SanFrancisco bishop Thinks Gay Propaganda Film Brokeback Mountain is "Very Powerful"

[cathgal]

The Bishop said that “one of the lessons (of the film) is the destructiveness of not being honest with yourself and not honest with other people and not being faithful, trying to live a double life.”

What doesn he mean by ‘honest with youself’ ? How should the cowboys be honest to themselves? By accepting that they’re homo and live it out instead of marrying and causing misery to their wives and children?

The Bishop should be careful of what he said cuz I don’t believe what he said is good.

 

[oat_soda]

all you have to do is listen to the bishops own words. there is a link at the bottom of the website that plays the entire interview. he does a pretty lame job proclaiming the gospel. he sounds so very tolerant to the point of sounding permissive. he’s a typical politican bishop who doesn’t want to rock the boat.

he talks like any confrontation is bad and that catholicism should be presented in the least offensive way as possible. in fact, i would say that unless people really hate what you are doing, you probably are not doing a good job at being christian.

he’s not doing homosexuals any favors by avoiding the fact that God calls each one of us to be perfect as he is perfect. it’s not easy, but nothing worth while is.

 

[fix]

From the link in the OP:

The interviewer then asks the obvious question, “Then why single out homosexuals?” That’s because, says the archbishop, the issue is much more front and center “since Stonewall.”

I do not know how accuarate any reporting is, but as reported is it not strange the bishop threw in the Stonewall thing?

 

[MikeWM]

cathgal:

By accepting that they’re homo and live it out instead of marrying and causing misery to their wives and children?

No. Surely homosexuals should neither ‘live it out’ NOR marry and cause misery. They are called to chastity.

As far as I know - I haven’t seen it - the film shows that these people had a homosexual ‘experience’ which confirms they are homosexual. They then obviously have trouble with married life. This sounds just like the catechism to me

This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity.

A film showing that being homosexual but not acting upon it (except the once) sounds like it helps us to understand that part all the better. Hence I must admit I don’t see what the problem is people have with this film.

Mike

 

[setter]

No. Surely homosexuals should neither ‘live it out’ NOR marry and cause misery. They are called to chastity.

This film is in no way about chastity to one’s vocational marriage vows.

As far as I know - I haven’t seen it - the film shows that these people had a homosexual ‘experience’ which confirms they are homosexual. They then obviously have trouble with married life. This sounds just like the catechism to me

This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity.

To which I would add:

…tradition has always declared that “homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered.” They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.(CCC 2357

)

A film showing that being homosexual but not acting upon it (except the once) sounds like it helps us to understand that part all the better. Hence I must admit I don’t see what the problem is people have with this film.

Mike

Let’s be accurate here: The film is unabashedly about an erotic love affair based on a disordered desire (SSA) and infidelity to one’s marriage vows.

 

[UtahMaggie]

Archbishop Niederauer has only been in San Fran for a week and already he is being judged. I feel like some are going to find fault in anything he does or says. I wish some could look at his record on topics other than homosexuality. In the Intermountain Catholic newspaper www.icnp.com there were two extra sections added for farewell letters from prominent Utahns and lay people addressed to then Bishop Niederauer. I’m still amazed that some are so judgemental already. Read some of his homilies and give him a chance and pray for him. We here in Utah would love to have him back. He has written a book called "Precious as Silver: Imagining Your Life with God (Ave Maria press). I would suggest people read his book. Everyone I know here loves to listen to him speak and we miss him. Please give him a chance.

Maggie

 

[Balance]

oat soda:

he’ll fit in well in san fran. it’s too bad for the catholics in his diocese who might be confused by his remarks. it almost sounds like he is equating homosexual acts with heterosexual ones. the only difference is the fact that one finds its fullest meaning in marriage while the other is wrong in as much as sex between a man and women outside of marriage is wrong.

i think the vatican should clear this issue that you can’t equate fornication with homo-acts; one is clearly more unnatural then the other.

here’s a question for you - is anal sex ok **as part of foreplay ** between husband and wife? I’m guessing you’ll say no - I think you’ll find that, in fact, it is - and therefore can be called quite natural. What does “unnatural” mean? This kind of hysteria about sodomy is laughable. The reasons homosexual acts are disordered is not becuase of the physical nature of such acts but because they take place between people of the same gender.

 

[MikeWM]

setter:

This film is in no way about chastity to one’s vocational marriage vows.

I didn’t say it was.

Let’s be accurate here: The film is unabashedly about an erotic love affair based on a disordered desire (SSA) and infidelity to one’s marriage vows.

…which shows how difficult these homosexual people find living their life, which unfortunately, because they denied their feelings, have instead ended up in difficult marriages. They give in to their feelings briefly, like all of us do from time to time.

Do I see the same condemnation for films that show people having heterosexual affairs? No. I wonder why…

Mike

 

[fix]

UtahMaggie:

Archbishop Niederauer has only been in San Fran for a week and already he is being judged. I feel like some are going to find fault in anything he does or says. I wish some could look at his record on topics other than homosexuality. In the Intermountain Catholic newspaper www.icnp.com there were two extra sections added for farewell letters from prominent Utahns and lay people addressed to then Bishop Niederauer. I’m still amazed that some are so judgemental already. Read some of his homilies and give him a chance and pray for him. We here in Utah would love to have him back. He has written a book called "Precious as Silver: Imagining Your Life with God (Ave Maria press). I would suggest people read his book. Everyone I know here loves to listen to him speak and we miss him. Please give him a chance.

Maggie

I do not know anything about the bishop except what I read in the papers like this:

"I have read the document several times, and I certainly don’t hear the document saying, ‘Please engage in a witch hunt,’ " the archbishop said.
The newspaper said the archbishop “believes a gay man can meet the criteria of the Vatican document and effectively minister,” and one of his top priorities will be recruiting and training new priests.deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,635184793,00.html

Very curious choice of words?

 

[miguel]

fix:

I do not know anything about the bishop except what I read in the papers like this:…Very curious choice of words?

Hey fix, this is what the NOR had to say in their current issue:

The latest outrage is Benedict’s appointment of Bishop George Niederauer to be Archbishop of San Francisco. Niederauer is clearly “gay”-friendly. He pastored a parish in West Hollywood with a large “gay” congregation, where he said that homosexuals are “wonderful.” As Bishop of Salt Lake City, he opposed a constitutional ban on same-sex “marriage.” He denies that there is a link between homosexual priests and the molestation and rape of boys. He helped found the Coalition of Concerned Religious Leaders in Utah, which supports “tolerance” for homosexuals. Topping it off, he has been praised by Sam Sinnett, head of Dignity-USA, and Francis DeBernardo, head of New Ways Ministry – both groups being comprised of proud “gay” and lesbian Catholics.
newoxfordreview.org/article.jsp?did=0206-editorial

Are you a subscriber yet?

 

[setter]

Originally Posted by MikeWM
No. Surely homosexuals should neither ‘live it out’ NOR marry and cause misery. They are called to chastity.

Originally Posted by setter
This film is in no way about chastity to one’s vocational marriage vows.

I didn’t say it was.

My meaning (I thought was obvious) that these married men carrying on a homosexual love affair were living anything but chasitity to their marriage vows (as would be the case of infidelity to one’s marriage vows with a heterosexual love affair).

…which shows how difficult these homosexual people find living their life,

The fact is that these “homosexual people” are married.

which unfortunately, because they denied their feelings, have instead **ended up in **

difficult marriages.
They chose to marry, just as they chose to keep the ember/flame of illicit desire ignited which has the direct consequence of causing difficulty to their marriage.

They give in to their feelings briefly, like all of us do from time to time.

Their feelings were kept alive and *they violated * their vows/commitment to their spouses and children *by choosing * to give in to their self-indulging desire. These men are not helpless victims of their disordered sexual desire. Let’s not over sentimentalize the wanton display of betrayal, immaturity, lack of virtue, and sin choices.

Do I see the same condemnation for films that show people having heterosexual affairs? No. I wonder why…

Mike

Why would you “wonder why”? – it’s Hollywood, the kingpin for spreading the culture of corruption. They are simply moving forward to the next layer of desentization over sin choices.

 

[fix]

miguel:

Hey fix, this is what the NOR had to say in their current issue:

The latest outrage is Benedict’s appointment of Bishop George Niederauer to be Archbishop of San Francisco. Niederauer is clearly “gay”-friendly. He pastored a parish in West Hollywood with a large “gay” congregation, where he said that homosexuals are “wonderful.” As Bishop of Salt Lake City, he opposed a constitutional ban on same-sex “marriage.” He denies that there is a link between homosexual priests and the molestation and rape of boys. He helped found the Coalition of Concerned Religious Leaders in Utah, which supports “tolerance” for homosexuals. Topping it off, he has been praised by Sam Sinnett, head of Dignity-USA, and Francis DeBernardo, head of New Ways Ministry – both groups being comprised of proud “gay” and lesbian Catholics.
newoxfordreview.org/article.jsp?did=0206-editorial

Are you a subscriber yet?

I will sign up tomorrow. I am so saddened in reading this I do not know what to think of it all.

 

[miguel]

Liberalsaved:

Saw it, it’s far from a propaganda film.

Here’s what reviewer Steven D. Greydanus had to say:

The meaning of a work of art cannot be reduced to a thesis or proposition; if it can, it is not art but propaganda, a tract. Brokeback Mountain is not a tract. Still, there is a perspective at work in its depiction of these characters and events. The film does not argue, but assumes, that the pain suffered by men like Jack and Ennis and those around them is the result of what is and isn’t permitted by entrenched social attitudes of intolerance and hate, which constrain such men from following their bliss, and push them into conventional arrangements that are ultimately truly satisfactory to no one. Compared to this film, the euthanasia advocacy of Million Dollar Baby, the anti-Catholicism of The Magdalene Sisters and and the abortion activism of The Cider House Rules are practically child’s play.

In the end, in its easygoing, nonpolemical way, Brokeback Mountain is nothing less than an indictment not just of heterosexism but of masculinity itself, and thereby of human nature as male and female. It’s a jaundiced portrait of maleness in crisis — a crisis extending not only to the sexual identities of the two central characters, but also to the validity of manhood as exemplified by every other male character in the film. It may be the most profoundly anti-western western ever made, not only post-modern and post-heroic, but post-Christian and post-human.

decentfilms.com/sections/reviews/brokebackmountain.html

 

[miguel]

fix:

I will sign up tomorrow. I am so saddened in reading this I do not know what to think of it all.

It is upsetting. But it is likely the Pope is not aware of this. I don’t assume he personally knows every Bishop he appoints. I assume he appoints people based on recommendations from others. Obviously it’s not always trustworthy advice.

 

[MikeWM]

setter:

My meaning (I thought was obvious) that these married men carrying on a homosexual love affair were living anything but chasitity to their marriage vows (as would be the case of infidelity

to one’s marriage vows with a heterosexual love affair).

Yes, I know, I’m not saying there is anything correct about it! Homosexual people are called to chastity - neither to engage in homosexual activities or in the lie of pretending they are heterosexual and get married.

They chose

to marry, just as they chose to keep the ember/flame of illicit desire ignited which has the direct consequence of causing difficulty to their marriage.

They did choose to marry, and they shouldn’t have done, because if they are homosexual that was part of weaving a lie.

Their feelings were kept alive

and *they violated * their vows/commitment to their spouses and children *by choosing * to give in to their self-indulging desire. These men are not helpless victims of their disordered sexual desire. Let’s not over sentimentalize the wanton display of betrayal, immaturity, lack of virtue, and sin choices.

No, they gave in to desire and lust. Like 99.9% of the population have at one time or another. That’s not to say it is right, but it’s not uniquely awful either.

Why would you “wonder why”? – it’s Hollywood, the kingpin for spreading the culture of corruption. They are simply moving forward to the next layer of desentization over sin choices.

My point was that you don’t see the terrific outrage this film has caused when a film that shows a married person having a heterosexual affair comes out, as they do by the bucketful.

Mike

 

[Joe_Kelley]

miguel:

It is upsetting. But it is likely the Pope is not aware of this. I don’t assume he personally knows every Bishop he appoints. I assume he appoints people based on recommendations from others. Obviously it’s not always trustworthy advice.

Presumably he appointed him at the behest of Archbishop Levada, who he appointed to his own former job a short while ago. One hopes he convinced himself of the Archbishop’s trustworthiness before appointing him to a, maybe the, major post in the Curia. Also one presumes he had at least cursory knowledge of the bishop’s previous statements re homosexuals while in Utah, e.g. his opposition to the anti-gay-marriage legislation.

 

[oat_soda]

Yes, I know, I’m not saying there is anything correct about it! Homosexual people are called to chastity - neither to engage in homosexual activities or in the lie of pretending they are heterosexual and get married.

you do not know understand the definition of chastity. even married people are called to chastitiy.

you are confusing continence with chastity; continence means abstinence from sex while chastitiy allows sex in its proper context -when it is procreative and unitive.

2337 Chastity means the successful integration of sexuality within the person and thus the inner unity of man in his bodily and spiritual being. Sexuality, in which man’s belonging to the bodily and biological world is expressed, becomes personal and truly human when it is integrated into the relationship of one person to another, in the complete and lifelong mutual gift of a man and a woman.

so chastity in no way is a prohibition of sex.

2348 All the baptized are called to chastity. The Christian has "put on Christ,"134 the model for all chastity. All Christ’s faithful are called to lead a chaste life in keeping with their particular states of life. At the moment of his Baptism, the Christian is pledged to lead his affective life in chastity.

so you see all people with either a healthy or disordered sexuality are called to chastity -which is an ordered sexuality. it implicitly rejects the notion that people are born homosexual; we are all objectively and ontologically heterosexual.

 

[miguel]

what we know about the healthiness of it…

catholicexchange.com/vm/index.asp?vm_id=90&art_id=23893

 

[miguel]

Joe Kelley:

Presumably he appointed him at the behest of Archbishop Levada, who he appointed to his own former job a short while ago. One hopes he convinced himself of the Archbishop’s trustworthiness before appointing him to a, maybe the, major post in the Curia. Also one presumes he had at least cursory knowledge of the bishop’s previous statements re homosexuals while in Utah, e.g. his opposition to the anti-gay-marriage legislation.

It is possible that Levada may have been aware of it. I would not assume that. I would also not assume he made the Pope aware of it. The NOR has also criticized Levada, BTW.

 

[setter]

MikeWM:

setter:

No, they gave in to desire and lust. Like 99.9% of the population have at one time or another. That’s not to say it is right, but it’s not uniquely awful either.

My point was that you don’t see the terrific outrage this film has caused when a film that shows a married person having a heterosexual affair comes out, as they do by the bucketful.

Mike

Regardless, this is where Hollywood and their like do a great disservice to the inherent dignity of the person and society as a whole and why for a bishop of the Church to give tacit approval to the otherwise merit of the movie is grossly mistaken, IMHO:

Chastity represents an eminently personal task; it also involves a cultural effort

, for there is “an interdependence between personal betterment and the improvement of society.” Chastity presupposes respect for the rights of the person, in particular the right to receive information and an education that respect the moral and spiritual dimensions of human life. (CCC 2344)

Chastity includes an *apprenticeship in self-mastery *

which is a training in human freedom. The alternative is clear: either man governs his passions and finds peace, or he lets himself be dominated by them and becomes unhappy. “Man’s dignity therefore requires him to act out of conscious and free choice, as moved and drawn in a personal way from within, and not by blind impulses in himself or by mere external constraint. Man gains such dignity when, ridding himself of all slavery to the passions, he presses forward to his goal by freely choosing what is good and, by his diligence and skill, effectively secures for himself the means suited to this end.” (CCC 2339)