Love, hate, and indifference

Speaking of hate crimes and the homosexual, the real hate criminals are those who hate or fear homosexuals so much that they consign them to hopeless stasis, deny them the possibility of repentance and forgiveness.

As Pope Benedict has pointed out in Caritas In Veritate, love and truth are inseparable.

Only in truth does charity shine forth, only in truth can charity be authentically lived. (¶ 3)

Jesus, who is Love incarnate and Truth incarnate, speaks the truth to the sinner and so offers moral freedom to the sinner. (John 8:31-36)

Real love, then, upholds the truth and makes freedom possible. Denial of truth and freedom is a form of hatred. The only question is which is worse, which is the opposite of love: active hatred, or passive indifference. The following from The Manhattan Declaration is a noble aspiration, worthy of pursuit:

And so it is out of love (not "animus") and prudent concern for the common good (not "prejudice"), that we pledge to labor ceaselessly to preserve the legal definition of marriage as the union of one man and one woman and to rebuild the marriage culture. How could we, as Christians, do otherwise?

Hate crimes

Though they know God's decree that those who do such things deserve to die, they not only do them but approve those who practice them.
  - Rom.1:32

The notion of exacting more severe punishment for a 'hate' crime requires the deification of government bureaucracy. That is to say, it requires one to ascribe to government authorities the divine attribute of knowing the inner workings of the human mind, of judging not only the criminal's behavior but the feelings which inspired that behavior.

But, as a god, our government is woefully incompetent. So, rather than really discerning the thoughts and intentions of the heart, it can only assume that crimes committed against certain individuals must be necessarily inspired by hatred, and therefore more heinous. Such assumptions are bound to be wrong most of the time.

Being a worshipper of the living God, I despise false gods. So I feel compelled to deliberately defy this latest arrogance. Does our lordly government now call it a crime to hate homosexuals? To hate homosexuality? To hate sodomy? Well, then, I have a few statements to make very openly and defiantly:

- Homosexual acts are sins against nature.

- Sodomy is one of the few sins that cry out to heaven for vengeance. (Gen.18:20-21)

- Homosexuality is intrinsically disordered, and no government authority can legitimize it.

- Homosexuality, like most addictions, is difficult but not impossible to cure.

The point is, I fear the true God, and earnestly seek to agree with Him. If the government now considers that a crime, bring on the handcuffs. Truth is truth. Those who oppose God's truth are fools, and deserve no respect, regardless of their political power.

Consequences

If God does not judge America soon, he'll have to apologize to Sodom and Gomorrah.
  - Mrs. Ruth Graham

Oddly enough, Barack Obama and the current Congress may indeed be a long-sought answer to prayer. More than a prayer: a spiritual hunger issuing from the depths of our souls for decades now. The quote from Mrs. Graham reflects that heartfelt prayer. A plea for justice in the face of escalating injustice and wicked ungodliness. A plaintive cry, along with the Psalmist, "How long, O Lord?"

Romans 9:22 portrays God as patiently crafting "vessels of wrath" with which to mete out righteous judgment. What is meant by "vessels of wrath"? Well, take a look at Obama and the socialists in Congress; don't they fit the bill quite nicely? Their reckless programs, undertaken at breakneck speed, appear destined to finally bring down the whole damned house of cards. (I use the 'd' word deliberately here, and not as a mere expletive.) And that will be just. It will not be pleasant, but it will be good.

Another way of saying this is to assert that sin carries within itself its own punishment. If you defy the laws of God, you will be punished - by your own defiance. Thus, if you defy the law of gravity by stepping out of a 15th floor window, your actions will result in your death or paralysis. Did God punish you? Well, yes, in the sense that He invented gravity and the other laws of physics, and then He allowed those laws to have their effect upon your physical being. The consequent punishment is both God's doing and your own fault.

This applies to moral laws as well. Defy those laws, and face the consequences. Moreover, this seems to be as true collectively as it is for individuals. Notice, for example, that Mt. 25:32 says the Son of man will judge between the nations, not between individuals. So, when the disastrous policies of this administration bring about the apocalyptic end of America as a world power, it will simply be the fruit of our own moral choices as a society. America now has the government she deserves. We had best brace ourselves for the consequences.

Prayerful sin

Did you know that prayer can be sinful? It's true. The great moral teachers say that some things are intrinsically evil, i.e., they are always sinful, under all circumstances. But no human act is always and without exception virtuous. Even something like prayer which is ordinarily good can, under certain circumstances, be sinful. Here's an illustration:

Scenario #1:

Suppose you're walking all alone on a quiet, empty beach. Suddenly you hear a cry for help, and, looking out to the water, briefly see a child's head, with arms flailing about uselessly. Then the child goes under again. That child is drowning! Though an adequate swimmer, you're not sure you can swim well enough to reach and save the child, so instead you kneel on the sand and pray for God to save him. Such prayer is a sin, a sin of omission. It is a sinful prayer, or, if you prefer, a prayerful sin.

Scenario #2:

Now suppose that the beach is not empty, but crowded with thousands of people. And, out in the water, not one but hundreds of children are drowning. Some of the people on the beach seem not to notice the children. Others notice, but are deliberately ignoring them. Still others are watching with interest, some even laying bets as to which child will last the longest. Finally, you find a large group of people who are kneeling together on the beach, praying for the children. Two individuals are in the water, actually attempting to rescue some of them, but many will surely perish for lack of assistance.

Scenario #3:

Finally, suppose that the children are deliberately being drowned by an armed detachment of government agents. Any attempt to rescue the children or even to interfere is immediately quashed. Moreover, everyone on the beach is being compelled to assist in the drowning operation. Some people are praying for the children, for a miraculous rescue, even as they willingly comply. Some are also fasting. Some are mailing red envelopes in protest.

From a moral standpoint, the biggest difference between scenario 3 and scenarios 1 & 2 is that the sin has become one of commission, not omission. To actively cooperate in evil is of greater moral magnitude than to passively omit doing good.

Please consider how your taxes pay for the slaughter of the innocents, and what your willing cooperation in that slaughter really means.

Related: A citizens' movement to refuse abortion taxes

Sermon on the Mount

Senator Barack Obama recently expressed confusion over what the Bible teaches on homosexual unions, and suggested the Sermon on the Mount (Mt.5:1-7:29) for clarification. This struck me as sage advice, so as a Lenten exercise, I have prayerfully reviewed that passage, with an eye especially for anything regarding homosexuality.

The Sermon on the Mount is, of course, a deep and multi-layered discourse, saying much about the path to God and the life of faith, containing way too many profundities to even mention in one blog post. Here are just a few little thoughts:

Early in His discourse (Mt.5:17-20), Jesus declares that He has come, not to abolish or diminish Old Testament teachings, but to fulfill them, to enlarge upon them. Now, it is well known that homosexual activity is categorically condemned in the Mosaic Law of the Old Testament. In Leviticus 20:10-16, for example, homosexuality is listed along with adultery, incest, and bestiality as the capital sexual sins, i.e., deserving the death penalty. So, as to the special focus here, Jesus would seem to be confirming and even strengthening the Mosaic prohibition against homosexual acts. This becomes even clearer in the remainder of chapter 5 (Mt.5:21-48), where Jesus gives six instances of His fulfilling or strengthening of O.T. precepts. In each example - murder, adultery, divorce, oaths, justice, and love - the commands of Jesus go beyond what the O.T. required; His commands are stricter and more comprehensive than the Mosaic statutes. Note that adultery, one of the capital sexual sins, is explicitly included. Not only is adultery condemned by Jesus, but even the lustful thoughts leading up to the actual adulterous act. One would have to conclude that the same principle applies to the other capital sexual sins as well: that we must be vigilant against the very thoughts and intentions leading up to the actual sins of incest, bestiality, and homosexuality.

As noted in a recent post, many have interpreted Mt.7:1 ("Judge not, lest ye be judged") as somehow providing license for all kinds of moral mischief. But the context (Mt.7:1-5) clearly talks about judging rightly, with clear vision. It condemns the condemning of certain behavior in others while excusing the same behavior in ourselves. It may also prohibit judging the inner secrets of another's heart which we cannot know. But in context it cannot reasonably mean that we must approve or condone sinful behavior, either in ourselves or in others. The apostles, the prophets, and Jesus Himself constantly exposed and judged sinful behavior.

The principle is profound but simple: love the sinner, hate the sin, both in ourselves and in others. To excuse sin is to belittle God's law and His holiness. To truly love the sinner (including myself), I must hate the sin which encumbers the sinner and keeps him from God. To excuse sin is to ignore the sinner's moral danger, and so to despise the sinner himself.

This principle applies to the special focus. Currently, many who profess the Christian faith have singled out homosexual behavior as something to be lauded or affirmed, rather than repented of as sin. This turns out, ironically, to be the ultimate homophobia. By their unwillingness to call this particular sin a sin, such Christians place a huge stumbling block in the path of their brothers who are so tempted. They single out homosexuals from other sinners, excusing them from the need for repentance, thus depriving them of the saving grace of repentance and forgiveness, and thus consigning them to eternal perdition. This is serious hatred! In contrast, Jesus loves the homosexual, and so calls him to repent. As with all sin, this is the only path to salvation and sanctity.

In Mt.7:13,14, Jesus warns us to avoid the easy way leading to destruction, then warns of false prophets (Mt.7:15-20), which also seems germane to the special focus. In the closing paragraph (Mt.7:24-27), Jesus gives another solemn warning: heeding His teachings leads to life and strength, ignoring them leads to collapse.

For once, the senator from Illinois got it right: the Sermon on the Mount has much to say on this and on many, many other issues. It is highly recommended reading.

Metanoia

In contemplating the transfiguration of Jesus, we might well ask what it means for us. Dare we ask for or expect a similar experience? May we be transfigured like Jesus?

Well, this side of resurrected life, the obvious answer is - No.  But if not transfigured, we might be transformed. In fact, by all scriptural accounts, those who come to faith in Jesus must be transformed, or converted. The Greek word is μετανοια, or metanoia, etymologically related to μεταμορφοω, or metamorphoo. Metamorphosis is, of course, the radical transformation that occurs when a caterpillar forms a chrysalis and then emerges later as a butterfly. The change is striking, to say the least.

In Romans 12:2, Paul commands us "Do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed...", and then in 2 Cor.5:17 he says "if any one is in Christ, he is a new creation; the old has passed away, behold, the new has come." This obviously means a radical and total change, not just a little reforming job.

The question is: is this transformation something we do, or a miracle of grace? It is, of course, the latter, since none of us has the power to change his own nature. Yet, it is presented as a command as well. If we claim to belong to Jesus, we must avail ourselves of that grace, do what we can to submit to the changes the Holy Spirit wants to accomplish in us. That's a big part of what Lent is to be about.

OK - anybody out there have some hints to help me get started on my cocoon?

Transfiguration

We are accustomed to hear the account of Christ's transfiguration without the surrounding context. The full story can be found in Mt.16:21-17:21, Mk.8:31-9:29, and Lk.9:22-43, with all three synoptic Gospels giving the same contextual details:

Jesus tells his disciples that he must go to Jerusalem to die and then to rise again. Then he tells them that every disciple of his must also deny himself, take up his cross and lose his life. Then he says that some of them would not die until the Kingdom of God had come. Then he takes Peter, James, and John with him up Mount Tabor, and appears in great glory with Moses and Elijah. The three disciples are dazzled, Peter wants to erect booths (tents? tabernacles?) for the three glorious figures, a cloud overshadows them, and they hear God say "This is my beloved Son; listen to him.". After that, Jesus alone is to be seen, back to his normal state. On the way back down, Jesus orders the three disciples not to talk about this event until he has died and risen. Once down from the mountain, Jesus casts out a demon which the other disciples had tried to expel but couldn't.

It seems significant that the surrounding details are consistent in all three accounts. It would seem that the transfiguration, that foretaste of resurrected and heavenly glory, is inextricably tied to self-denial and to the cross. This is true not only for Jesus, but for us as well. The flip side is that, in the midst of our crosses and of our desert times, we can take heart and derive strength from the promise of victorious resurrection life. The cross and the resurrection are two sides of a single redemption coin. Our battle against sin and against Satan will be futile outside of this reality.

Knowing good and evil

When Adam and Eve ate the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, just what did that mean? At face value, it seems to simply say that Man became a moral being, capable of knowing right from wrong, and capable of freely choosing either. We cannot be amoral like the animals; we can only be moral or immoral.

No less than John Paul II has suggested a deeper meaning as well. Namely, that the original sin of Man involved deciding what is good and what is evil, in direct rebellion of God's authority. Note the serpent's words: "You will be like God, knowing good and evil". Rather than agree with God's judgment of sin, we want to make up our own rules.

Sound familiar? Of course it does - we hear this all the time, even perhaps from our pulpits. "Each person must find his or her own truth" or: "Only you can decide what is right and wrong for you" or: "Sin is whatever you feel it to be" If this relativism is questioned, the inevitable out-of-context comeback is "Judge not, lest ye be judged."

Whether you call it a serpent's hiss, or "Values clarification", it's still a deception. Repentance starts with agreeing with God, and recognizing that what He says is good is good, and what He says is evil is evil.

Repentance, a sweet deal

Here it is, Ash Wednesday, and the Church is calling me to repent of my sins again. What a bummer! I mean, I thought I'd done that repentance thing already - what's the deal, anyway? . . . Well - - OK - I've been sinning again, that's the deal. Truth is, I never really stopped. Maybe slowed down a couple times, that's all.

Speaking of deals, repentance is a pretty sweet offer, when you think of it. Sin, even the major ones, need not keep us from God nor from eternal life. Just agree with God that sin is evil, ask forgiveness, and purpose to do better, with God's grace. That's repentance.

Jesus died so we could have such a deal. That is to say, the cross is the remedy for sin. Taking on our sins was Jesus' part; belief and repentance is our part of the deal. But there is no remedy for making excuses, for rationalizing and justifying our sinful ways. Just repent - agree with God that sin is wrong. To refuse to do so is to refuse the sweet deal, and to remain trapped in the deadly pit our sins have dug us into.

John's unwelcome light

In response to my complaints against the moral corruption of our culture and my own abysmal failures, someone recently remarked (not via a blog comment) that my 'dark mood' reminded her of John the Baptist crying out in the wilderness.

Leaving aside the nonsense of comparing my yelpings with the Baptist's prophetic fierceness, I was puzzled by the adjective 'dark'. Surely John was the opposite - a strong beacon of light in the midst of murky darkness. Of course, sometimes light is an unwelcome thing. The window that, at night, appears clean shows its hidden dirt when the morning sun hits it. I may prefer the illusion of darkness, and regret the light, which seems to make the window dirty. Likewise, John's light was unwelcome, exposing men's hidden, secret sins.

We like John pointing us toward Jesus, but we don't like him pointing out our sins; that seems 'dark'. The question is: can we have it both ways? Can John point us to Jesus without also pointing out our sins and our absolute need of a Savior? The present generation seems to demand this very thing... Tell me about the Good Shepherd, but don't tell me I'm a lost sheep. Tell me about God's infinite love, but not of his hatred for sin. Talk to me softly of pardon, healing, and comfort, but don't mention my need for repentance.

John, true beacon of light, doesn't offer such slick illusions. He offers light, which exposes our sins and points us toward Jesus the Savior.

Repentance - 2

It bears repeating. The worst aspect of our degenerate culture is not widespread and legalized abortion, nor same-sex 'marriage'. These two frontal attacks upon moral values are both symptoms of a deeper malaise: the popular refusal to call sin by its name.

God, who is holy, would be wholly just to consign each one of us to eternal damnation. Indeed, that is what we deserve. To break God's law is to commit a crime of infinite gravity, to spit in the face of the Almighty. Even a single minor transgression, correctly and honestly appraised, demands a level of supreme atonement and reparation that no finite mortal could satisfy. None of us is good enough; all of us rightly deserve Hell.

Only in the light of this bad news can we appreciate the Good News - that Jesus has taken all this upon himself in his perfect act of atonement. Only the one who recognizes his guilt before God can understand God's mercy.

Here's the point: God's plan is extremely lenient -- but not automatic. Despite the common assumption to the contrary, God's offer is not unconditional. The New Testament puts forth three conditions for our salvation: faith, repentance, and baptism. This is very, very lenient. To escape our just eternal punishment and attain undeserved eternal happiness, all we have to do is believe, repent of our sins, and be baptized. What ridiculously light conditions! But not automatic.

Repent - acknowledge your sins. It's the easiest thing in the world to do. Just agree with God that your sins are evil, and ask forgiveness.

It's also the most difficult thing to do. I suppose this has to do with pride. Rather than confess and receive forgiveness, we think of all kinds of ways to justify ourselves, rationalize, make excuses. I'd much rather patiently explain all about my extenuating circumstances - how my deeply ingrained sin isn't all that bad, probably not even really sinful.

But consider: In all the Bible and in all Church teaching, there are examples and stories galore of God's mercy in forgiving confessed and repented sin. But you'll not find a single instance of God accepting an excuse.

So, the crimes of abortion and militant homosexuality are not the primary problems. The assertion of the 'right' to kill pre-born babies, and of the 'right' to practice homosexuality, etc. - that's what will condemn us, both collectively as a culture, and as individuals who will one day stand naked before the just and holy God.

Repentance

Ash Wednesday - the beginning of our Lenten journey through the desert, a season of repentance. Not a big mystery, really. If a half century of life has revealed anything to me, it is my own great capacity to ignore my sinfulness and make excuses for myself. And as i look around me, i realize i'm not the only one. Probably you who read this share this talent for self deception.

So, we need to periodically stop, take stock, and agree with God that our sins are evil. Then we can turn for forgiveness and healing.