By Their Fruits You Shall Know Them

+In this, the last in our series about the Roamin’ Homosexual Catholic Church in America, we respond, less discreetly than is our custom, to this schismatic federation’s sacrilegious insults against decency, dignity, and all that is holy.

+The blasphemous degeneracy of the RHCCIA is embodied in the “Sisters of Perpetual Self-Indulgence,” one of their new religious orders based in San Francisco, which brazenly confronts us with the most advanced development as well as the logical conclusion of “liberation.” We refer of course to the satanic heresy that homosexuality is normal behavior.

+In order to help sane Catholics put this plague in its proper perspective, The Flying Buttress has submitted an article on the topic to the Catholic Encyclopedia, excerpted below, which traces the recent history of this school of “thought.” We hope that those readers who have been baffled and frustrated by the pervasive double-talk of their own Roman Catholic Church (from whom the RHCCIA, after all, has sprung) will find it to be a handy reference tool and a source of refreshing clarity.

DOCTRINE

While not foremost among the doctrinal disputes that troubled the Church during the Second Vatican Council (1962-65), homosexuality nevertheless occupies a pervasive if unspoken place in modern ecclesiastical history. According to reliable observers at the Council, it was the liberal peritus Franz Faerius, a Bavarian theologian, who most insistently attempted to de-mythologize and rationalize the ancient taboo. In this he was carefully groomed by his uncle, the Dutch prelate Hans Cardinal Nefaerius, who occupied a position on the Theological Commission.

The doctrine which Hans and Franz attempted to promulgate was their affirmative response to the ageless question of whether homosexual relationships, which can neither beget nor be begotten, can have any validity when measured by the standard of “be fruitful and multiply.” Since their initial conclusion in favor of validity was too radically opposed to tradition, thus meeting with little favor and much revulsion, they were forced to soften, as it were, the blow.

Their solution to the obstacle of tradition was developed by blurring the problem itself. That is, the terminologies of science and psychology were employed both to obfuscate the issue and to clothe the taboo in an aura of respectability. Thus, two different causes of homosexuality were proposed: the first, homofusion, was based on the hypothesis that homosexuality is inborn because of an imbalance among x and y chromosomes and their faulty amalgamation, resulting in gender confusion.

The second variety was dubbed homofission, and referred to the theory that this behavior resulted from an early separation from one’s father or from some traumatic early childhood experience.

As their new ideas were feverishly circulated behind the scenes, Hans and Franz gained considerable support among the liberal alliance of Church Fathers.

HISTORY

Attempting to exploit their influence at its height, Faerius and Nefaerius inserted a pregnant footnote favorable to their cause into the Council Declaration Nostra Aetate. This footnote, appearing at the first phrase of the Declaration’s second sentence (“In her task of promoting unity and love among men…”), read as follows:

“By the words of Our Lord, ‘Come ye after me, and I will make you to be fishers of men,’ (Mt. 4:19) it is readily apparent that Our Lord’s own vision of unity and love among men did not exclude same-sex attractions and relationships. The Church therefore also recognizes and does not reject that which is good and holy among the practices of the ancient Greeks, whose spiritual patrimony has added so much to the theological foundation of our faith.”

However, after this footnote was discovered and, in a rare defense of tradition, removed by Paul VI himself, the doctrinal cohesion among advocates of the initiative quickly unraveled into petty and vindictive internecine disputes. For example, a prominent spokesman for the “homofusion” school of thought, Swiss theologican Otto Opprobrious, contemptuously dismissed the “homofission” theory as a “logical phallusy.” In response, his counterpart, comparative religion professor Charles Constantine Contumelious, repudiated “homofusion” as a “riddle wrapped in an enigma cloaked in a condom.”

Though these early attempts to portray homosexuals as universal victims of either biological or familial circumstance proved temporarily unsuccessful (despite their wholehearted adoption by the Society of Jesus), this in no way restrained or discouraged the clerical practitioners of this behavior, who flourished throughout the Church after the Council. In fact, as evidenced by the 1986 USCCB document “On the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons,” their heresy ultimately carried the day and is now espoused by a solid majority of American bishops and priests.

NOTE: Should our readers be interested in locating the full article in the Catholic Encyclopedia, please go to their website and search under the keywords "Faerian Heresy."

Miscellanea CATHOLICA

+The third episode of “Silencing the Christians,” “Grandma Behind Bars,” may be viewed on-line here.

+Volunteers for the American Society for the Defense of Tradition, Family and Property (TFP) found that 45% of the websites of 211 major Catholic universities contained information about pro-homosexual clubs.

+Apparently, to ask relevant questions of the new Jesuit Superior is to be accused of a lack of civility.

+Oh-so-compassionate me.

+Of global warming, dental floss, and St. Francis of Assisi.

+Sign a petition to de-fund Planned Parenthood.