The Startling Mr Linder and the German Bishops
By The Hermits, Sep 20 2015 04:23PM
It does seem that evil, and wrong-headed thinking, which in itself is an evil, is sending many people in the Church quite mad. What is interesting is that no-one is there to send a lot of this nonsense up. Where are the Dr. Johnsons, the W.S. Gilberts, the Chestertons, the Lewises, the Muggeridges to poke fun at all this crazy liberalism. In the media comedians are terrified of sending things up, because of political correctness and the possibility of them being sacked by the equivalent of some Bolshevik commissar in the BBC, or any of the other TV channels, but surely real humour is one of the most sane things in the world, because it shows up the stupidities and follies of human behaviour. The situation in the Church is terrible and terrifying at the moment, and on one level needs to be seen for what it is, the attempt by Satan to take over the Church. However to win over people from damning themselves, it is very important to use whatever means to do so, and humour sometimes illuminates truth more than the most well argued apologia, or brilliant preaching.
Katholisch.de. which is the German Bishops website, published an article this week, by a Theology student, Simon Linder that ran to six pages. Sadly Lifesite news has not published the whole thing, and one hopes that with their usual professionalism they have translated the excerpts faithfully, and given the flavour of the young man’s essay. Suffice it to say, it is a most peculiar article and would only confirm one in the stereotype of the mad German professor. I fear this man might well grow into one. Linder’s argument for supporting Gay Marriage falls into four sections.
1. The “societal climate” has changed so we don’t have to justify marriage for all. It is up to the opponents of marriage for all to justify their opposition to it.
2. “Where does the Church have the idea……that homosexuality is a burden for male and female homosexuals.” and “Who gives the Church the right to declare homosexuals as people to be pitied.
3. Opposition to homosexual unions collapses, because these unions are infertile, is no longer an argument as in the past people had children to look after them in old age. Now the state looks after people who have had no children.
4. This section is so badly argued or badly edited, I don’t know which, as to sound like complete nonsense. Linder says that “The Bible did not condemn love between homosexuals ---- one did not even yet know those at the time ---- but the act itself for the sake of the interest of society. Anyone who wants to interpret the Bible, has to know and consider the circumstances under which the text was written. Anyone who does not do this, does not do justice to Holy Scripture.
In section 1 Linder seems to think that because society has changed so marriage has to change, and thus now marriage is for all, but he does not state how marriage is for all. Does he mean that apart from Gay marriage there may be other forms of marriage? I think not. Will people be rushing to the Evangelical (Lutheran) churches in Germany asking the pastor to bless their marriages to their pets. Will the pastor sense real danger when a young woman goes up the aisle with the love of her life, who happens to be a rather hungry looking crocodile? How would the Pastor feel if he had to go to Hamburg and bless the wedding of a young man to his latest pet a Blue Whale. How will the liberal Catholic priest, who seems to be the very essence of priesthood in the German speaking world, manage an eccentric pilot who wishes to marry his Jumbo Jet which he has just managed somehow to land outside the door of the Church? Is there anything to stop the silly middleaged lady from marrying Mount Etna. God laid down that Man must marry Woman, no other. The Societal climate may within a few tumultuous years criminalize all homosexual marriages. If there is a societal change which reduces the population of the world drastically, so that there will be few men left on the face of the Earth which will have suffered a terrible catastrophe what will Mr. Linder say? If as St. Hildegard tells us, ably backed up by other visionary seers and saints, a comet will hit the Earth and cause either havoc to Britain of North America then will Mr. Linder be encouraging the near despairing and starving remnants of mankind as to the inestimable benefits of Gay Marriage? Since the dawn of history even the most homosexual nations like Sparta never thought of proposing homosexual marriage.
Section 2. has an air or unreality about it. The idea of male homosexual marriage is intriguing, as male homosexuality is, more often than not, about having as much sex with other men as possible, so marriage is neither here nor there. Also added to this the sexual addiction like all addictions it requires more and more sex in as many different ways as possible. It is not about love. After all we would not say that the rake or the nymphomaniac are interested in love; they are interested in only one thing, sex. Anyone knows that such people are not happy any more than an alcoholic is happy. Does Mr. Linder have eyes in his head? The idea of homosexual marriage in a secular/humanist permissive society, and nothing can be more permissive than the ideal world of the LGBT, is both ridiculous and terrifying as well as being utterly sterile. This mockery of marriage is a union where the rules are always changing. Nothing can be stable. There are very few stable gay unions, and calling them marriage is not going to make them anymore stable. Admidst all this supposedly ecstatic pleasure there is always the ever present spectre of death. One doctor in the states got fed up with dealing with all the terrible health problems that are result of promiscuous homosexual sex. One does not need to state all these diseases are caused by the most frenzied forms of sexual deviancy. But then sex for the homosexual population is a drug. And this, let it be noted, is much the same for heterosexual sex, which is all about having fun. The slogan “A Healthy Sex Life” is bizarre in the extreme. What the reality is behind that confusing slogan is completely the opposite. How can a healthy sex life be one where one has a string of partners, and a string of broken relationships? It is medically and psychologically utterly destructive. It is as silly as saying prostitutes have a healthy sex life, which they most decidedly do not. The euphemism of prostitutes being “sex workers” apparently is a way of trying to make prostitution respectable and so you have a name which contains three almost counterproductive ideas, the silly, the sordid, and the dull. Only the grey and monotonous modern Western Society obsessed with utilitarianism and productivity could come up with such meaningless jargon. The homosexual lives in a world where nothing is stable, where the lifestyle is dangerous, where homosexual behaviour is linked with excessive drinking, and drug taking, and where in the higher echelons of society and among the media and entertainment world includes Satanic worship and rituals, and ultimately blood sacrifices, who in their right minds would want that? What could be more dangerous than that? The Church does not pity homosexuals; it is trying to save them from damnation. Mr. Linder might be pitied for his stupidity, which is certainly less than the German hierarchy’s stupidity, which is mind boggling.
Mr. Linder asks “Who gives the Church the right to declare that homosexuals as people to be pitied?”, and having established that pity is not the right word, condemnation of sin is, then one can simply say God has the right to condemn. Surely if Mr. Linder has read Dei Verbum, he will know that the Holy Spirit is the ultimate author of the Bible, who uses human scribes. He will find that homosexuality is condemned in chapter 19 of Genesis, where we see the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah. In Leviticus 18:22 we read “You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination.” Later on in Leviticus the condemnation is repeated but now with the added penalty for such behaviour. “If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall be put to death, their blood is upon them” (Leviticus 20: v.13). Deuteronomy forbids cult prostitution for both men and women in chapter 23: verse 17. Then of course we have the famous passage in St. Paul in the first chapter of Romans:
For this reason God gave them up to dishonourable passions. Their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural, and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men in their own persons the due penalty for their error (Romans 1: vv. 26-7). In 1 Corinthians 6: vv.9-10 Paul throws the net wide to include others, who are not homosexuals who will be damned for failing to obey God.
“Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither the immoral (fornicators), nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor robbers will inherit the kingdom of God.”
You can hardly say that Paul is nothing if not comprehensive in his list of those who will go to Hell if they persist in their sinning, but note, the list starts with sexual sins, and ends with revilers.
Section 3 has the ominous ring of the social services and the welfare state. One might add that really this should come as no surprise that Germany before the First World War was really the first modern nation to found the welfare state, in fact it was begun by Frederick the Great in Prussia. However Mr. Linder seems to think that marriage is purely for the procreation of children to look after their elderly parents. For him it would appear that the state is now the one to look after the elderly married couples. He presumably supports the idea of the nanny state. He also has a dim view of marriage. If St. Paul uses Marriage in Ephesians as an analogy for Christ’s relationship with the Church who is his Bride, and if we look at the Old Testament Bridal imagery, we see it describing the whole relationship of God with Israel, then we see Israel as God’s bride and usually an unfaithful one at that. Marriage then is of the greatest importance, especially when Christ raises it to being a sacrament in the New Testament.
Most of the Fathers of the Church would see that marriage is something that comes about after the Fall. It is God’s way of helping man with concupiscence, a way of controlling his sexual urges which were not there prior to the Fall. Once again the Fathers of the Church saw procreation before the Fall as being something very different from what we know it to be. Even Aquinas, hardly someone that the Orthodox East would care for, said that prior to the Fall Adam and Eve would have had passionless sexual intercourse, not something that the Gay Community would care much for.
Section 4 is so odd as to leave me in a state of stupefaction. Having asked earlier “Who gives the Church the right to declare that homosexuals as people to be pitied?” Mr. Linder says the Bible did not condemn love between homosexuals. What does he mean by love? Is this a non-sexual love, because we can see from the above quotes that the Bible condemns homosexuals to death. Then Mr Linder goes on about how we should interpret the Bible, but surely as a Catholic he should realize that it is up to the Magisterium to interpret the Bible. And so one is left somewhat confused by the young man’s reasoning. The question I have to ask is “What are German bishops playing at, by allowing such a badly argued piece to be on their official website.” Also is there anyone reading this who is a fluent German speaker who can translate Mr. Linder’s argument as I do not wish to do him an injustice? Sadly madness seems to be the mainstay of too many intellectuals in the Church these days, and tragically holiness is almost absent from most of them. Let us pray to Our Lady Seat of Wisdom to give the bishops wisdom and the theologians also.