Thursday, December 3, 2009

The Vatican Sends In The Spinner To Respin The Spin

Vatican spokesman Fr. Fredirico Lombardi signals his wish for a certain Vatican Cardinal

I am almost speechless with this one. The first article is taken from IslamOnline, which goes to show how quickly the internet can spread lies and distortions. The second article is from CNA and it's mission is to cloud the truth in the original article which was printed in Pontifex News. That article was given a much greater world wide circulation by London's

The crux of all this is the Vatican is in spin mode again. No wonder the Vatican has problems with the internet. Their own spokes persons are being exposed as people who are not on the same page--not even in the same catechism for the matter.

Gays Won't Go to Heaven: Cardinal & Newspapers 12/03/09

"Homosexuality is therefore a sin, but this does not justify any form of discrimination," said Cardinal Barragan.

CAIRO – Cardinal Javier Lozano Barragan, who this year retired as the Vatican's chief spokesman on health care issues, asserted that homosexuals and transsexuals would never go to heaven, the Telegraph reported on Thursday, December 3.

"Transsexuals and homosexuals will never enter the Kingdom of Heaven," Cardinal Javier Lozano Barragan, 76, said in an interview with the aptly named magazine Pontifex.
"One is not born a homosexual. One becomes a homosexual," stressed the former head of the Vatican’s Council for Health Pastoral Care.

"It is for various reasons, such as education, or for not developing one's own proper identity in adolescence; perhaps they are themselves not responsible, but acting against the dignity of the human body, certainly they will not enter Heaven," he added.

"All that goes against nature and against the dignity of the human body offends God."
Cardinal Barragan insisted this was not his personal opinion or interpretation.
"It’s not me who says so; it’s St. Paul," he contended, citing passages from St. Paul's letter to the Romans.

"Their females exchanged natural relations for unnatural, and the males likewise gave up natural relations with females and burned with lust for one another," St. Paul writes in the Apostle.
"Males did shameful things with males and thus received in their own persons the due penalty for their perversity."

No Discrimination

Cardinal Barragan underlined, meanwhile, that homosexuals and transsexuals must not be discriminated against for this.

"Homosexuality is therefore a sin, but this does not justify any form of discrimination," he said.
"God alone has the right to judge.

"We on earth cannot condemn, and as human beings we all have the same rights."
The Vatican distanced itself from the comments in a statement that was highly unusual because it indirectly criticized a top Church official.

Vatican spokesman Father Federico Lombardi said Pontifex should not be considered an authority on Catholic thinking "on complex and delicate issues such as homosexuality."
"The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. They do not choose their homosexual condition," said Lombardi.

"They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided."

The Catholic Church teaches that homosexuality is not a sin, but considers homosexual intercourse as sinful.

In 2008, Pope Benedict XVI called for defending humanity against the threat posed by homosexual behaviors, warning homosexual acts could lead to the self-destruction of the human race.

Same-sex relationship and marriage are totally prohibited in Islam as well as in all divine religions.

Islam teaches that believers should neither do the obscene acts, nor in any way indulge in their propagation. (So the Islamic take is to ignore the Vatican spokesman Fr. Lombardi in favor of their interpretation of Benedict's remarks from last December. Remarks which Fr. Lombardi also had to reinterpret.)


The following is the US's own version of Pontifex (Catholic News Agency) trying to clean up this seeming conflict between Cardinal Barragan and the Vatican press office. This apparently is not the first time that CNA has had to clean up after Pontifex.

'Homosexuals will not get into Heaven' is not the Catholic teaching, Vatican spokesman clarifies
Rome, Italy, Dec 2, 2009 / 07:42 pm (CNA).-

Following the release of comments attributed to Mexican Cardinal Javier Lozano Barragan, according to which allegedly he said that homosexuals will not go to Heaven, Vatican spokesman, Fr. Federico Lombardi S.J., explained that such statement is not the official teaching of the Catholic Church. (In this article Barragan's statement is only 'allegedly made'. I bet Tiger Woods wishes he only 'allegedly sent' certain text messages.)

Cardinal Lozano Barragan, former President of the Pontifical Council for the Pastoral Care of Health Care Workers, who is now retired but lives in Rome, was quoted by the Italian news website "Pontifex News" saying “trans(sexuals) and homosexuals will never get into the Kingdom of Heaven, and it’s not me who says it, but Saint Paul.” (I'm sure St Paul was imminently familiar with trans sexuals.)

Responding to a follow-up question from Italian religious journalist Bruno Volpe, the Cardinal allegedly added that those who feel homosexual impulses “perhaps aren't guilty, but by acting against the dignity of the body they will certainly not enter the Kingdom of Heaven.” (CNA is only using alleged quotation marks for the alleged quote of Cardinal Barragan.)

Pressed for comment, Fr. Federico Lombardi said that Pontifex News “should not be considered an authority on Catholic thinking,” especially “on complex and delicate issues such as homosexuality.”

Pontifex News has previously been involved in controversies regarding the accuracy of their quotes. Last year, Cardinal Juan Sandoval of Guadalajara, Mexico, strongly denied a quote attributed by Pontifex to him, in which he allegedly said that a former Mexican president was responsible for the murder of his predecessor, Cardinal Juan Posadas.

Despite repeated complaints, Pontifex never posted a correction, so Cardinal Sandoval requested that other Catholic media –including CNA- set the record straight.

Fr. Lombardi also quoted the Catechism of the Catholic Church 2358, which says that “the number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. They do not choose their homosexual condition; for most of them it is a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God's will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord's Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.” (CNA in their zeal to set this record straight neglected to mention the Fr. Lombardi is quoting from the outdated Catechism. The new one says; "This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial." In the new catechism, homosexuality is a choice.)


It seems there's just a little confusion out there in Vatican land about homosexuality. Even the most traditional, obedient, and faith filled of Catholic publications can't agree. The Islamic world has no such problem and have clarified for all of us that gay relationships are prohibited in all divine religions. Which I guess means religions which do allow gay relationships are not divine. Amazing that in the 21st century we've finally got this divine true religion thing down to one issue: if you prohibit gay relationships your religion is divine. All righty then, it's good to know it really doesn't have anything to do with Jesus or Mohamed or even Buddha. Divinity is yours if you prohibit gay relationships. I was so on the wrong track. I thought it had something to do with Jesus and love and compassion. This anti gay thing is much easier.

Looks like the new ecumenism can be found in prohibiting, criminalizing, and executing gays for gay behavior. The new ecumenical difficulties lie in deciding if the gay 'tendency' is innate or self chosen. I'm sure it won't take them long to come to the conclusion it doesn't matter, innate or not acting on it is self chosen. I wonder why this same reasoning doesn't apply to heterosexuals with the same vehemence and condemnation it does for gays.

It must be that with heterosexuals that the innateness is related to the degree of inability to control oneself. This must be especially true for heterosexual males, since part of the mandated complementarity role of women is to dress as asexual as possible in order to bolster a man with his innate inability to control himself. If she can't accomplish this bolstering, it's her fault. God condemn her to hell if she dresses provocatively or in any way triggers this heterosexual male inability to control himself. In some societies this is still a stoning offense--for her anyway. The poor man has just succumbed to his innate disorder. Kind of like an alcoholic succombing to his addiction. Maybe it would be better for alcoholics if whiskey bottles were packaged like milk cartons.

Actually, now that I think about it, most of our traditional morality is aimed at controlling this innate inability of heterosexual men to control themselves because almost all of the time the fault lies with women and men are their victims. That goes all the way back to Adam and Eve.

Maybe that's why Cardinal Barragan has to send all gays to hell because there is no real way to tell which partner is the woman he can blame--except in the case of trans sexuals.
In my skewed point of view, it seems that what makes a religion divine is not homo bigotry as that's just a symptom, it's the insistence on providing excuses for heterosexual males to wallow in their innate inability to control their sexual urges and make women and the prevailing culture responsible for their personal failure. Actually, it doesn't make these religins divine, it makes them patriarchal and all too human.
Real men stand up and admit they make mistakes in the 'failure to choose properly department'. They don't fall back on excuses or play the blame game.


  1. The Maine Diocese just paid out $200,000 to a woman who was abused as an altar girl. Was Fr Vallely's offense worth less in a settlement because it was against a female? Was she less traumatized because it was heterosexual abuse?
    And over $500,000 was spent to stop gay marriage because of the damage to children?

  2. Colleen,

    Leaving today's helping of moronic Roman bilge on the side for one second - here is another photo for your collection of pictures of Vatican frou-frou:

    I don't *think* it's on your weblog.


  3. Great photo, Rat-biter.

    It gives a whole new meaning to the phrase, "dragging up the rear," as applied to the church.

    I'm convinced that the church is determined to drag up the rear these days, when it comes to showing even a modicum of human decency to its gay children. But I didn't know how committed the church is to showing its hindquarters and dragging behind, until I saw that photo!

  4. ## "I am almost speechless with this one."

    Too damn right. In the words of Kent Brockman, "what in the the name of holy hell" do these jokers thinkthey atre playing at ?

    After all, this is supposed to be the Holy See, the top see of the One True Church(TM) which alone contains the fullness of truth. So why the Hell are these people telling whoppers ? Truth ? What's truth, when it makes the Church look bad ? That's right - it becomes an allegation. Nothing more.

    Talk about an Orwellian appoach to reality... :( This is horrible, horrible, horrible.

  5. Michael, that's got to be a cappa maxima not a cappa magna. This one looks like it's been designed to cover the asses of the Budweiser Clydsedales---all of them.

    Speaking of covering the asses of Clydesdales, I be that's what Fr. Lombardi feels like. No wonder he wants to retire.

    coolmom, this is just more proof of what some of us who have actually worked with pedophiles have been trying to state all along--it's a matter of access not orientation.

    500,000 was spent in Maine to bolster the authoritative and political voice of the hierarchy. It had nothing to do with children, no matter what the deceitful commercials said.

  6. Michael, great pix. I am convinced these "leaders" of the RCC are truly dinosaurs going extinct. It's the final act & performance of their lives and they are truly exiting the stage with all of the colorful drama-queen pompousness as exhibited by the dragging of their long red tails (cappa maximus giganticus grande).

  7. It gets tiresome trying to respond to all these crazy statements like the one yesterday from Cardinal Javier Lozano Barragan.

    Thank you for keeping up the cause here.

    Yesterday I posted this video from Davey Wavey on my little blog as a respose to the Manhattan Declaration.

    It seems like it would fit better here as a response to Cardinal Barragan.

    So here's the link.

  8. I want to know which of these Cardinals is going to wear the cappa summa.

    Wild Hair, Davey is a cutey. He doesn't need to cover much of anything.

  9. Pontifex News is not the Italian version of LifeSiteNews. Please correct the error.

    John-Henry Westen
    Co-Founder and Editor-in-Chief

  10. Colleen, once again we have found the same topic to write about - the confusion over queer Catholics uncovered by Brannagan's stupid remarks. I have a slightly more optinisitc reading though: at least there is an attempt to respin this. I suspect that a little earlier, they wouldn't have felt the need.

    On broader issues, thanks for once again picking up the connection to the built-in misogyny of the church. I don't say it often enough, but the more I learn about he history of the anti-gay teaching, the clearer it becomes that it's deeply rooted in the ancient view of women as inferior "possessions" of men. This is why for the first 1008 years of Chrisitan history, if gay relationships were opposed at all, it was nearly always the "passive" partner thaat came in for the real stick.

    The issues are all deeply connected, and all the battles muxt be fought simultaneously: Compulsory celibacy; the cult of the all-powerful, all-male clergy; the obsession with the modern idea of the "traditional family"; and creeping infallibility of the papacy.

  11. Terence I've written before that all these issues seem to orbit around what used the be the assumed dominance of white European heterosexual males. Now, it's orbiting around hetersexual males who accept traditional white European cultural definitions of male supremacy.

    The largest promulgater of all the 'European male cultural supremacy' is and was Roman Catholicism.

    The most potent opponent of this assumed cultural supremacy is real democracy and it's notions of the equality of all of humanity. I think it's really ironic that it's a political system which is most vocal about the basic tenants of Christianity. Democracy is more or less based on 'seeing Christ' in others, not Institutional Roman Catholicism, which as we all know, is not a democracy and also pathological mysoginistic.

  12. 1. in re the national, Knights of Columbus funded, anti-prop 8 type initiatives + all the millions spent by local dioceses on this foolishness......just imagine how many of God's poor starving thousands in the US alone could have been fed with this money?

    2. Do these 'oh so pious ones' ever consider that they hurt others....other men & women, created as they are, by the same loving God?

    3. As to 'gays will not go to heaven', here is just one example which de-rails that screed:

    In that case, St. Paul the Apostle - who wrote the numerical majority of the books of the New Testament & began the evangelization of non-Jews, spreading the message of Jesus far & wide.......cannot go to heaven. As anyone who objectively & prayfully reads his Epistles will come to the very clear conclusion that he most certainly had homosexual tendencies - and was attempting to impart spiritual advice therein to those with the same condition.

    N.B. those messages must be read carefully to be properly decoded & understood - as our 'pious Vatican translators' have done their best to obscure & obfuscate the message by editing & mistranslation!

    4. As to the (mis)conception of gayness as a 'choice'...who in their right mind would 'choose' this? To be thought of a a weirdo, freak....incurring the hatred of family, peers, friends & society at large? To live lives of 'quiet desperation' in the closet, hoping nobody will know? Thus creating from childhood a mode of "lie" and lying about yourself.....even to yourself? Often thus driving self to addiction and/or other self-destructive behavior?

    If one knew & observed all this in others - whether as a child or adult - who in their right mind would choose this? Much less willingly continue in this mode, once its ramifications were known?


    It is no 'choice'; it is a very complex condition which is very integral to the person, from early childhood. It cannot be washed off with soap any more then it can be 'purged', 'cured', or 're-trained'.

    Christ said: "I desire MERCY, not sacrifice".

    The Vatican has yet to comprehend the Gospel.

  13. Regarding transsexuals:

    Once again the See's zeal for hatred against certain groups regardless of Faith has spilled over and destroyed any rationality. I'll leave the discussion of Paul to the previous comments and say this:

    In the last 15 years, neurology has made astounding findings regarding transsexual's brains. Key locations which are sexually dimorphic have been found to be structurally and functionally consistent with the self-identified gender rather than the one assigned at birth. And as an aside, there is little correlation to sexuality. 200-300 studies have confirmed and build upon the initial findings. The social movement of the 1960's and 70's that proclaimed gender was a purely social and environmentally-caused construct has been disproved. However, those who built their careers on the old school have been very reluctant to let go. One such person is Paul McHugh, who later became the "psychiatry advisor" to the Pope.

    Moving on from rational science, let's look at what the Bible has to say about transsexuals:

    For thus says the Lord, "To the eunuchs who keep My sabbaths, And choose what pleases Me, And hold fast My covenant, to them I will give within my temple and its walls a memorial and a name better than sons and daughters; I will give them an everlasting name that will not be cut off." (Isaiah 56:3-5)

    Jesus said, "For there are eunuchs, who were born so from their mother's womb: and there are eunuchs, who were made so by men: and there are eunuchs, who have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven. He that can take, let him take it.." (Gospel according to Matthew, 19:12).

    Acts 8:26-40, which describes how the Ethiopian eunuch was reading Isaiah and discussing it with the apostle Philip. They continued through to the passages in Isaiah mentioned above, at which point he mentioned that he'd like to join the Church and so Philip baptised him and welcomed him into the Church.

    The importance of these passages is that the Bible ties three very clear proclamations, from before Jesus (The Prophet Isaiah, circa 700 BC), Jesus' own words (Gospel of Matthew) and after Jesus' ascension (the missionary journeys in Acts, circa 3-400 AD). Equally important is that the Bible internally cross references and joins them together in such a way that there can be no doubt as to God's Will. His Will is clear; it is and always has been intended for us to recognize that transsexuals are His children, they are part of His Kingdom and they are to be loved as God loves them.

    Can someone please inform the Vatican?