Monday, November 05, 2007

Why Is The Catholic Church Hatin' On Transpeople?

In October 1953 a Cuban newspaper conducted an interview with Father Hilario Chaurrondo. At the time he was a blunt, outspoken, down to earth and very popular priest known throughout the island for his prison advocacy and other work that kept him close to the grittier aspects of life in pre-Castro Cuba.

I read this eye-opening snippet of the article in the book Christine Jorgenson-A Personal Autobiography. This particular chapter in the book covers Christine's visit to Havana to perform at the Tropicana. Here's what Father Chaurrondo had to say about Christine.

"I am familiar with the Cristina Jorgenson case right from its very beginnings. I have followed it in the press and have read her memoirs. Very interesting-very. These are the things which leave us bewildered by the progress of the days we live in.

A doubt came into our mind. Should we ask him or not? Well, when all is considered, Father Chaurrondo is considered a "man of the world".

"Father, you are aware that Cristina is legally a woman with all the rights and attributes inherent in such a social condition. Would you be disposed to give your blessing to Cristina marry a man in church?"

Father Chaurrondo doesn't flinch and he replies as if it were the most natural thing in the world.

"If her application for a Catholic ceremony carries with it all the presiquites and prior dispensations of the Archbishop, I would say yes."

"Would Cristina's case involve special dispensations?"

"No. Only the normal procedure. Just as for any other woman. As far as we are concerned, Cristina is a woman since she has been so designated by the United States, where they know what they are doing."

"And the Archbishop's dispensation?"

"Cristina is an alien resident, and in such cases certain requirements have to be met for reasons of diocese and parish. I repeat, Cristina's case calls for no special treatment. I can marry Cristina Jorgenson in the church once the usual and current regulations have been complied with. The procedure will be no different with her than with any other woman."

Father Chaurrondo is clear, frank, simple and definite. Cristina Jorgenson can be married by the Church.

"Look my son, we priests nowadays have seriously to study the realities of life. We're not like the priests of sixty years ago, or as I was when I first began."

Chaurrondo's voice softened at memory of those first years of his priesthood.

"The secret of confession is inviolable, otherwise I would tell you stories of Cristinas and Cristinos of every color under the sun. At the beginning my soul grieved and sorrowed at the horror and shame. Now it's different. I read Maranon (Gregorio Maranon, a famous Spanish endocrinologist) and even dig football. Times change, but the eternal truths are immutable."

...we take our leave of Father Hilario Chaurrondo who remains behind in the yard before his Church of Mercy, smiling in his own kindly, jolly way which somehow makes him seem Don Camillo himself.

We carry the news with us like a bomb. A Catholic prelate in Cuba is the first representative of any church, religion or sect ever to make such a clear pronouncement on the Cristina Jorgenson case. It remains to be seen what the reactions to his statements will be amongst the Catholic congregations, not only in Cuba but throughout the world.


How prophetic the closing paragraph in that 1953 artcle was.

Fast forward to January 2003.

VATICAN CITY (CNS) -- After years of study, the Vatican's doctrinal congregation has sent church leaders a confidential document concluding that "sex-change" procedures do not change a person's gender in the eyes of the church.

Consequently, the document instructs bishops never to alter the sex listed in parish baptismal records and says Catholics who have undergone "sex-change" procedures are not eligible to marry, be ordained to the priesthood or enter religious life, according to a source familiar with the text.

That document mentioned was completed in 2000 and was credited to Jesuit Father Urbano Navarrete of Spain (far left in this photo with Pope John Paul II) who is a retired canon law professor at Rome's Gregorian University.

Father Navarrete wrote a 1997 article on transsexualism in an authoritative canon law journal and has been consulted by the doctrinal congregation on specific cases involving transsexualism and hermaphroditism. He was just elevated to cardinal by Pope Benedict XVI.

But one of the things not mentioned is that the Vatican was being advised by a 30 year enemy of the transgender community: Dr. Paul McHugh.

A man with a personal axe to grind against transgender people got himself named as an advisor to the Vatican. He has used that position to turn the Catholic Church into an intolerant bastion of transphobia, at least at the leadership level.

Yes, the same Dr. Paul McHugh who has much Hateraid for transgender people and takes credit for killing the Johns Hopkins Gender Clinic.

McHugh has ties to neoconservative Catholic groups, not surprisingly is a member of the President's Council on Bioethics, and is frequently quoted by anti-transgender groups such as NARTH and the Concerned Women for America. McHugh claims responsibility for helping get J. Michael Bailey's anti-transgender character assassination screed The Man Who Would Be Queen published through the National Academy of Sciences.

McHugh's still chomping Hater Tots after all these years. He had this to say in a 2004 article for the conservative Catholic publication First Things entitled Surgical Sex

"...The post-surgical subjects struck me as caricatures of women. They wore high heels, copious makeup, and flamboyant clothing; they spoke about how they found themselves able to give vent to their natural inclinations for peace, domesticity, and gentleness—but their large hands, prominent Adam’s apples, and thick facial features were incongruous (and would become more so as they aged)...."

During his time at Johns Hopkins from 1975-2001, after he assumed the chairmanship of the Psychiatry department from Dr. Joel Elkes, he assigned Dr. John Meyer to do a long-term follow-up study of 50 transsexuals who underwent SRS at Johns Hopkins. The 1977 Meyer Report claimed that SRS confers no objective advantage in terms of social rehabilitation for transsexuals. The paper was widely criticized at the time as flawed, but was used as the pretext by McHugh to close the Johns Hopkins Gender Identity Clinic in October 1979.

Interestingly enough while he hates on transgender people, McHugh doesn't show the same level of vitriol toward child molesters. Check out this August 21, 2002 Washington Times report by Judith Reisman and Dennis Jarrard entitled Strange Bedfellows.

If you found the clergy sex abuse scandal shocking, prepare for another jolt: the Catholic bishops are getting their "expert" advice on pedophilia from people who have covered up or even defended sex between men and children.

The bishops recently chose Dr. Paul McHugh, former chairman of the Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences at John Hopkins University School of Medicine, as chief behavioral scientist for their new clergy sex crimes review board.

Yet Dr. McHugh once said Johns Hopkins' Sexual Disorders Clinic, which treats molesters, was justified in concealing multiple incidents of child rape and fondling to police, despite a state law requiring staffers to report them.

"We did what we thought was appropriate," said Dr. McHugh, then director of Hopkins' Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, which oversaw the sex clinic. He agreed with his subordinate, clinic head Fred Berlin, who broke the then-new child sexual abuse law on the grounds that it might keep child molesters from seeking treatment.


Fortunately, the Catholic rank and file members take issue with the idiocy and increasing anti-transgender intolerance at the top, which has only intensified since Benedict XVI became pope in April 2005.

Dignity USA, an organization of GLBT Catholics is fighting to stop the madness. Dignity chapters are located around the country and around the world where gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered Catholics are welcomed for mass. It is not sanctioned by Rome or local Catholic bishops and masses are held in Episcopal churches and in other houses of worship.

When the anti-transgender statement was made public in 2003, Dignity issued a statement in which it took the Vatican’s doctrinal congregation to task for “trivializing the life-long struggles of our transgender and inter-sexed sisters and brothers in Christ.”

Marianne Duddy, who was president of Dignity USA from 1993-1997, wrote that "transgendered individuals have been a part of the Catholic Church faith communities for decades and that their spiritual, emotional and physical challenges are enormous — and humbling."

“There are profound truths about humanity and about God to be learned from their experience,” she wrote. “Transgender people need pastoral attention that is respectful and open, not judgmental and dismissive. The Vatican statement fails to take into account current medical, physiological, psychological and sociological findings.”

Despite the official negative church position on trans issues, there are individual church parishes around the United States and abroad that are more accepting, if not openly embracing of those who are transgender, gay, lesbian and bisexual. Some parishes fly below the radar of local church authority, meeting as house churches or small faith communities.

When asked in a 2006 Washington Blade interview about why GLBT peeps stay in the church, then Dignity Executive Diretor Debra Weill said, "For me as well as others in the LGBT community, we stay because our faith is rooted in the Catholic liturgy and faith traditions. It is not rooted in the ignorance of statements that come from the Vatican. It’s in what the Catholic Church teaches about loving one another and serving others.”

Dignity is in this battle for the long haul. At their Austin, TX convention they issued their response to a November 2006 United States Conference of Catholic Bishops document entitled Ministry to Persons with a Homosexual Inclination: Guidelines for Pastoral Care.

In the DignityUSA Letter on the Pastoral Care of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender (LGBT) People 2007 they sought to address some of the critical pastoral needs of the LGBT community. It gives voice to the concerns of Catholic LGBT persons regarding their role in the church; calls on the bishops of the United States to put an end to prejudice and discrimination against LGBT people in the church; and expresses the hope, expectation and just demand of LGBT Catholics to be full participants in their church, as is their right by baptism.

McHugh has ruined not only the lives of many transpeople in the United States, but is now setting up the conditions to spread his hatred through an institution that impacts people around the world. These negative policies will impact transgender people not only who are members of the Catholic Church but non-Catholics around the world as well. They are already being cited by governmental agencies to deny transgender people basic human rights.

McHugh and the conservacatholics who share his views would be wise to remember I Corinthians 15:10.

“By the grace of God I am what I am, and God's grace to me has not been without effect.”

Dignity USA and groups like it around the world are fighting to ensure that the Church lives up to its humanitarian principles. We can only hope and pray that the results of this battle will be a more positive religious climate.

We pray the misguided people in the Vatican will see the error of their ways and not only Catholics, but all faiths will open their doors and hearts to let us fully practice our spirituality in an open and accepting atmosphere that reflects our humanity.

But then again, if past history is any indicator, I may be waiting a while for that to happen. It took the Catholic Church 500 years to acknowledge the error of persecuting Galileo and Copernicus for daring to suggest the Earth revolves around the sun.


Unknown said...

I would call the catholic Churches position Medieval if it wasn't for the fact that the church was far more open in the middle ages. Unfortunately as the church has lost secular power it has become more conservative if not reactionary in spiritual matters.

I wish those fighting for reform luck but I fear given the current composition of the Collage of Cardinals reform is at best a distant possibility.

Monica Roberts said...

The forces of Intolerance learned lessons from the 60's civil rights struggle that we progressive forces didn't pay attention to.

One of those major lessons was if they couldn't get the churches to totally sign off on their hatred, split them by fomenting dissension in various demoninations along progressive-conserative lines.

The other is spin, spin, spin their hatred as a religious issue. They know they lose if people rightly interpret it for what it is: A human rights/civil rights issue.

Unknown said...

Too right Monica, the reactionary right learned a lot of lessons from their defeats in the 60's They used those lea sons to take over churches and local Republican party organizations until they dominated on the right. We could do worse then to learn from their organizational success.

Cameron Partridge said...

Thanks for this post, Monica. I'm part of a relatively new organization in the Episcopal Church called TransEpiscopal ( and keyword 'transepiscopal' at When I was recently checking to see if our name was up on the United ENDA list yet (we requested to join) I noticed Dignity there. Go Dignity! It's a really tough time to be trans or connected to trans folks in the churches right now. In my own denomiantion we don't have the kind of official condemnation you cite but we also aren't yet fully visible in the Anglican Communion conversations. I think we could all use each others prayers.


Rev. Cameron Partridge

Monica Roberts said...

Rev. Cameron,
Thanks for the comment and the info.

Yeah, it's going to be tough for the next few years because the Forces of Intolerance are getting increasingly desperate.

As Dr. King once said, "the arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice."

They are on the wrong side of history once again. They may win a battle or two, but the war to have transgender people's humanity and full civil rights codified into law will go our way.

Cameron Partridge said...

Amen, sister!


Daisy Deadhead said...

Fascinating and comprehensive post. I would add that I think the foofaraw over various recently-discovered, possibly-transgendered saints and popes of the past, has added to the witch-hunting atmosphere. For example, the way Church historians feverishly insist that Pope Joan was merely a "legend" (prove it!), speaks volumes. (She is no more a "legend" than countless saints of the past, and do they really wanna go there?)

And then you have the whole list of GLBT saints, many of whom include major heavy-hitters
(Joan of Arc, Julian of Norwich) who were OBVIOUSLY trans. John Boswell sent everyone into a panic, and now there is a big cover-up. This is therefore techically a REACTIONARY (as in: reaction to) tendency. The Church, as pointed out by Natasha, was actually far more liberal in the Middle Ages, and as you point out, was pretty mellow about trans and Christine Jorgenson until the 70s or so.

It will take a long time, since the Church (as I think St Anselm, another gay saint, said) moves very slowly, in God's time, not human time. But I think civil disobedience (just going ahead and taking part in the sacraments, regardless of dogma) is the best way right now. We won't get any progressive change on these issues with Cardinal Ratzinger, traditional guardian of authority at the Vatican, as Pope Benedict XIV. I prayed for Cardinal Francis Arinze to be pope, and I didn't get him. :(

One liberal pope is all it would take, for women priests, too. Pray we get one. :)

Monica, thank you for all the good work you do here... your blog recommended by wonderful Lisa at QUESTIONING TRANSPHOBIA.

KaraLynn said...

Transgriot, the only person I see "hating" here is you and the other militant homosexuals who can't stand to be told "no". Why can't you leave well enough alone? If you don't like the Catholic Church's position on transgendered and homosexuality DON'T BECOME A CATHOLIC. No one is holding a gun to your head and forcing you to become one. If anything the Church teaches COMPASSION for people who have such struggles with same-sex attraction and the like. Take a look at what happens to them in say, ISLAM. You would be executed in some fashion. So grow up and accept another's RIGHT to disagree with your CHOSEN LIFESTYLE.


We're not EVER going to get a "liberal" Pope. Jesus promised that when He said the gates of Hell shall NEVER prevail against His Church (Matthew 16:16-18).

So don't hold your breath!

KaraLynn said...

daisydeadhead, you need to wake up. There has NEVER been "gay saints". You are obviously TOTALLY UNINFORMED about the Catholic Church.

You want proof that "Pope Joan" is a complete fabrication? I've got plenty:

Here is an ATHEIST'S article about "Pope Joan":

an excerpt:

"The legend should probably be rejected. First, there aren’t any contemporary accounts of a Pope Joan — the first reports come hundreds of years after she supposedly ruled. Second, it would be difficult if not impossible to insert a papacy of more than two years anywhere that Pope Joan is alleged to have existed. A papacy of a few days or months may be credible, but not of multiple years.

Perhaps just as interesting as the legend of Pope Joan is the question of why someone would take the trouble to invent the tale in the first place. The legend was most popular during the Reformation, when Protestants were eager for anything negative that could be said about the papacy."

Encyclopedia Britanica Online says this:

"it was the Calvinist David Blondel who made the first determined attempt to destroy the myth in his Éclaircissement familier de la question: Si une femme a été assise au siège papal de Rome (1647; “Familiar Enlightenment of the Question: Whether a Woman Had Been Seated on the Papal Throne in Rome”)"

It was a PROTESTANT CALVINIST who sought to destroy the myth. That speaks VOLUMES.

"Pope Joan" refuted:

So I can see that radical, militant homosexuals will sink to the lowest possible means to discredit the Catholic Church and justify their hated of Her. Fortunately, the Church teaches Her children to USE REASON and the faithful are intelligent enough to know your assinine claims are BASELESS.

Kara said...

The argument that if you do not like an organization's policies (in this case, the catholics) do not join it. For one, what if you want to join it? Are you to be kept out? For another, the more organizations that say discrimination about something is okay, the more other organizations will think it is okay and do the same.

I am not a catholic, but right now I am is an argument with one organization about their policy of exclusion of another group (no, not TLBG). The immediate goal is to get them educated on the issue and to phrase their policy in a much less disdainful tone. Even if their policy is completely reversed though, it is doubtful that many in the group they currently look down on would attend that organization anyways. So why am I pressing the issue? To educate them and the more organizations that think it is okay to exclude that group the more other organizations will do the same .... making it that much harder to get them in to places where they *do* want to go.

KaraLynn said...


But the thing is, the Catholic Church is MORE than an organization. It's a religious institution. We have freedom of religion in most developed nations. We also have the freedom to NOT join that religion if we don't agree with the teachings. It's very simple. I don't agree with the teachings of Islam, so I am not about to become a Muslim. I don't attack the Islamic faith. I don't try to "educate" them and try to change what they believe. It's their God-given, free will right to believe and practice what they do.

You would do well to see things that way about the Catholic Church because you come across as being the intolerant ones. You come across as being spoiled rotten little children who throw tempertantrums because someone told you "no".

Respect the Catholic Church's freewill right to CHOOSE to practice and believe what She does, just as She respects YOUR freewill right to CHOOSE to live your lifestyle. She respects ALL GLBT peoples right to CHOOSE the way they live. And even those they may not choose their orientation, they can choose to act on the inclinations. I know this because I am a woman who has same-sex attraction, and I CHOOSE to NOT live as a lesbian. I CHOOSE to live according to my Catholic Faith.

Lastly your cause is futile because you will not change the views of an religious institution that has been around for 2000 years and counting. All of our teachings come from Jesus Christ Himself, including the ones about human sexuality. Like I said in previous posts, they are Natural Law. They were put in place when the universe was created. They cannot and will not change. Jesus says that His Church will always be faithful to His teachings when He said the gates of Hell will not prevail against His Church.

Here's a little wake up call for daisydeadhead:

You want a liberal Pope and you prayed for Cardinal Arinze? LOL! Africans are the MOST conservative Catholics in the Catholic Church. If anything, Arinze would be as "strict" or even stricter than Ratzinger! Yet another clue that you know absolutely nothing about Catholicism or the Catholic Church!

Kara said...

Hmm, a bit too glib with the term 'natural law' are we? Look it up in a dictionary sometime, I think you will find the meaning to be not what you think it is. So, if you are saying certain types of attraction and gender identity are "natural" or not, are you saying something like, oh, asexual reproduction is not natural? What about hermaphroditic species or ones (like fish and some amphibians) that have been shown to change sex based on various factors?

Any organization is just that, an organization. Yes, it may have other characteristics (religious, legal, and so on) but that does not change the fact that it is an organization. As such, it has an effect on other organizations.

BTW, a helpful tip: do not try to use religious arguments with someone who does not have your particular imaginary friend. I both know what your religious scribblings say (as the majority religion in this part of the world and are not blinded by them. Besides, neither side wins in a religious argument.

Oh, and you think 2000 years is a long time? ROFLOL

KaraLynn said...

kara h,

Dictionary definition of "natural law":

natural law

a principle or body of laws considered as derived from NATURE, RIGHT REASON, or RELIGION and as ethically binding in human society.

Seems like my use of "natural law" is completely accurate.

As for not using "religious arguments", that's nonsense too. The author of this blog MADE IT a religious argument when HE chose to attack the Catholic Church's stance on sexuality. To say religious arguments are irrelevant is absurd.

Third, any historian worth his degree acknowledges that Jesus of Nazareth existed. There is plenty of documentation of his existence (ie Josephus). What is up for debate (according to them) is, whether or not He is who He and His followers claimed to be. People don't give their lives for imaginary friends and myths. When was the last time you heard someone dying for Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny or the Tooth Fairy? 2000 years is a long time to be perpetuating an alleged hoax.

Lastly, yes 2000 years is a VERY long time compared to my, your and modern science's existence. I think it's quite arrogant that you, a person merely decades old, would claim to know better than an organization in existence for a couple of millenia.

Kara said...

According to my dictionary:
natural lab n. A law or body of laws that derives from nature and is believed to be binding upon human actions apart from or in conjunction with laws established by human authority.

I know it has a lot of big words, but I do not see anything in there about religion.

No, there is no consensus among unbiased historians as to whether or not the personage you talked about existed. If you have some solid proof otherwise, please illuminate us.

Hmm, it seems to me you are making this more a religious argument than she ever was by inserting claims about your belief system. She stated what were documented facts, not beliefs.

Oh, and yes, 2000 years is a short time, the religion I follow started a long time before yours. The field I used to be in commonly dealt in timescales that were measured in millions of years.

KaraLynn said...

kara h

What dictionary are you quoting from? I'm quoting from the unabridged addition thorugh Random House. It's the very first definition.

As for the author of this blog. He is NOT presenting facts. He is misrepresenting Catholic teaching to justify his bias. So far, I have not seen any authentic knowledge of the Catholic Church or any of Her teachings from any of the people who have commented or the author. My goodness, one poster even called the Magesterium the COLLAGE of Cardinals. I cannot take anyone here seriously.

As for unbiased consensus, the onus is on you to provide proof to the contrary. I have the witness of His contemporaries on my side. Prove them wrong.

As for your religion being older, well that's not true either. Catholicism is the completion of Judaism, and it is well known that Judaism goes back to at LEAST 6000 B.C.

As for the field you worked in, the accuracy of "millions" of years is also up for debate.

This debate, I am putting it on hold. I have a paper to write for my Social Service Worker course.

Have a nice day.

Oh, P.S...

The author of this blog stated that Dignity is a CATHOLIC organization. The members of that organization have been excommunicated and are therefore OUTSIDE the Catholic Church and cannot be called a "Catholic" organization.

I, a woman with same-sex attraction, belong to a LEGITIMATE Catholic group called Courage. Named rightly so because we all have the COURAGE to live according to Church teaching. We don't live our lives in open rebellion while still trying to call ourselves Catholic.

Monica Roberts said...

I see you didn't have the balls to post your comments with a profile before insulting me. That's the ususal modus operandi of a nekulturny coward.

Transpeople didn't start this war, you conservatives did who were looking for an excuse for your lagging attendance, your inability to gain new members to your faith and your failure to decisively deal with the molestaion scandal that went on for decades that's now costing you catholics big bucks to clean up and forcing major changes in the way the Chruch does business.

That's not our fault. It's not the TransGriot's fault that you are a close minded uneducated bigot either.

Think! It ain't illegal yet.

Kara said...


Hmm, 12-17 is a minor in the US. And an adult (18+) having sex with a minor is statutory rape.

Actually, the Christians (which includes Catholics) changed with every culture they encountered. Like putting their holidays at or near those the local people were celebrating anyways. There is even evidence you were much more tolerant to TBLGs in the first few centuries (one example I can recall is same-sex weddings, but I do not remember the reference offhand).

Quoting things said in your holy book does no good either. It has changed too much over the years from the original Aramaic to reflect the personal agendas of whoever was doing/financing the translation.

Of course, you are not going to be swayed by either of the last two paragraphs. Since I am of another religion and pointing out facts about yours you will just say I am wrong.

KaraLynn said...


You don't have the RIGHT to know everything about me. I do have something called the RIGHT to privacy.

You need to learn that if are going to post in a VERY public place like the internet you have to be prepared to be challenged. You call me a coward, but you only project what you are onto me. Only a coward would take what the media says at face value without thoroughly researching the issue. Only a coward would seek to attack a peaceful organization because that organization told them "what you are doing is unacceptable". Not only a coward but a spoiled rotten little child.

The Catholic Church didn't start any "war". The radical, millitant activists in the GLBT community did when they sought to stick their noses where they don't belong--into the issue of RELIGIOUS FREEDOM. The Catholic Church has ABSOLUTELY EVERY RIGHT to dictate to Her members how they should live. She doesn't FORCE anyone to be Catholic. You don't like the teachings? Then don't become a Catholic. It's as simple as that.

Certainly you get more respect and compassion from the Catholic Church than you would from the Islamic faith, where they would kill you without hesitation.

As for the sex abuse scandals, I see you haven't used your critical thinking skills and looked into what REALLY happened. Instead you let the media spoon-feed you and tell you selectively what the reality of it was.

What the media didn't tell you is that 99.9 % of the victims were TEENAGE BOYS between the ages of 12-17. They were NOT pre-pubescent children. The men who had relations with these teenagers were in their late twenties and early thirties. Hmmm, sounds a lot like homosexuality to me.

You would do VERY WELL to look in your OWN back yard for cases of abuse. You won't see the Catholic Church establishing and condoning organizations like NAMBLA. NOT ONCE have I heard ANYONE in the GLBT come out and condemn this organization, one that advocates sex between GROWN MEN and LITTLE BOYS.

Not ONCE have I heard the homosexual community speak out about blashpemous actions by groups such as the "Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence" who hold "bingo nights" and give away sex toys in the shape of crucifixes and saints. NOT ONCE have I heard them speak out against blasphemous events like the Fulsom Street Fair where there are gay male strippers dressed up like Jesus, or advertisements that mock the Last Supper--gay men in leather dressed up as Jesus and the Disciples.

Why don't YOU speak out against these disgusting and degrading things? Don't YOU have the balls to stand up against such blatant evil?

Apparently not.

So before you go on line and spew your hatred for an organization that has done more for AIDS patients than ANY OTHER organization in the ENTIRE WORLD, take a look inside yourself and see what's wrong there.

You can't DEMAND respect when you don't give it. Start respecting the Catholic Church's RIGHT to teach and believe what it has been for 2000 years, otherwise you are nothing but a hypocrite.

As for not being able to gain members, did you get that information from the media too? I can tell you have. There are 10, 000 baptisms and conversions INTO the Catholic Church PER MONTH. People are leaving the Episcopal and Anglican churches in droves BECAUSE of their stance on homosexuality. They've caved in to activist bullying and forsaken the teachings of Jesus Christ.

But I can see you're not up for reporting things that make your community look bad. I shouldn't be surprised, it's a typical tactic with the militants.

Finally, if you see someone challenging your views as "insulting" than you better give up being a blogger and even a writer altogether.

Writing is not for the supersensitive. Egos must be left at the door.

KaraLynn said...

kara h

Statutory rape? Depends on which State you live in. And even if it was statutory rape, it's not pedophilia. It's called ephebophilia. Time to tell the truth.

Same with you kara h, why don't you speak out against despicable organizations like NAMBLA, that INTERNATIONALLY advocate sex between grown men and little boys? What about all the blasphemies committed by the GLBT community, like the "Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence" who mock nuns? What about their sex toy prizes in the shape of crucifixes and saints? What about posters with gay men clad in leather mocking the Last Supper? Why don't you condemn these actions? Why aren't you raising "awareness" in the GLBT community and "educating" them that they cannot remain silent about these things and expect to be taken seriously when they demand respect?

Finally, It's absurd to think that YOU know more than I DO about MY religion. It's absurd to think that YOU know more about MY HOLY BOOK than the institution that put it together.

It's absurd to think I will take words from you, someone who clearly has an agenda, over the words of billions of Christians over the ages.

So absurd that I have to end this conversation with you. I know when I'm merely casting my pearls.

Have a nice day.

gionata said...

In front of such much gratuitous violence against the homosexuals, and considering the ear-piercing silence of the world; as Christians coming from different confessions and progress of faith, we believe that it is in our duty to give some concrete answer, obviously, we won’t keep silent.
That is why on Friday the 4th of April 2008 we will meet together in several cities of Italy to celebrate many vigils of prayer to remember the victims of homophobia and to smash in, through our testimony, the wall of silence and embarrassment that usually prevails in our churches and our society about this heavy problem.
It is up to you, as Christians, to decide whether it is time to break your silence or not.
For further information visit the website
The volunteers of Gionata

NonDigna said...

*Cuius regio, eius religio*

I am transsexual myself, but I agree with KaraLynn! I attend the Holy Roman Catholic Church and participate in its rituals without trying to change the views of the Church on transsexuals and homosexuals. After all, I am going to church not for political or idealogical discussions but to worship God and His Holy Mother.

I don't understand why it is so important for some queer people to make their queerness into an ideology. Why do they have to fight for something all the time? Wouldn't it be more appropriate for a Christian to follow the teaching of the Church with humility without trying to change the world.

Dominus vobiscum. Amen.

Monica Roberts said...

Nope, not when you have human beings who misinterpret and misuse those teachings as excuses or justifications for misguided beliefs, ignorance, or to persecute others.

NonDigna said...

To Monica Roberts
Well, you are welcome to choose another church or association then. After all, we live i a time of a "pick and mix" religion (as one British priest and sociologist said)- I believe in what I want and ignore what doesn't suit me. Nobody is forcing you to be a part of the Holy Catholic Church. A lot of people, including myself, have found God in the Roman Church through the ages. The servant of the servants of God and His Holy Mother, Domina Angelorum, the Pope and the Fathers of the Church have guarded the traditions and the wisdom inspired by God. You can find love and understanding in the Roman Catholic Church without trying to reform everything and change the world if only you show some humility and modesty. To attack the Church is NOT Christian.
Pax Domini tecum.

Unknown said...

Well if the Catholic Church would stop attacking us and opposing any progress we make on gaining equal protection under the law I for one would be happy to leave them alone.

As long as the Catholic Church as an organization injects it's self into the political battle to oppress me and mine I will fight it tooth and claw. As far as I'm concerned the Pope and his church long ago lost any claim to moral authority. As I'm not a christian their claim to spiritual authority does not concern me in the least.

NonDigna said...

The fact that churches (and we are not talking only about the Catholic Church here) participate in the political debate is not something new. We live in a civilized world, and all opinions are therefor important. Don't forget that the Church represents Her members who are a part of the society too. Besides, we live in a world where ethical and moral questions are being discussed all the time (cloning, artificial fertilization, etc), and the opinion of the Church is thus more important than ever. One could give more examples... But that's not what I was trying to say in my first post. What I don't understand is, why some individuals absolutely need to design their own church and invent their own God? What's the point of creating their own faith that addresses to their particular life philosophy? I believe that the idea of the supermarket faithfulness is wrong. We know, that The Roman Catholic Church (RCC) doesn't reject Her gay or trans gender members. For the RCC all individuals are precious. Sodomy though is condemned just as well as for example the premarital sex among men and women. Shall we expect now that men and women who fuck around (sorry my language) will found their own church? For those who are addicted to sex? No, they either stay out side of the church or repent!

An organization as DignityUSA is a typical example of celebration of pride! "I am gay/queer/trans/whatever and I am proud!" What kind of slogan is it for a Church? To create another queer ghetto and call it Dignity doesn't have anything to do with the worshiping of God and His Holy Mother, The Virgin, but with the glorification of one's own pride.

Perhaps, in stead of celebrating themselves (is the gay pride parade not enough for that?), one should think of the famous holy words, known for every Chatholic, "Domine, non sum dignus..." and show some humbleness and humility.

But it's clear that designing one religious organization after another is much easer that making an effort.

Thank you. Have a nice day.

Kara said...

When you talk about inventing your own deity are you talking about developing a new religion or reinterpreting an old one?

If the former you are talking about Paganism/Neo-Paganism. One of the currently fastest growing religions (if not the fastest, the statistical methods are debatable). We take a pretty generalized framework and fill it with whatever speaks to us (said framework does not even specify the deities we work with, although it usually includes Mother Earth). My version includes such things as working with the deities my own ancestors knew and tossing in a bit of geekiness.

If the latter, well, don't all religions change over time? It is pretty much guaranteed that a person from whatever belief system today would not recognize it if they only went back a few hundred years.

So, if the modern version of a religion is anti-GBLT and an older version of it was the opposite which one is wrong?

NonDigna said...


We are discussing a concrete problem within a concrete church, namely The Holy Roman catholic Church, One and Indivisible! Please, read all the comments before you start a totally new discussion about Mother Earth and other pagan and heretical sects, which is completely inappropriate here. Thank you. Dominus tecum.

Kara said...

Well, your opinion about all other religions is quite clear. To use your own words: read the discussion and you will see my posts starting far above yours.

Actually, until my last post I was careful to avoid saying what my religion was to avoid us getting off of the point. The only relevant bit was that it was something other than Catholic. In light of the comment about inventing a religion it only made sense to use it as an example to ask a clarifying question.

Which gets back to the question I raised (and the original post in this blog). If a religion believes one thing at one point in time and something else at another which is right? How to explain the other one in infallibility is claimed?

NonDigna said...

well, what I meant by saying that gays/lesbians/etc design their own faith is, of course, that the groups they organize has nothing to do with the original Church. Although they use the title "Catholic" (to sound serious) it's just another gay ghetto and not a church. Try to visit Dignity's home page, for example, and you shall clearly see, that the central element of the organization is "how it is to be gay without any restrictions and demands".

What is it exactly you mean by true now, false before. I don't understand what it has to do with what I said.

Bella Boze said...

My problem with religions is that most adherents, such as yourselves, have such a microscopic focus that you would prefer to quibble about such inconsequential things as the supposed non-existence of a female pope, and use silly, Latin phrases to lend your own arguments some extra pseudo-credibility.

What is truly at issue is this: as fellow humans, why can we not live in harmony?

Surely your response will begin with something about Jesus, or Allah, or Jehovah, or Buddha, or Zoroaster, or any other symbolic head of a constructed belief system.

But that would be the same old mistake, regurgitating someone else's words to a tangent, instead of answering the original question.

And all the time, the religious zealots are full of pride-- pride in their religion, and pride in themselves for being such staunch believers in this religion.

And nothing is accomplished.