I don’t see him setting up any straw men. Where? He simply does not agree with some of the teachings, plain and simple.
I don’t see or hear him say the two churches are hateful and homophopic. Where?
Of course he saw redeeming features in some people he worshipped with–and he has said as such. But that doesn’t have anything to do with agreeing or not agreeing with the church teachings.
I don’t understand. Where and when did he say it stems from a hatred of homosexuals?
He didn’t say that in the one big interview he gave so far about this. Or in his column, that I’ve seen. He hasn’t said anything like that on his FB page or website or twitter.
Where are you seeing that he has said these things?
I think the best way I can respond to this is by restating what I originally said in less emotional manner.
I don’t think it would be controversial to say that the majority of Canadians would classify the Church’s teachings as homophobic because it classifies homosexuality as intrinsically disordered and rules out the possibility of gay marriage. Since sexuality is such an intimate and important part of the human person, the assumption seems to be that condemn homosexuality is to necessarily condemn the homosexual.
While it’s true that many Catholics who profess the belief in the Church’s teaching may be homophobic, the teaching itself is not. By reading the Catechism, or even hearing contemporary clergy speak on the issue, one should come to realization that those teachings are motivated by a hatred of homosexuals but rather a particular vision of the purpose of sexuality and anthropology.
The problem is that there is a disconnect between what most Canadians see and what the Church actually teaches. It’s difficult for people to believe that Church’s teachings on homosexuality are not motivated by hatred when, for so many people, it seems that they are. When a Bishop, Priest or Orthodox Lay Catholic tries to claim that this isn’t the case the natural response to to not believe them because they have a vested interested in appearing inclusive in a tolerant society.
I haven’t followed what everything that Mr. Coren has said, although I have read the interview in the National Post as well as his column in the Toronto Sun. Perhaps the picture that I’ve seen doesn’t represent the totality of his view. I should make it clear that I have not heard him explicitly say that the Church teaching is homophobic or motivated out of hatred. I have not heard him explicitly say that all orthodox Catholics are nasty people.
I’ve heard him say things like “we need to broaden the circle of love”. Perfectly harmless, yes? Except if the Church doesn’t already include homosexuals in their circle of love, where does that place them. As far as Mr. Coren’s goes, the Church’s problem is that it doesn’t love homosexuals — when it’s functioning as intended by God it does — but that it doesn’t endorse same-sex romantic love. Any Canadian who reads that sentence will think it means (I’m not sure that it doesn’t) that the Church doesn’t love gay people. In our hyper polarized society that will really be read as the Church hates gay people.
The Church is a big place and there are many people inside who hate homosexuals. There are also many orthodox people who do not. The plenty of orthodox people who love homosexuals while agreeing with the Church’s view on homosexuality and same-sex marriage.
My issue, and the one I may expressed poorly, is that when expressing his disagreement with the Church’s views on sexuality in public, he doesn’t bother to point any of this things out. Does he have a duty to make his former denomination look good? Admittedly he does not. But I do think he has a duty to highlight the good as well as the bad. When Canadians hear him discuss his break with the Church, I think it would be great if Mr. Coren fully described the the Church he left: the good as well as the bad. By only mentioning the latter (that I have seen), I think he’s going to reinforce some incorrect stereotypes about Catholicism.I think he owes it to his former fellow Catholics.
Similarly, with Orthodox Catholicism, I have heard him say nothing but negative things about the “Catholic Right”. Has he described all Catholics as being hateful an vitrolic? No. However, when those are the only descriptions of Catholics that he has recently been giving, what is the average person to conclude? This is availability heuristic at its worse.
Has he been erecting strawmen then? In some sense, yes. When Mr. Coren implies that the Church opposes same-sex marriage and characterizes homosexuality as intrinsically disordered because they don’t love homosexuals (or at least do not include them in their circle of love), Mr. Coren makes a straw men. The truth is more complicated then that.
