It seems that everytime I manange to write about Ratzi the Nazi I get in trouble. Got unceremoniously booted off one blogroll for it. My bad, I guess. But you gotta look beyond the vista of the good, faithful, loving Catholics to see what their beloved Church is becoming. Let's face it, Catholicism is not exactly without its' own minor indiscretions over the centuries. But to be fair, it seems to have been able to chart a course towards improving (sometimes) the lives of many of its' adherents by the good works and faith of its leaders from the lowliest Priest trying to live his vows, to Bishops and Cardinals who have stood up to repressive regimes, sometimes at the cost of their own freedom and even lives.
So what's to be made of a man who was a Nazi? Who wears the hat of the leader of one of the major religions of this planet who seeks to use the training of his youth to marginalize men who share his alleged love of his god, but are gay? Here's where he came from:
Because some Nazis believed homosexuality was a sickness that could be cured, they designed policies to "cure" homosexuals of their "disease" through humiliation and hard work. Guards ridiculed and beat homosexual prisoners upon arrival, often separating them from other inmates. Rudolf Hoess, commandant of Auschwitz, wrote in his memoirs that homosexuals were segregated in order to prevent homosexuality from spreading to other inmates and guards.
Gee, Ratzi and Rudolf have something in common apparently, don't they? Ratzingers belief that he can ostracize men who are gay and remove them from the priesthood, thereby "curing" its pedophelia problem smacks of his training from the Nazi Party he must have received as a Hitler Youth. He was told that Gay = Evil. Now he has an opportunity to implement a policy that will remove gay men from the Church he allegedly loves, one which was founded on the teachings of a young Jew
Mat 5:10
Blessed [are] they which are persecuted for righteousness' sake: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven
Mat 5:11
Blessed are ye, when [men] shall revile you, and persecute [you], and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake.
whose teachings seem to have been forgotten by the men at the Vatican who seek power and only power to accomplish something that lies so far from the teachings of Peace, Love and Understanding that it would not be unexpected to see them restart the Inquisition to "root out" the damn homos, get them to confess and then condemn them to death.
Gee, maybe they can call it "Auto-da-Fe 21". Real Catholic Torture for the 21st Century. No Comfy Chairs Provided.
posted by Jo Fish on 09.22.05 at 04:07 PM
Comments:
Actually, I believe the highest office of Catholicism and his closest associates have been pretty much corrupt as a Bush administration official since the very beginning. And the doctrine to which they turn most frequently is not so much the Gospel Jesus as the Epistle Paul. They preach more of a Paulist religion than anything else. It turns into even nastier stuff when you have a Pope Eggs Benedict. He's kind of like the loudmouth redneck type.
This says there is no link between homosexuality and child molestation. Plus some priests, like Father Joe, cause lots of problems through heterosexual activities.
Note: Goert, fixed your HTML. You forgot a closing tag. If you wanted it in some other part of the post, let me know.
JF
posted by: Goert on 09.23.05 at 03:25 PM [permalink]
I guess people hate criticism of religion. It takes too much to think. It is in such bad taste to be RELIGOUSLY INCORRECT. Give 'em hell just the same, Jo!
Thanks for fixing the HTML tag. Looks like you got it right. As far as I can tell there is a significant difference between gays and child molesters. My sister has a Phd. in social work and first pointed this out to me. If you're celibate, what difference does you sexual orientation make?
posted by: Goert on 09.24.05 at 10:27 AM [permalink]
In banning 'mos, Ratzinger is implying that he's heterosexual. Is there anything to support this? Can he, for example, produce any woman he's ever slept with (presumably pre-seminary and now an elderly lady) Made some boyish pass at? Dated, even?
You get a big range of sexuality in parish priests--gay, straight, short-eyed, asexual, fighting it, too old, whatever--but the hierarchy seem to attract men who cannot deal with sex in any way, shape or form.
E.g., although the cover-up of pedophiles was motivated in part by CYA, of all the options available to the Church officials in this matter, sweeping-under-the-rug was the choice that permitted these insanely prissy bishops and cardinals to deal with this messy, scary, icky matter least. (Bernard Law, incidently, seems to be one of those guys who, if he weren't a cardinal, might have come out around his mid-40s--to the surprise of absolutely no one who'd ever met him.)
Anyway, this aversion to anything to do with sex doesn't exactly engender well-thought-out policies on the subject. Hence Ratzinger's policy.
posted by: Molly, NYC on 09.25.05 at 12:01 AM [permalink]
Well, no comfy chairs?
Screw that.
posted by: Barndog on 09.25.05 at 06:00 AM [permalink]
