jump to navigation

It’s not that the Church is “obsessed” with sexual issues……. January 9, 2014

Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, disaster, error, foolishness, General Catholic, persecution, sadness, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sexual depravity, sickness, Society, Spiritual Warfare.

…it’s that the culture is.  And when there are such huge swaths of the population out there for whom nothing is more important than their electrically operated sexual stimulation devices –  or whatever – even tacit opposition from the Church suddenly becomes a very big deal.   Thus, the Church merely saying “no” to contraception, abortion, fornication, or sodomy, becomes an intolerable affront, a veritable rejection of the whole psychological makeup of millions.

It is the culture that obsesses about the Church’s stance, and demands it change. We see 5000 times as many news items on the Church’s stance on moral-sexual issues, than we do on ones like the Real Presence or the College of Saints.  But is that really because the Church is just out there constantly focused on these sexual matters?  Or is that there are millions who, from their actions, appear to care about nothing but their next orgasm?

The following piece says much of the same, while noting that the problem with the culture is not so much those with more extreme kinks – sodomy, polygamy, bestiality, etc – no, the problem is with more garden variety heterosexuals who want the freedom to fornicate, adulterate, or porn…….i-cate……. without guilt, and thus they favor seeing the sexual envelope pushed, the better to make their sins more acceptable.  I think this is a very accurate, and important, point:

Americans resent religion’s perceived interference in their sex lives. The president of the Barna Group, an evangelical market research organization, recently observed that “Young people’s most common complaint . . . is that churches are too focused on sexual issues.” The consequences of same-sex marriage may pose the gravest threat to religious liberty, but the cultural conditions and assumptions that make that threat possible are rooted in heterosexual behavior.

This is a curious attitude, given that no religion in America has the legal ability to force anyone, adherent or not, to follow its teachings regarding sexual morality or anything else. An evangelical Christian can impregnate his girlfriend and keep his head firmly attached to his body, unlike the situation faced by Claudio in Measure for Measure. A Catholic can buy a package of condoms at the local drugstore. The clerk won’t ask to check his religious identification before ringing up the purchase. And women of any religious persuasion can obtain an abortion in all fifty states.

Why, then, does it seem that a growing number of Americans view religious liberty with suspicion, if not outright hostility? The problem is that many Americans are offended by the existence of an opposing view. The fact that someone, somewhere, dares to voice disapproval of their sexual behavior is, it now seems, offensive in and of itself. Studied non-judgmentalism is one of the hallmarks of contemporary American culture, with departures viewed as gauche at least or, more commonly, as an illegitimate attack on the sacrosanct individual. If you doubt this, please try telling a group of largely secular thirty-somethings that you believe cohabitation is wrong and see what response you receive.

Or try telling your average 20 year old co-ed that their hook-up culture is banal, unsatisfying, dangerous, and will almost certainly entail a lifetime of bad and destroyed relationships.  Even though the co-ed herself knows she is dissatisfied with the casual one night hour 5 minute stands, more often than not, she’ll defend the practice as somehow not only necessary, but even good.


It is no surprise, then, that people whose belief systems are a muddle of Casey’ssweet-mystery-of-life passage and Modern Family bridle at the strict sexual morality of the monotheistic religions. This is exacerbated by traditional Christianity’s refusal either to conform to the spirit of the age or to go away and be quiet. [That is what the cultural left wants – it wants traditional, non-left-supporting religion to go away, permanently.  Unfortunately,the vast majority of the population counts as cultural leftists nowadays] The erosion of the state’s role in upholding public morality both foreshadowed and led to the cultural rejection of religion’s right to judge the morality or immorality of certain acts.

Evangelicals still loudly proclaim that one should “wait until marriage,” even if that command is largely honored in the breach. The Catholic Church has not relaxed its prohibition on contraception, even if many of its adherents ignore its teaching or even loudly oppose it. Both Evangelicals and Catholics (and those members of mainline churches who hold to traditionalist norms) grapple with the culture on multiple fronts—praying outside abortion clinics, attending the March for Life, objecting to FDA approval of abortifacients, decrying pornography, etc. In short, they have remained a thorn in the side of an ever-more-permissive culture for over forty years. (Orthodox Christianity, Orthodox Judaism, and Islam also adhere to strict moral norms regarding sexual behavior, but attract less attention because of their status as minority religions.)

This cultural attitude has led to religious liberty’s current embattled position. Catholic bishops teach that contraception is a sin? Break them. The charities they oversee must, in some way, be forced to provide free contraception and abortifacients to employees. Contraception has been available for over forty years, but now, suddenly, we must force business owners and religious orders to provide drugs and devices they believe to be sinful.

The proponents of the sexual revolution successfully persuaded the state to support their views. Now they seek to use the power of the state to force private persons to violate their religious beliefs and conform to the new morality.

And if you think these developments are just accidents of history, you think wrong.  The left began, as far back as the 1930s, deliberately plotting to overthrow both the Western politico-economic paradigm and the Christian Faith that undergirds it order to pave the way for communism.  By the 1960s, leftist academic professors and lawyers pursued a course of action designed to shatter the Christian consensus of our culture – even one as deformed as the liberal protestant one in the United States – through deliberate legal challenges made in specially chosen, friendly courthouses in order to advance their agenda. Research Leo Pfeffer.  They chose their targets brilliantly, knowing that sexual sins are the easiest to get people to fall into.

The Church has not radically amped up its rhetoric in opposition to these sins.  The Church has always spoken about them, probably more so at points in the past than it has today.  How often to most Catholics hear a sermon denouncing their contraceptive use, or their porn habit, or their fornication?  Even from the pulpit of St. Peter’s?  Dang rarely.

But the mere fact that the Church maintains official, even though often nothing more than tacit, opposition to these sins is enough of a rebuke for those lost in them to be an intolerable offense.  And this matter of two people of the same sex pretending to be married, and the government recognizing this false union, is a bridge, like abortion, that most churches maintaining even a semblance of adherence to traditional morality simply will not cross.  Given the cultural forces ranged on the other side, pressing for this awful change, that is why I feel this matter will be the vehicle of the persecution.  The incredibly oversexed culture will not take no for an answer……..so to speak.  We shall have a fight on our hands, perhaps even to the death, whether we want it, or not.

Our first and best recourse is to prayer.

%d bloggers like this: