It is the most simple and fundamental concept in moral thinking, but the most difficult for many (notably adolescent females and liberals) to comprehend: the distinction between the subjective and the objective. We must judge the act, but not the person! We can NEVER judge the heart and soul of another person! Never! Not the pope not the Supreme Court...none of us can judge another! But we can and must and constantly do judge actions and ideas!
And so we see the confusion caused by our Holy Father when he says, in reference to homosexuality, "Who am I to judge?" On the face of it, he is voicing a Catholic truism with which his predecessors and any informed Catholic would surely agree: Who am I to judge the heart and soul of another person? But he is ambiguous and so he is largely understood to mean: Who am I to judge these actions, relationships and lifestyles? As Pope, he is, of course, supreme judge of right and wrong; he is our teacher; he is an incomparable source of instruction, for Catholics of course but for others as well. A wise and loving father will firmly and directly admonish his children against sin. It is impossible for us to determine: did this ambiguous statement do more harm or good? Did he do more good by welcoming and affirming active homosexuals? Or did he do more harm by confirming them in error, by enabling them in what is harmful? My view is that truth is essential and not to be watered down! We are, all of us, sinners...hopefully in recovery...and our recovery absolutely requires heavy doses of candor and truth...even if that arouses the ire of those of us still in denial. For my money, Pope Francis is too much of an enabler. He is our "Father" and a father's love is tender and compassionate but also true and just. It can be experienced as a harsh and tough love. By contrast, his is a soft, feminine and inclusive love, lacking firmness, clarity and justice.
And so we see the confusion caused by our Holy Father when he says, in reference to homosexuality, "Who am I to judge?" On the face of it, he is voicing a Catholic truism with which his predecessors and any informed Catholic would surely agree: Who am I to judge the heart and soul of another person? But he is ambiguous and so he is largely understood to mean: Who am I to judge these actions, relationships and lifestyles? As Pope, he is, of course, supreme judge of right and wrong; he is our teacher; he is an incomparable source of instruction, for Catholics of course but for others as well. A wise and loving father will firmly and directly admonish his children against sin. It is impossible for us to determine: did this ambiguous statement do more harm or good? Did he do more good by welcoming and affirming active homosexuals? Or did he do more harm by confirming them in error, by enabling them in what is harmful? My view is that truth is essential and not to be watered down! We are, all of us, sinners...hopefully in recovery...and our recovery absolutely requires heavy doses of candor and truth...even if that arouses the ire of those of us still in denial. For my money, Pope Francis is too much of an enabler. He is our "Father" and a father's love is tender and compassionate but also true and just. It can be experienced as a harsh and tough love. By contrast, his is a soft, feminine and inclusive love, lacking firmness, clarity and justice.
No comments:
Post a Comment