- Feb 5, 2002
- 181,794
- 65,738
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Female
- Faith
- Catholic
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
Fr. Martin’s true objective is the normalization of homosexual acts via indoctrination into the rainbow mythology of God-willed sexual fluidity. So why are so many Church leaders silent?
A screenshot of Fr. James Martin, S.J., giving a March 2018 a presentation titled "Spiritual Insights for LGBT Catholics". (YouTube)
I am not a “traditionalist”. At least not in the sense that the term has come to mean these days in common ecclesial parlance. I have sharp theological disagreements with the theological tendencies among some traditionalists on a range of issues. Nevertheless, they are a part of the Church, and their concerns should not be trivialized as unimportant or summarily dismissed via the pathway of lazy and breezy caricatures of them as just a gaggle of “anti-Vatican II” malcontents.
However, there are some, especially among the strongest apologists for the Francis papacy, who accuse traditionalists of interjecting a “toxic” divisiveness that undermines Church unity and jeopardizes ecclesial peace. This fact, they say, justifies the draconian restrictions introduced by Pope Francis, in Traditionis Custodes, on the traditional Latin Mass (TLM).
I am not here to re-litigate that debate or to argue that there are not indeed such toxic elements within the traditionalist movement. Instead, I want to call into question the response of the Church to the alleged toxicity of the movement—a reputation that I think is exaggerated—by engaging in the much-maligned practice of “whataboutism”. This practice can, on occasion, be a deflection from examining one’s flaws and should usually be avoided. Nevertheless, it can also be used legitimately to point out double standards, especially when ecclesial authorities are quick to discipline the failures of some while ignoring equally problematic failures in others. And this becomes acutely important when it appears that those authorities have their thumb on the scales of pastoral justice based upon unarticulated theological commitments.
Continued below.
www.catholicworldreport.com
I am not a “traditionalist”. At least not in the sense that the term has come to mean these days in common ecclesial parlance. I have sharp theological disagreements with the theological tendencies among some traditionalists on a range of issues. Nevertheless, they are a part of the Church, and their concerns should not be trivialized as unimportant or summarily dismissed via the pathway of lazy and breezy caricatures of them as just a gaggle of “anti-Vatican II” malcontents.
However, there are some, especially among the strongest apologists for the Francis papacy, who accuse traditionalists of interjecting a “toxic” divisiveness that undermines Church unity and jeopardizes ecclesial peace. This fact, they say, justifies the draconian restrictions introduced by Pope Francis, in Traditionis Custodes, on the traditional Latin Mass (TLM).
I am not here to re-litigate that debate or to argue that there are not indeed such toxic elements within the traditionalist movement. Instead, I want to call into question the response of the Church to the alleged toxicity of the movement—a reputation that I think is exaggerated—by engaging in the much-maligned practice of “whataboutism”. This practice can, on occasion, be a deflection from examining one’s flaws and should usually be avoided. Nevertheless, it can also be used legitimately to point out double standards, especially when ecclesial authorities are quick to discipline the failures of some while ignoring equally problematic failures in others. And this becomes acutely important when it appears that those authorities have their thumb on the scales of pastoral justice based upon unarticulated theological commitments.
Continued below.
Fr. James Martin’s homosophistry takes advantage of a clear double standard
www.catholicworldreport.com
