Sunday, October 13, 2019

The Canonization of John Newman was an obvious trap...





The stomach turning Jesuit, Fr. James Martin is claiming newly canonized Cardinal Newman as a gay icon. Very nice people are arguing against him but this is exactly one of the reasons why Newman should not have been canonized in the first place. Both admirers and enemies have long noted his relationship with  Fr. Ambrose St. John. Some people read Newman's letter describing his feelings after Fr. St. John's death and were disgusted. Some were touched and said that Newman and St. John were just best friends and anybody who says anything else has a dirty mind. John Newman is going arlready being embraced and celebrated as the chaste gay saint and we can no more stop it than we can "take back," the rainbow symbol. The table was set and the Church's enemies inside and out are feasting. It's only a matter of time before we see artwork depicting St. John holding hands with or embracing Fr. St. John. I imagine someone is working on a variation of their 1847 portrait right now.



Portrait of John Henry Newman, right, and Ambrose Saint John by Maria Giberne, 1847

1 comment:

Tamsin said...

A thing I find personally distressing about the sacralizing of same-sex inclinations among men, is it relies on thinking that because their inclination comes about naturally, or unbidden, it must be good. If the tendency is organic and not asked-for, it is good. They are "born that way".

So many others have made the point better than I can, that people are inclined to all sorts of objective evil, great evils and small evils, that must be restrained, and men and women must be trained to do good, and from an early age. Thus sodomy should be discouraged. The inclination might, just might, have been restrained in the past because it conduces to evil greater than affects the perpetrator: a society-sized evil.

Does a Fr Martin think that such passions were restrained in the past but no longer need be, because we have developed drugs to treat HIV?

Many of the same men who sacralize sodomy because it is their tendency would not so sacralize other tendencies; say, abortion. They think they see a difference. Or perhaps they imagine that all women are inclined to care properly for their infants because we give birth: we will all be driven organically by our hormones to give the best care. To not do so is symptomatic of an underlying, "unnatural" disease.

But they are too late: women have been trained to know that we can contrive to rid ourselves of unwanted children before birth if the inclination to stop caring arises organically, unbidden. The guard rails have been taken down for everyone, for all inclinations. Abortion is now a society-wide evil. We go forward as a society, unrestrained, in ways that may adversely affect even the most sensitive and caring individual sodomite whose inclinations arose, naturally.