Courage, Conviction, and the Culture of Death
What began as the "live and let live" slogan of the LGBT is ending in prison time for anyone who dares to say, "this is wrong," and "what you are doing is sinful."
Many years ago, I was told a joke that was not in particularly good taste, nor was it particularly funny. I’m going to retell it, irrespective of the aforementioned reasons for not doing so, because it illustrates something greatly ironic about the culture of death and the dictatorship of relativism in which we find ourselves.
A man to his friend: Why are you leaving the country?
Friend: They’ve made homosexuality legal and I want to get out of here before they make it compulsory.
I know it’s not funny, and I know it’s in highly questionable taste; but it does highlight a great irony. The irony is that homosexual practice has not been made compulsory, but endorsement of homosexual practice has been. Such is the intolerance of the dictatorship of relativism toward those who fail to show tolerance of the things that it says must be tolerated.
This intolerance in the name of tolerance, this Orwellian doublethink, is currently rampant, especially in Europe. In the United Kingdom, more than 12,000 people a year are being arrested for criticizing the government of Sturmführer Starmer on social media.
The fact that the dictatorship of relativism is wedded to the culture of death is evident in Iceland, which boasts of finding the Final Solution to the “problem” of Down syndrome in the systemic extermination of all those babies who are discovered in the womb to be “guilty” of the genetic “defect.” It is in Iceland, too, that the intolerance of those who fail to endorse homosexual practice is especially evident.
Fr. Jakob Rolland, chancellor of the Catholic Church in Iceland, was threatened with arrest by the police after he gave an interview with state broadcaster RÚV in which he stated the Catholic Church’s position on homosexuality. Such a position is no longer tolerated in Icelandic law, following the passing of a parliamentary statute in 2023 banning so-called “conversion therapy” of those experiencing same-sex attraction. According to those seeking to silence Fr. Rolland, his adherence to Catholic teaching and his refusal of the Eucharist to those living in same-sex relationships are forms of “conversion therapy.”
Fr. Jakob Rolland, chancellor of the Catholic Church in Iceland, was threatened with arrest by the police after he gave an interview with state broadcaster RÚV in which he stated the Catholic Church’s position on homosexuality.Asked whether he should obey the new law, Fr. Rolland responded in a manner reminiscent of the courage and conviction of St. Thomas More: “Yes, as long as the laws align with God’s laws, then it’s fine. It has been known in law from the very beginning that when the laws of the land and God’s laws conflict, God’s laws apply.” As with all good disciples of Christ, he is happy to render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, but he will not render, or surrender, the things that are God’s to Caesar.
The courage of his convictions was evident in an earlier interview, in 2019, when Fr. Rolland stated:
If two women came to us and wanted to marry, then I’d say, “Unfortunately, that won’t work for us.” If they wanted to press charges, I’d say, “Do it.” If I go to prison, then I go to prison, but it won’t change my position.
Apart from having the courage of his convictions, Fr. Rolland also has the deep understanding of the things of which he is convicted and the ability to express them with clarity and charity:
Sexual orientation is only one factor among many that concern an individual’s tendencies towards some lifestyle that is not good for the individual and not good for society. And “conversion”—change of heart—this is a key word in the daily life of Catholic people. We are constantly in the position of turning away from what is evil towards what is good.
Against the charge that he is discriminating against those struggling with the disorder of same-sex attraction, Fr. Rolland makes it clear that we are all disordered in one way or another. Each of us struggle with sin and its harmful consequences. In this sense, those struggling with one form of disorder are no different from those struggling with different disorders. We are all sinners, and we are called to love one another; but there’s a difference between loving the sinner and endorsing the sin, a difference and a distance which is as wide as the chasm that separates Heaven from Hell:
Everyone who comes to church has their problems and sins, struggling to some degree with bad tendencies towards something. Everyone is kneeling, sometimes crying before God, before the statue of the Holy Virgin Mary, and asking for help. We are all really in the same position.
In recent interviews, Fr. Rolland has affirmed that Catholics with homosexual inclinations may receive the Eucharist—but not if they are engaged in intimate same-sex relationships. In other words, those struggling with a moral disorder are welcome to receive the Sacrament as repentant sinners. This is obvious because all human persons are in some sense morally disordered. The key word is not the noun, sinners, but the adjective, repentant.
In the face of the intolerance of the state, Fr. Rolland remains resolute, gaining great encouragement by the number of young people taking an interest in the Faith:
Yesterday I had a meeting for people who want to learn more about the Catholic faith and the Church’s teachings. And it was just a large group, and the vast majority were young people. So maybe it’s also part of the zeitgeist to be looking for an anchor, for answers to life’s questions. You want to find security and a sanctuary and community, and that’s the kind of people who come to us.
Fr. Rolland’s sense of encouragement at the number of young converts is also being felt in other countries. In France, over 13,000 adults and 8,000 teens were received into the Church this Easter, a new record for adult converts. The increase in the number of teenagers is simply startling. In 2017, only 1,385 teenagers requested baptism. This year, that number skyrocketed to 8,152.
Especially encouraging is the overall youthfulness of these new French converts. Older generations make up a tiny fraction of the total number. Only 1 percent of adult baptisms involve people over 65. In contrast, the overwhelming majority of new converts (82 percent) are between 18 and 40 years old. A similar, if less dramatic, upswing is being seen in the United Kingdom and other countries.
What are we to make of this resurgent Catholicism in the midst of the culture of death? Perhaps, as Fr. Rolland surmises, young people are “looking for an anchor, for answers to life’s questions.” They are seeking “security, sanctuary and community.”
In brief and in sum, they are seeking what can’t be found in the disordered world of relativism and nihilism. All that is needed is for the leaders of the Church to have the courage and conviction of good and resolute priests, such as Fr. Rolland. Such courage and such conviction will provide the rock to which young people need to cling as the culture of death continues its slow, sordid, and self-assisted suicide.
Well, well, well: is this the promised "devastating satire" from Swashfuckling Bullshittigan?
ReplyDeleteFor Christ's sake, Groper, put another record on, we've heard this one before, although to be fair this post is much funnier than the usual laboured tosh from Swashfuckling Bullshittigan.
"In recent interviews, Fr. Rolland has affirmed that Catholics with homosexual inclinations may receive the Eucharist—but not if they are engaged in intimate same-sex relationships. In other words, those struggling with a moral disorder are welcome to receive the Sacrament as repentant sinners. This is obvious because all human persons are in some sense morally disordered. The key word is not the noun, sinners, but the adjective, repentant."
No, the key word is JUDGEMENT - and no-one has placed this jumped-up little turd in a position to judge, and no-one - least of all God - has conferred upon him the right to mediate God's mercy to people of whose God-given sexuality he disapproves.
And, of course, Groper, there is a key question, Why should anyone take the slightest notice of a lying, two-faced bastard like you who whinnies on about his "searing honesty" and the "sanctity of the principle of free speech" whilst uttering repeatedly malicious lies about people who have time and again humiliated his narrow minded bigotry.
And when, instead of dishing it our whilst cowering behind a pseudonym, he is obliged to take what he dishes out with such glee, he squeals like a stuck pig and censors those who are simply playing his own nasty behaviour back to him to see how he likes it.
You're a lying, two-faced, hypocritical, malicious bastard, Groper.
Saint Paul has given a very succinct rebuttal to your support of sodomy.
ReplyDeleteGod did not give homosexuality. Original sin did.
“For this reason God gave them up to vile passions. For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature. Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due. And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a debased mind, to do those things which are not fitting” (Romans 1:25-28).
Bollocks - the doctrine of original sin has no basis whatsoever in the Gospels, being concocted by Augustiine of Hippo in the late 4th century.
ReplyDeleteNeither St Paul nor Augustine was God, nor did they know the mind of God, any more than you do.
Do you EVER stop to think for yourself, you mindless pillock?
The C of E accepts the Doctrine of Original Sin. Read your 39 Articles.
ReplyDeleteYou'll never make it as a theologian will you Detters?
I repeat - the doctrine of original sin is not scriptural.
DeleteAnd acceptance of the 39 Articles is not, and never has been a criterion for confirmation in the Anglican Church.
Nor do I "support sodomy", you lying bastard. As I have said on numerous occasions, Groper, I neither condemn nor support the practice of anal sexual intercourse whether homosexual or [as when you claimed to have buggered my wife] heterosexual. I do support the idea of couples expressing their love physically in whatever way they choose, provided that that way is legal and consensual.
As for "making it as a theologian", when I look at you - your low-minded bigotry, your dirty, nasty lying corruption, your ironclad conceit of your own rightness and virtue and your pathological narcissism, I think that if that is what being a theologian looks like, you can stuff it up your arse.
"For this reason God gave them up to vile passions."
ReplyDeleteSaint Paul
Got that?
GENE
So fucking what?
ReplyDeleteSt Paul was not God, and he had no right to impose his own sexual hang-ups on the rest of the world, any more than you are entitled to bully others into a semblance of your own twisted, repressed and furtive sexuality, Groper.
Groper - what about your own vile passions, acted out in deserted classrooms and empty corridors on defenceless young women?
"I neither condemn nor support the practice of anal sexual intercourse"
ReplyDeleteSo why don't you condemn? Your church, the C of E, condemns stating unequivocally that 'homosexual acts are incompatible with the Scriptures.
Bollocks.
DeleteThe Church of England welcomes LGBTQ+ individuals and allows for prayers of dedication or thanksgiving for same-sex couples following a civil ceremony.
"Prayers of thanksgiving or for God’s blessing" can be offered informally.
The Church has apologized for the "hurt and pain" caused to LGBTQ+ people.
Stop making stuff up, Groper.
'any more than you are entitled to bully others'
ReplyDeleteOh! but wait. It is the bullying of the Gay Lobby that is the issue here.
When has the [non-existent] Gay Lobby forced you to so anything you didn't want to, you stupid bastard.
ReplyDeleteYou're just talking at random and making a colossal tit of yourself in the process.
Groper - what about your own vile passions, acted out in deserted classrooms and empty corridors on defenceless young women?
…using your status as a senior teacher to bully them into acquiescence and silence. Your behaviour was a form of rape, Groper, so don’t wang on about the sexual habits of loving couples of whatever sexual orientation and expect to be taken seriously. Their behaviour is not a crime. Yours was.
DeleteYou will never learn will you Detters? Every faith and every Christian denomination (There are over 30,000 Protestant denominations by the way) condemn homosexual acts as sinful.
ReplyDeleteThe C of E has not changed it teaching that homosexual acts are incompatible with Scripture.
GENE
Bollocks, Groper, stop making stuff up. Your recurrent psychosis - that if you repeat a lie often enough it becomes true - is making a tit of you again. Of the 32 dioceses in the C of E, nine have created LGBTQI+ chaplaincies led by ordained homosexuals, seven of them with authorised lay assistants. A further seven dioceses are planning to establish similar chaplaincies in the course of this year. They will work with LGBTQI+ Christians to secure their acceptance in church communities, mostly by working at parish level. Huff, puff and quote 20 year old General
DeleteSynod motions as much as you like, Groper, but you are wrong. A church establishing LGBTQI+ Chaplaincies led by gay priests cannot be condemning homosexuality.
So kindly stop talking crap.
I should make it clear that these chaplaincies have been created by diocesan bishops who have listened to their diocesan synods and have done so with the literal blessing of the Right Revd Sarah Mullally.
DeleteSo, once again, stop talking crap.
"When has the [non-existent] Gay Lobby forced you to so anything you didn't want to, you stupid bastard."
ReplyDeleteHaven't you read the article? This priest is being threatened with prison.
Gene
WRT Fr Rolland, there are disgraceful aspects to this story.
Delete(1) that a group of bigots who disagree with Fr Rolland’s views on administering the sacraments to active homosexual Catholics have tried to ambush him legally by using a law quite rightly outlawing the ridiculous notion of “conversion therapy”. Denying the sacraments to active homosexual parishioners is his right as a priest, and although a case could be made that his decision is a kind of coercive conversion therapy, it would never stand up in court. Those seeking the arrest of Fr Rolland are bigots and they should not succeed,
2) that Fr Rolland betrays his calling as a priest by denying the sacraments to those who wish to partake in them. To me that is an abuse of his office. Week after week after week he gives communion to people who have no intention of reforming - you, Groper, are the same arrogant, bigoted bastard every time you take communion with no intention of changing your ways because you think that you are right to be an arrogant, bigoted bastard. Fr Rolland is not only placing his own restrictions on the mercy of God, but he also singling out a particular form of sexuality to punish. Presumably he’d be happy to give the sacrament to a man who sexually fondled young female colleagues without their permission, for instance?
If the bigots who are trying to haul Fr Rolland into court are a disgrace - and they are - then they are at least motivated by equally disgraceful behaviour on his part.
3) finally, your bigotry, your bullying, your bumptious arrogance, your ironclad certainty that to quote chunks of theology that you only half understand is somehow to prove you right and me wrong, your juvenile preoccupation with winning - all these are a disgrace to the Catholic Church. You are, spiritually, one of the mindless crowd who called for Christ’s crucifixion.
“Think it possible, in the bowels of Jesus Christ, that ye may be mistaken.”
Or maybe just shut the fuck up and find something useful to do instead of polluting the internet with a ridiculous blog that nobody reads.
"A church establishing LGBTQI+ Chaplaincies led by gay priests cannot be condemning homosexuality."
ReplyDeleteNo one is condemning homosexuality. No church condemns homosexuality. What is condemned as sin is homosexual activity.
You know this perfectly well. You are being deliberately obtuse here. You have repeated this conflating of homosexual individual and homosexual activity ad infinitum. This won't wash.
The Catholic Church has led the way in accepting and welcoming those of LGBTQI+ orientation. Read the Catechism of the Catholic Church
The Catholic Church has also established chaplaincies those of LGBTQI+ orientation.
No church, including the C of E , accepts the practice of homosexual activity to be anything other than sinful.
GENE
Groper, you make me tired, but you are NOT going to bully me into accepting what I cannot bring myself to accept.
DeleteYou are entitled to what you believe, and I am entitled to believe what I believe; but I will NOT be bullied by a wanker like you into accepting your preposterous views on the practices of a church you despise, of whose workings you are totally ignorant and to which you do not belong.
And I will go on claiming, that FOR ME, no matter how loudly you squeal about it, that to condemn a sexuality for the way in which it is expressed is a hair-splitting, casuistical cop-out, and it won't wash.
If you think I am wrong, then feel free to fuck off and stop telling what I ought to believe. But do so in the knowledge that I will never make common cause with a self-righteous serial sexual predator like you without an atom of genuine piety in his own body.
Detterling Gene is perfectly correct and you know it. Why do you think that all Christian denominations (over 30,000 of them Protestant) condemn homosexual acts as sinful?
ReplyDeleteAs usual with you everyone is wrong and you are right. Maybe you should stop and think.
Mary Winterbourne
And you, Gene, should stop this ludicrous pretence that your sock puppets exist.
DeleteAnd I do not think that I am right and everyone else is wrong.
I simply claim the right to think for myself on this matter, just as you claim the right to think for yourself on it.
And I will NEVER concede that to condemn a legal, God-given sexuality for the way in which it is expressed is not a hair-splitting, casuistical cop-out, and it won't wash. You might as well maintain that keys are good but locks are bad, you stupid bastard.
"If two women came to us and wanted to marry, then I’d say, “Unfortunately, that won’t work for us.” If they wanted to press charges, I’d say, “Do it.” If I go to prison, then I go to prison, but it won’t change my position."
ReplyDeleteAnd this would be the position of any Catholic priest here in Hillingdon or anywhere else.
Mary Winterbourne
As I have said already, Gene, it would their right to make that decision, just as it is my right to say that a priest who with-holds the sacraments because he disapproves of how Christian homosexuals express their love is behaving as if he were God. He isn't.
DeleteAND IT IS A RIGHT THAT, NO MATTER HOW IT INFURIATES YOU, YOU CANNOT PREVENT ME FROM EXERCISING.
The "pressing of charges" reference is pure misdirection - Fr Rolland may be a disgrace to his cloth, but the attempt to arraign him using the "gay conversion law" is both nasty and futile.
Which just about sums up your entire postings on this thread, Groper.
Well said Mary!
ReplyDeleteSebastian D'Orsai
Fuck off, Gene.
Delete"AND IT IS A RIGHT THAT, NO MATTER HOW IT INFURIATES YOU, YOU CANNOT PREVENT ME FROM EXERCISING."
ReplyDeleteYes, no one can stop you holding to the abhorrent view that vile sins such as sodomy are acceptable to you. But you cannot force that view on others. In this instance the Catholic Church has the perfect right to maintain its teaching that homosexual acts are depraved and totally sinful. And of course not only the Catholic Church but all Christian denominations hold to such teachings. And so do the C of E. You don't like that do you? but until the C of E state otherwise that's the position. And even for the C of E it is unthinkable that it would ever state that the vile act of, say, sodomy is not sinful.
Mary Winterbourne
Groper, I am not trying to force my views on anyone.
DeleteFind me a single instance in any of my posts on this subject where I say “this is what I think AND BECAUSE I THINK THIS SO MUST EVERYONE ELSE.
You can’t, because I haven’t.
I leave that bullying, hectoring bigotry to you and your pitiful gang of sock puppets.
The truth is not, of course, determined by majority opinion, but nor is its cause served the kind of juvenile crowing and name calling with which you always prosecute your views.
ReplyDeleteBut look around the congregation at Mass next Sunday, and reflect that independent, peer reviewed research has determined that:
[a] TWO THIRDS of your fellow Catholics, most of them better Christians than you would, if asked, tell you that you are talking piss about assisted dying [Dignity in Dying];
[b] THREE QUARTERS of them, most of them better Christians than you would, if asked, tell you that you are talking piss about same sex marriage [PEW Research];
[c] ABOUT A THIRD of them, most of them better Christians than you would, if asked tell you that you are talking bollocks about abortion, according to research by https:/catholicsinbritain.le.ac.uk/
It really is time that you learned an essential lesson, Groper, which is that YOUR way of conducting your religious and prayer life is not the only way, and that people who say the same creeds as you do are entitled to disagree with you should they wish to, without being accused of betrayal of the faith, or heresy or blasphemy. If your psychosis tells you that you are God or the Pope, fair enough: but don't make a complete tit of yourself by expecting everyone to treat you as if this were a reality.
I will render account of myself to my Lord in due course and in the meantime, no-one, least of all a drunken, sexually delinquent Cockney ponce, is going to tell me what to believe, think or do.
End of story.
"I will render account of myself to my Lord in due course"
DeleteYou certainly will - and wouldn't I like to be there!
GENE
I was sitting out on the patio yesterday evening smoking a cigar. (Marianne won't let me smoke in the house.) I thought a lot about Detters and how this man has the gall to call himself Christian.
ReplyDeleteDetters you accept the evil of abortion. Detters you accept the evil of assisted suicide. Detters you accept the evil of homosexual acts. You, despite the teaching of the Church, see nothing wrong here.
Detters you don't accept the reality of heaven, hell and purgatory.
Just how do you have the effrontery to call yourself Christian?
GENE
By the same criteria that you - a serial sexual predator, liar, drunkard, hypocrite, a conceited, arrogant, coward, fraud and pornographer - call yourself a Christian.
DeleteAt least my effrontery doesn’t extend to having pretensions to being God and laying down the law as to who is Christian and who is not, you impertinent sod.
And stop the pathetic weasel wording to misrepresent my views. I do not “accept” abortion, anal sexual intercourse or assisted dying in the sense - ie “support” you are trying to foist on me, Groper.
I accept and support the right of those who do not share my moral/ethical standpoint to make their own conscientious decisions on those matters, provided that legal and consensual standards are observed. Unlike you, I don’t subscribe to the view that “if I don’t want to, then no-one must be allowed to.”. As the statistics quoted earlier today show, your views on abortion, same sex marriage and assisted dying are held only by a shrinking minority of your fellow Catholics. - but we never hear of your trying to prosecute those views face to face in your own church, do we?
That’s because you would be told to hold your tongue in the first five minutes and you’re too big a coward to speak up anyway. Easier to try to bully others whilst cowering behind a pseudonym, with your pathetic retinue of sock puppets to give you the appearance of support.
Anyway. Nearly 2.30: time for the second bottle of Aldi Chianti.
He who eats the Body of Our Lord and drinks His Blood whilst in a state of sin eats and drinks his own condemnation, and no authority can alter this law contained in the teaching of St. Paul and in Tradition.
ReplyDeleteSins of impurity that are against nature are of such gravity that they always and in every circumstance cry to God for vengeance, and are radically incompatible with every form of authentic Christian love. Such a ‘lifestyle’ can therefore in no way be recognized as a gift from God. A couple practising this vice must be helped to free themselves from it, and can in no way be blessed — formally or informally — by ministers of the Church.
Put that in your pipe and smoke it Detters.
GENE
As ever, you have no answers to points reasonably put to you and so we get yet another chunk of the catechism you yourself ignore when it suits you in lace of an argument. Do you have any idea of what a tit you make of yourself?
ReplyDeleteDid you use artificial contraception in your sexual relationship with your wife until she expelled you from the marital bed five years ago?
Yes?
or
No?
Did you use artificial contraception in your sexual relationship with your wife until she expelled you from the marital bed five years ago?
ReplyDeleteNone of your business you impertinent so-and-so.
D: Did you use artificial contraception in your sexual relationship with your wife until she expelled you from the marital bed five years ago?
DeleteG: None of your business you impertinent so-and-so.
D: Any more that it's any of your business how I bring my son, and you 've talked a mile of crap on that score. Once more, you can dish it out, but you can't take it, you two faced tosser.
And, of course, that's a "yes" from you.
So why did you go against the teachings of your church, Gene?
After all, you'd hardly need to: your personality, unpleasant hygiene and drunkenness were contraceptive enough, I should have thought.
Your question was most impertinent Detterling. How would you like it if I asked you, for example, how frequently Cuthbert gets sodomised by his partner Julian?
ReplyDeleteGENE
I wouldn’t mind in the least, mainly because I am not in the least interested.
ReplyDeleteEven if I had a nephew called Cuthbert (he isn’t) and his husband was called Julian (he isn’t), I neither know nor care how they express their sexuality physically, and since both of them are atheists they both think St Paul was a wanker anyway.
But I digress.
Why did you flout the ex cathedra teaching of Pope Paul VI and use artificial contraception while you and Marianne still had a sexual relationship?
Why didn’t you rely on your repulsive personality? That alone would have been enough to put her off, surely?
At least Gene was/is able to have a sexual relationship with his wife.
ReplyDeleteUnlike some whom I could mention who could never have such a relationship due to erectile dysfunction.
Mary Winterbourne
Ah, Gene, avoiding the issue again, and doing so with your characteristic feeble "back at you" na-na-na-na-naa response.
ReplyDeleteYou may have been able to have a sexual relationship with Marianne - although your tastes seemed more to run to buggering other peoples' wives in the days when you could induce your eight and a half centimetre dick to twitch, but she threw you out of her bedroom seven years when she tired of your drunken pawings, your foul breath and constant premature ejaculation - not for nothing was Gene known as Groper Two-Push.
But I digress.
Why did you flout the ex cathedra teaching of Pope Paul VI and use artificial contraception while you and Marianne still had a sexual relationship?
Why didn’t you rely on your repulsive personality? That alone would have been enough to put her off, surely?