS is an example of one of my f...Well, Trevor, your PS is an example of one of my favorite rhetorical devices: paralepsis.<BR/>Very funny.<BR/><BR/>Being gay and Catholic. Well, I will always be "Catholic" at practically a DNA level, and culturally and in terms of its influence on me. But I gave up practicing and identifying myself as Catholic precisely because I had such a problem with the teaching on homosexuality. What I might say to these girls is, "I disagreed and left over it. Why don't you have some respect for yourself and the Church by doing the same?"<BR/><BR/>But even if I did say I was Catholic and gay, --which I did for several years, in good faith---I could just be considered a "bad" Catholic. Sin and schism are different orders of behavior in Catholicism. Being gay and Catholic is not a matter for excommunication, just confession. Everybody sins. But asserting that you have possession of Holy Orders, a public act that lies at the heart of the Church's existence, is a kind of defiance that is, I would assert, in a quite different category. Going to communion as an active and unrepentant homosexual is committing a sin, like going to communion after having sex outside of marriage, but publicly getting "ordained" invalidly and against the clear prohibition of the legitimate authority and then carrying out sacraments in public is sort of like the ecclesiastical version of sedition. <BR/><BR/>Others would disagree. But being the arrogant SOB that I am, I am unimpressed. Disagreement is near universal on near everything in life. It just means a lot of people are wrong! :)OreamnosAmericanushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15602268350813211243noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38413397.post-86580879086313546742008-12-14T08:36:00.000-08:002008-12-14T08:36:00.000-08:00I think you're on to something important when you ...I think you're on to something important when you write about how much you can change a thing before it is not that thing any more.<BR/><BR/>The standard for judging the difference between a bend in the road and a turning of a corner is not uniform. You judge the ordination of women into the Roman Catholic Church to be a turning of the corner, but being a gay man and a Catholic to be a bend in the road. I'm not asking you to be 'fair,' just saying that the way you distinguish between the bends and the corners may questionable by others. And I favor that questioning, much more so than the perspective that we're all brothers and sisters who share the same struggle and must support each other's causes.<BR/><BR/>When the Church of Jesus Christ Later Day Saints (Mormons) changed their laws and allowed the ordination of Black men, would you say that was a bend or a corner?<BR/><BR/>I favor organizations with voluntary membership being able to have any standard they desire for membership and role, and the ability of members to leave that organization and found a new one if those limitations are too restricting. I have my own ideas of bends and corners and they have changed over time. I know it when I see it, pretty much. My opinion has nearly no influence in the real world.<BR/><BR/>- Trevor Blake<BR/>ovo127.com<BR/><BR/>PS: Aren't you relieved that I haven't mentioned that Karl Popper also wrote about how much you can change a thing before it is not that thing any more?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com