St Peter Damian – some quotes to “damnable sodomites”

-BY Ann Barnhardt

St. Peter Damian, Doctor of the Church. You should listen to him. He was actually Catholic, believed what the Church teaches, was really smart, was NOT a diabolical narcissist and actually gave a flip about human souls.

St. Peter Damian, Doctor of the Church. You should listen to him. He was actually Catholic, believed what the Church teaches, was really smart, was NOT a diabolical narcissist and actually gave a flip about human souls.

I have in my collection a book written by St. Peter Damian – who lived in the Eleventh Century, and whose feast it is today, [February 23] by the way – called “The Book of Gomorrah”. I recommend it strongly to one and all. It is probably the best takedown of sodomites and their godforsaken culture ever written. A note of caution: you will see articles written about this book in which even very Trad Catholics spew the modernist boilerplate about how St. Peter Damian was speaking not about homosexuality as an orientation, but only about sodomitical acts. This is nonsense, and one of the lies that has crept into the post Vatican II Church. Aberrosexual ORIENTATION is wrong and sinful. For a dude to sit around thinking sexually about other dudes, or to be sexually drawn to other dudes is WRONG. It is WRONG for a human adult to be sexually attracted to children. It is WRONG for a person to be sexually attracted to animals. It is WRONG for a person to be sexually attracted to dead bodies. The notion that all of these aberrosexual “orientations” are hunkey-dorey… just so long as you don’t act on them, is bee-ess that flies in the face of common sense.

As we have previously discussed, and will discuss much more, ALL ABERROSEXUALITY IS DERIVATIVE OF DIABOLICAL NARCISSISM. And as we have defined it before, Diabolical Narcissism is when a person freely chooses to purge themselves of all love (charity), thus becoming completely self-absorbed, utterly devoid and incapable of empathy, and capable only of the diabolical emotional palate: anger, hatred, jealously and fear. They freely choose to adopt the demonic psycho-spiritual posture and emotional palate. They are, whether they realize it or not, Hell’s Mercenaries, soul-killing monsters prowling the earth seeking the ruin of souls out of pure, unquenchable spite.

Here are just a few quotes from St. Peter Damian, Doctor of the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church.

  • “Tell us, you unmanly and effeminate man, what do you seek in another male that you do not find in yourself?”
  • “For God’s sake, why do you damnable sodomites pursue the heights of ecclesiastical dignity with such fiery ambition?”
  • “By what right or by what law can one bind or loose the other when he is constrained by the bonds of evil deeds common to them both?”
  • “Who can expect the flock to prosper when its shepherd has sunk so deep into the bowels of the devil?
  • “Who, by his lust, will consign a son whom he spiritually begotten for God to slavery under the iron law of Satanic tyranny?”
  • “This utterly diseased queen of Sodom renders him who obeys the laws of her tyranny infamous to men and odious to God.”
  • “Without fail, [the vice of sodomy] brings death to the body and destruction to the soul. It pollutes the flesh, extinguishes the light of the mind, expels the Holy Spirit from the temple of the human heart, and gives entrance to the devil, the stimulator of lust.”
  • ”[The vice of sodomy] leads to error, totally removes truth from the deluded mind . . . It opens up Hell and closes the gates of Paradise.”
  • ”[The vice of sodomy] is this vice that violates temperance, slays modesty, strangles chastity, and slaughters virginity.”
  • “Truly, this vice [sodomy] is never to be compared with any other vice because it surpasses the enormity of all vices.… It defiles everything, stains everything, pollutes everything. And as for itself, it permits nothing pure, nothing clean, nothing other than filth.…”
  • “The miserable flesh burns with the heat of lust; the cold mind trembles with the rancor of suspicion; and in the heart of the miserable man chaos boils like Tartarus [Hell]…. In fact, after this most poisonous serpent once sinks its fangs into the unhappy soul, sense is snatched away, memory is borne off, the sharpness of the mind is obscured. It becomes unmindful of God and even forgetful of itself. This plague undermines the foundation of faith, weakens the strength of hope, destroys the bond of charity; it takes away justice, subverts fortitude, banishes temperance, blunts the keenness of prudence.”
  • “And what more should I say since it expels the whole host of the virtues from the chamber of the human heart and introduces every barbarous vice as if the bolts of the doors were pulled out.”
  • “Who will make a mistress of a cleric, or a woman of a man?”
  • “It is not sinners, but the wicked who should despair; it is not the magnitude of one’s crime, but contempt of God that dashes one’s hopes.”

St. Peter Damian, for us now under the relentless, grinding jackboot of Diabolical Narcissist Sodomites seeking the ruin of souls, pray for us.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

48 Responses to St Peter Damian – some quotes to “damnable sodomites”

  1. johnhenrycn says:

    “…why do you damnable sodomites pursue the heights of ecclesiastical dignity with such fiery ambition?”

    Good old (metaphorically speaking) Ann Barnhardt. The Spotlight film was just released today on DVD. I got it remembering our duty and obligation to look at the truth. Not that from what I’ve read the movie is all that truthful, because it apparently bends over backwards, if that’s the mot juste to avoid the ugly, evil truth: rape priests are overwhelmingly homosexuals.

  2. Tom Fisher says:

    ALL ABERROSEXUALITY IS DERIVATIVE OF DIABOLICAL NARCISSISM. And as we have defined it before, Diabolical Narcissism is when a person freely chooses to purge themselves of all love (charity), thus becoming completely self-absorbed, utterly devoid and incapable of empathy, and capable only of the diabolical emotional palate: anger, hatred, jealously and fear.

    Only 3 of my close friends / colleagues are homosexual (and 2 of them are in a couple). So in terms of significant personal experience, my sample is not large. But the claim quoted above is utterly false in all 3 cases. Which leads me to be very skeptical of it.

    The quotes from Peter Damien have the slightly histrionic quality that one often hears in someone whose real struggle is internal.

  3. toadspittle says:

    Interesting that, way back then, there were enough gay priests to get the dear old saint frothing.
    Although he might have been better advised to turn the other cheek. (in a manner of speaking.)
    Maybe it’s nothing to do with Vat 2.

    “Tell us, you unmanly and effeminate man, what do you seek in another male that you do not find in yourself?”
    “Well, Sweetie-Pie…”

    Good job, CP&S!
    Nice to begin the day with a laugh.

  4. Tom Fisher says:

    Well Toad, Ann Barnhardt has a Twitter account. Thomas Aquinas she ain’t, but entertaining she is.

    https://twitter.com/AnnBarnhardt

    Enjoy over coffee.

    In fact, after this most poisonous serpent once sinks its fangs into the unhappy soul, sense is snatched away, memory is borne off, the sharpness of the mind is obscured

    Well yes… It is hard not to make certain inferences. However Ann seems oblivious of the cumulative effect of all these quotes. Hopefully Peter Damian found peace with himself in the end

  5. kathleen says:

    This sort of tough talking – for us post-V2 Catholic ‘softies’ – is quite staggering, isn’t it! After all the (well-intentioned ?) talk of ‘understanding’ and ‘welcome’ towards those who claim to have homosexual tendencies that we are dished up nowadays (and not only by the Secular media), this harsh condemnation and zero-tolerance of homosexuality from no less than a Doctor of the Church comes as quite a shock!

    But can we say with honesty that it’s all that different from the way other saints in the past have talked when defending Catholic Truth and the dangers of evil? I’m thinking of the fiery sermons of St Paul, St Bernard, St John Vianney, St Padre Pio, many of the past canonised popes… and even the Words of Our Blessed Lord Himself!
    Love and mercy were never lacking in their preaching for the sincere, repentant sinner – the whole purpose of their rigorous condemnation of grave sin being to open the eyes of the sinner to the wickedness of his ways and to turn from them – yet sweet-talking pandering would never budge a hardened sinner to amend his life! We have the proof of that all around us today.

  6. Tom Fisher says:

    This sort of tough talking – for us post-V2 Catholic ‘softies’ – is quite staggering, isn’t it!

    Not really. Everybody knows that Peter Damian just says what “true Catholics” are too timid to say these days. — Though not Ann Bernhardt, her comments are similarly robust.

    Love and mercy were never lacking in their preaching for the sincere, repentant sinner

    Tosh. Peter Damian’s comments are a torrent of bile, and clearly tell us more about himself than his subjects. ‘Love and Mercy’ had nothing to do with it. Fearing and hating homosexuals is something it’s best to be open about, not coy.

  7. GC says:

    Oh yes, Mr Fisher, I seem to recall you said similar things in these very pages about St Catherine of Siena (a Doctor of the Church, no less) and her locutions concerning sodomy. Before later becoming a little coy yourself, if I remember rightly.

  8. kathleen says:

    GC: “Oh yes, Mr Fisher, I seem to recall you said similar things in these very pages about St Catherine of Siena (a Doctor of the Church, no less) and her locutions concerning sodomy. Before later becoming a little coy yourself, if I remember rightly.”

    “Ah yes, I remember it well!”😉

    But seriously, Tom, are you unaware of the “hard teachings” on the consequences of unrepentant mortal sin from Our Blessed Saviour no less? (And from most of His closest followers like the examples I gave?) Or do you simply prefer to stick your fingers in your ears, close your eyes and shout: “I can’t hear you, I can’t hear you!” (Unless it’s soft-talk niceties of course.)

    What I said is not “tosh”. Wake up! Not one of these saints (and over and above all of them, Our Lord Himself, naturally) was anything but Love and Mercy incarnate. It was because of this that they preached so fiercely, passionately and continuously on the terrible consequences for those who refuse Christ’s call to conversion, and prefer to follow the devil’s non serviam path to Hell! They wanted to save their souls! Our love for Christ should be over and above any concern for what people should think of us for speaking the truth, however harsh it may sound.

    Sodomy is called one of the four sins that “cry to God for vengeance”, but in our day and age we are being fobbed off with nothing but blatant lies and falsehoods from the so-called “lobby of the LGBT agenda”.

    I admit I know little about St Peter Damian though, and Ann Barnhardt’s post has whetted my appetite to learn more.

  9. ginnyfree says:

    Added the book to my wish list at Amazon. Thanks for the tip. Looks like a good one. God bless. Ginnyfree.

  10. Robert says:

    A list of Mortal Sins Fornication, Pornography, Prostitution, Sexual abuse, Hatred for others, Idolatry (material goods and human idols). Sodomy is a Mortal Sin under Sexual abuse.
    Tom Fisher “.. Fearing and hating homosexuals is something it’s best to be open about, not coy..”
    See above list of Mortal Sins which you seem to be propagating.

    This Satanic ploy of confusing the POOR SINNER with the SIN. Also how convenient to single out one Sin what about all the others?

    First Our Lord Loves the POOR SINNERS but NOT THEIR SINS.
    Its never ever mentioned but its a Truth that the PAIN of your senses doesn’t end with physical death!
    What do you think the Fires of HELL or of Purgatory Are? There is NO entry for SIN in Heaven and the wages of SIN are Death (that’s spiritual DEATH) . Its for Eternity.
    The Saints have never said otherwise.
    You want to place the blame on the Atheist naturalists for whom beastility is simply being rthe animal that they claim to be!

  11. Robert says:

    If St Peter and St Paul had been soft yes Men there would have been NO Church. The softies of V2 are the puppets of Satan.

  12. There is much truth in what Ann Barnhardt says. The Catechism of the Catholic Church, in paragraphs 2357, 2358, 2359, repeats the word “disordered,” that so many people these days find objectionable:

    2357 Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex. It has taken a great variety of forms through the centuries and in different cultures. Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained. Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity, 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.

    2358 The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them 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.

    2359 Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection.

  13. Tom Fisher says:

    Before later becoming a little coy yourself, if I remember rightly.

    Everyone’s coy sometimes GC.

    But seriously, Tom, are you unaware of the “hard teachings” on the consequences of unrepentant mortal sin from Our Blessed Saviour no less? (And from most of His closest followers like the examples I gave?) Or do you simply prefer to stick your fingers in your ears, close your eyes and shout: “I can’t hear you, I can’t hear you!” (Unless it’s soft-talk niceties of course.)

    Well, Kathleen. I suppose I have long since realised that the editors of this blog delight in rhetoric that I find unpalatable. And you have every right to of course. An example is this dehumanizing characterization of homosexuals:

    completely self-absorbed, utterly devoid and incapable of empathy, and capable only of the diabolical emotional palate: anger, hatred, jealously and fear. They freely choose to adopt the demonic psycho-spiritual posture

    And it’s fine. It’s a view point. It should be expressed. I don’t ask for “soft talk niceties”. I would much prefer it if this blog had the confidence to state openly how you really feel. — You guys get a thrill from Peter Damien, and Ann Bernhardt, because they say what you’re too squeamish to say. — It is, to borrow a phrase from Bernhardt, pure “boiler-plate” to talk about ‘love and compassion’. Homosexuals fill you guys with disgust, contempt, rage, and fear. — If you’d just say it, directly, it would be more constructive in the long run.

  14. Crow says:

    What was St Peter Damian canonised for? Was it this vitriolic spray? Is he the patron Saint of venomous diatribes? Do we pray to him when we want to vent on people we hate? Which pope made him a saint ?

    And the author of the article, Ann Barnhart, doesn’t sound to me like any traditional Catholic I have ever known. She sounds to me like a fundamentalist Protestant.

  15. kathleen says:

    Tom @ 9;40 yesterday

    Personally, I think your final accusatory paragraph here towards us is both unfair and untrue. To start with, we are a team of six, not a cloned being of one voice, opinion and ideas. Our unity lies solely in our shared orthodoxy and our primary love for Christ and the Holy Catholic Church.

    When we publish an article from another Catholic author, it does not necessarily imply that we concur absolutely with everything this person states.
    Ann Barnhardt is indeed “robust” and tough… with a way of expressing herself that we are little used to hearing these days in the Church! She is also a fierce defender of Catholic doctrine, and abhors the way the pendulum has swung so completely in the other direction, so that we are now practically covering up for all sorts of serious mortal sin with simpering sweet-talk. This fear of unpsetting those indulging in grave sin was not the way of Our Blessed Lord, or any of the great saints I mentioned above.

    St Peter Damian’s harsh condemnation of “sodomites” appears to be aimed at those who “freely choose to adopt the demonic psycho-spiritual posture”, not those struggling with SSA. He was most likely directing his condemnation towards those “rape priests” (cf JH in his comment) who were pursuing “the heights of ecclesiastical dignity with such fiery ambition”! They were wreaking havoc and grave scandal in the Church of his day.

    Another proof that there is nothing new under the sun!
    __________

    Just one little anecdote that might surprise you….

    Your friend, Toad, is sometimes every bit as vitriolic towards us on CP&S, as St Peter Damian was towards “sodomites” in his day!! Yes, really!
    We are continually receiving reams of bitter insults for the posts we publish, and for not publishing more than about half of all his comments. Some of these are so full of spite, he knows full well we will not allow them to pass through our ‘moderation’ process…. yet he still wants to attack us nonetheless and let us know what he thinks of us.
    Sad!

  16. kathleen says:

    Crow @ 6:42

    Briefly, in answer to your questions, here is a summary I’ve found of the life of St Peter Damian:

    “St. Peter Damian (1007-1072) was born in Ravenna, Italy, the youngest of a large and noble yet poor family. After being orphaned at an early age, a brother priest, recognising that Peter had great intelligence, took him in and provided for his education. Peter excelled in his studies and in religious piety. By the time he was twenty-five he became a professor famous for his work in theology and Canon Law. Bothered by the distractions of university life, at twenty-eight he left his position to become a Benedictine monk to lead a quiet life of fervent prayer and self-mortification. He lived during a time of great corruption in the Church, and became heavily involved in the controversies and crises of the day, advocating for reform and greater discipline in religious life. He was an influential figure, a friend and adviser to both popes and emperors, and was made bishop and cardinal. Due to his academic prowess and prolific theological writings, St. Peter Damian was declared a Doctor of the Church in 1823.”

    The sentence I have highlighted in ‘bold’ probably explains his forthrightness in condemning homosexuality so strongly.

  17. toadspittle says:

    “Your friend, Toad, is sometimes every bit as vitriolic towards us on CP&S, as St Peter Damian was towards “sodomites” in his day!! Yes, really!”
    Quite so. The little green blackguard deserves a damned good thrashing (Toad, that is – not Saint Peter Damian)!

  18. Michael says:

    Some excellent responses there Kathleen – very thorough, and very restrained, given the accusations that went before (both those directed towards the CP&S team and towards Saint Peter Damian himself)!

    Just as a very minor supplement though, in response to Crow’s query, here are some good relevant articles at the New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia:

    http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05075a.htm

    http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11764a.htm

    They don’t really say much more than you’ve already outlined above, but they do reinforce your points by adding some more detail (particularly wrt the times Peter Damian lived in, and what being named a Doctor of the Church means for that person’s contribution to and role within the Church as a whole).

  19. kathleen says:

    Thank you, Michael, for those two great links. New Advent is considered a very reliable source for accurate information.

    Here we are, anxiously complaining of all the problems and betrayals we are suffering in the Church today, when a detailed look at the turbulent times of St Peter Damian, and we gasp with horror! It should make us realise that the Church (who not only survived them, but came out from them even stronger and holier than ever before) will do so again today!

    Troubles, as the result of sin (disobedience to the Divine Law) have always been with us…. and always will be. We, who have been called to life at this time, must face our own challenges and difficulties, armed with all the grace of God we can avail ourselves of! (Prayer, sacrifice and the Holy Sacraments, etc.)

  20. Tom Fisher says:

    Kathleen,

    Personally, I think your final accusatory paragraph here towards us is both unfair and untrue.

    Material such as that in this post provided, frequently, without any editorial disclaimer — and you seem to be taking offence at the suggestion that it reflects the views of the editors.

    This characterization of homosexuals is quite clearly dehumanizing:

    …completely self-absorbed, utterly devoid and incapable of empathy, and capable only of the diabolical emotional palate: anger, hatred, jealously and fear. They freely choose to adopt the demonic psycho-spiritual posture.

    You either endorse it or you repudiate it. But it is inherently violent dehumanizing language. It is not like posting a review of a film you may or may not disagree with. It is serious stuff, and you need to take some sort of editorial stance. — I think it likely that you agree with Peter Damian — which you have every right to. In which case it would be fair to use the terms I did, disgust, contempt, rage, and fear

  21. Tom Fisher says:

    *Bernhardt, Damien

  22. Tom Fisher says:

    Kathleen,

    It’s worth noting that the quote which I find particularly egregious, and included in my last comment, is from Bernhardt not Damien. Just in case that’s not clear to anyone who happens to read it. And an attempt to put two words in bold clearly went awry.

    Michael,

    Some excellent responses there Kathleen – very thorough, and very restrained, given the accusations that went before (both those directed towards the CP&S team and towards Saint Peter Damian himself)!

    There weren’t “accusations”. There were two very straightforward observations. 1.) In this context publishing vitriol as a post, without editorial comment implies assent to it. 2.) Peter Damian’s rhetoric regarding homosexuality was so preposterously savage that any modern reader should recognise the likelihood that it reflected some sort of inner turmoil. Neither of those points seems to require “restraint” in responding to them.

  23. toadspittle says:

    Very well.
    Is it all right to say I agree with Tom?
    (or is that “inappropriate,” too?)

  24. kathleen says:

    Well, Tom, I can only talk for myself and not for the rest of my team mates, however hard you try to roll us into one.
    On CP&S we are, of course, in total agreement in all that the Catholic Church teaches, and we all share a great love for Christ and the Church, as I have already mentioned, but our approach to certain topics of discussion may (or may not) differ accordingly, depending…

    On 25th Feb. @ 9:40, you said (among other things) that:

    “You guys get a thrill from Peter Damien, and Ann Bernhardt, because they say what you’re too squeamish to say…. Homosexuals fill you guys with disgust, contempt, rage, and fear.”

    Before I was more restrained, replying that this accusation was “untrue”; now I shall say it more robustly: it is a LIE, and a defamatory one at that.

    1. When we “guys” publish the writings of saints, Catholic journalists, authors, lawyers theologians, etc., and which we often do, it is not because we are “too squeamish” ourselves, but because these scholarly and/or (in the case of saints) enlightened people express themselves with greater coherence and fluidity. The controversiality of some of our articles we publish is a sign that we are neither “squeamish” nor cowardly in bringing these topics to light.
    2. The grave sin of sodomy may certainly fill us with “disgust” (it does me), but “disgust” for, “contempt” of, or “rage” at, homosexuals (sodomites) is not, personally speaking, what I am filled with at all! On the contrary, I greatly pity these “poor sinners” who have willingly chosen this disordered path of great immorality that will, unless they repent, lead them into the pits of Hell. I “fear” for them only… and for those unsuspecting souls who have been either cunningly drawn into their evil ‘nets’, or whose faith has been lost by the scandal they have witnessed.

    And this last point (fear for the unrepentant sinner) and the robust way of condemning the filthy sins of “ALL ABERROSEXUALITY [which] IS DERIVATIVE OF DIABOLICAL NARCISSISM” that Ann Barnhardt renounces (through the words of Doctor of the Church, Saint Peter Damian) is why we published this article here.

    You disagree with this clear condemnation of “aberrosexuality” – okay – “which you have every right to”, but the soft tolerant approach you advocate is not going to ever prick the conscience of any hardened sodomite (or whatever) to change his tune. That’s not true charity!

    Therefore I join Ann Barnhardt in praying:

    St. Peter Damian, for us now under the relentless, grinding jackboot of Diabolical Narcissist Sodomites seeking the ruin of souls, pray for us.

  25. johnhenrycn says:

    Tom (04:54) you say: ” Peter Damian’s rhetoric regarding homosexuality was so preposterously savage that any modern reader should recognise the likelihood that it reflected some sort of inner turmoil.”

    His rhetoric was indeed “savage” and did indeed reflect “inner turmoil”, but you should recognise the “likelihood” that turmoil (i.e. anguish and anger) had nothing to do with the sort homoerotic impulses you seek (sotto voce) to ascribe to him, but rather was caused by his fight against the rampant homosexual ecclesiastical corruption he observed all around him. The potted Wikipedia entry for this Doctor of the Church refers to his Book of Gomorrah (cited by Ann Barnhardt) and states that it was written by him specifically with the widespread sexual vices of priests and monks in mind:
    ” About 1050, during the pontificate of Pope Leo IX, Peter wrote a scathing treatise on the vices of the clergy, including sexual abuse of minors and actions by church superiors to hide the crimes.”

    To quote this treatise by St Peter Damian on the occasion of his feast day (which is actually February 21st, not February 23rd as mentioned by Ms Barnhardt) seems quite apt as we are once again dealing with the fallout caused by the abuse of children by (primarily) homosexual clergy and the unbelievably disgusting efforts of some/many bishops to sweep their evil acts under the rug.

    Serious concerned Catholics are darn right to be “preposterously savage” in confronting them all.
    ___
    The Spotlight film was well worth watching (I’m only able to bear seeing it the once) but I was right in mentioning in my opening remark on this thread that it would do its best to skirt around the issue of homosexuality. At the end, for example, there was mention made of the number of children abused by priests, without any mention of their sex, as if that was an irrelevancy to understanding.

  26. johnhenrycn says:

    In referring to the Spotlight film, I said:

    “At the end, for example, there was mention made of the number of children abused by priests, without any mention of their sex…”

    I meant to add that the number was around 1000 in the Boston, Massachusetts area during the time period covered by the Boston Globe investigation. Just sickening.

  27. toadspittle says:

    From what JH derives from Saint Peter Damian’s fulminations, (rightly, in my opinion) it would seem that pederasty is, and has been, a nagging problem in the Catholic Church,* for at least 1000 years.
    Who’ve been a bit slow in getting round to dealing with it, I’d suggest.
    But then, maybe nobody ever made too much of a fuss about it. Not important. Who cared?
    …Not until recently when the horrid, secular, ungodly, world started making rude noises – in places like Ireland, proud Bower of Catholicism in Western Europe. Where perversion was most prevalent. Odd, that.

    *[Moderator – long before that Toad, and everywhere, not in the CC alone.]

  28. johnhenrycn says:

    I’m trying to decide whether homosexuals raping boys are worse than airport security personnel who make a living from touching children:

    On my last flight, I had to submit to a full body pat down because I was wearing suspenders, which I refused to remove because they were, well, suspending something. But I am not a child.

  29. johnhenrycn says:

    …which reminds me of another time when my golf shoe cleat remover was temporarily seized by a carry-on luggage inspector until she could consult with her supervisor concerning its lethality. That’s enough from me for now.

  30. toadspittle says:

    “I’m trying to decide whether homosexuals raping boys are worse than airport security personnel who make a living from touching children:”
    You might as well try to decide whether Methodists are worse the Lutherans, JH.

  31. toadspittle says:

    [A moderator: four sentences deleted.]
    It all puts me in mind of Auden, who didn’t like being gay, so he tried to change direction by having sex with a woman friend. No good. Didn’t work. Seemed “unnatural” to him. Which leads me to ponder:
    Are all these gays, since the dawn of history, a part of God’s mysterious plan, somehow? Just don’t know, do we? Although it’s lucky for us Adam was “straight,” isn’t it?

    Also lucky the Airport Moderators didn’t attempt to test whether JH’s golf shoe cleat remover related, in some obscure fashion, to his cavities.

  32. Michael says:

    Tom @ 04:54, February 27th:

    Hmm, well they seemed fairly accusatory to me, but yes I suppose that perhaps ‘heavily imply’ or ‘strongly suggest’ would be better. At any rate, in your comments you insinuated, assuming a great deal in the process, that:

    a.) All of the CP&S team subscribed to both the content and the tone of Anne Barnhardt’s post and Peter Damian’s quotes therein.

    b.) Saint Peter Damian, Doctor of the Church, was a self-loathing closet homosexual.

    As to the first of these, Kathleen has given another very thorough response. As to Peter Damian, johnhenry’s comment at 17:22, February 27th, makes the very important point that his vehement criticism of homosexual behaviour during his lifetime does not necessarily imply repressed homosexual impulses, nor self-hatred. Damian was responding to some particularly scandalous behaviour, but the idea that anyone who is perturbed by, or even repulsed by, homosexual activity in general is therefore repressing similar impulses themselves, whilst in some cases an accurate description of reality, is very often a canard used by lobbyists to discredit people and shut down debate – it is certainly never self-evident that there is a connection between the two.

    Anyway, yes, these were insinuations rather than accusations, but as you said at 09:40, February 25th, ‘If you’d just say it, directly, it would be more constructive in the long run.

  33. Tom Fisher says:

    Kathleen, JH, Toad, Michael,

    This thread has been busy since I last had time to visit. Since I was pretty forthright in my last 3 comments I appreciate that I should respond to all replies. I’ll get that underway now..

  34. Tom Fisher says:

    Kathleen [Feb 27 120:07], — (I’ve tried to use Italics a fair bit in this comment, it will probably not work)

    We all know the old saw hate the sin, not the sinner That has always struck me as a morally admirable, but psychologically (near) impossible stance. — For example — my abhorrence towards men who beat their wives is not simply a case of “abhorring wife beating” while “loving wife beaters”. — I regard their crimes as so vile that it cannot be separated from my assessment of who they essentially are Vicious crimes reveal the nature of the person.

    — Now I do not think that homosexual relations should be put I the same company as the above mentioned crimes. — But some people do — So let’s just have consistency, we don’t just have a problem with spousal abuse, we have a problem with the cowardly ***** who carry it out. We don’t just have a problem with rape, we have a problem with the scum who commit it. If it is such a terrible thing, you don’t just have a problem with homosexuality, but with homosexuals, as people. — Which surely should just be said directly?

  35. Tom Fisher says:

    JH,

    you should recognise the “likelihood” that turmoil (i.e. anguish and anger) had nothing to do with the sort homoerotic impulses you seek (sotto voce) to ascribe to him, but rather was caused by his fight against the rampant homosexual ecclesiastical corruption he observed all around him.

    JH, I’ll grant you this, that is at least as plausible as the more entertaining possibility. And to be fair, apparently St Peter Damian did have a pretty good record of getting into paroxysms of rage about all varieties of corruption.

  36. Tom Fisher says:

    Michael,

    I made two pretty clear assertions — which I have been happy to openly discuss. The only reason I query the terms ‘accusation’ or ‘insinuation’, is that the first implies I am suggesting someone is “guilty” of something; I am not, and I used ‘insinuation’ (or implication) because I was unsure what might lead to me being moderated.

  37. kathleen says:

    Tom @ 7:15

    “We all know the old saw hate the sin, not the sinner That has always struck me as a morally admirable, but psychologically (near) impossible stance.”

    “Impossible” perhaps for you, Tom, but not for me.

  38. Michael says:

    Tom @ 07:43:

    Fair enough – assertions it is. There does remain the sticking point however that these assertions were themselves based on assumptions about the way in which decisions are made on individual posts at CP&S, the beliefs of all members of the CP&S team regarding homosexual persons, and the sexual inclinations of Saint Peter Damian – assumptions which I would argue are all unwarranted, and therefore your assertions might have been made with ever so slightly less confidence than they were.

    Regarding your analogy of wife-beaters and rapists, I don’t think this really helps, as it already assumes that people’s feelings towards active homosexuals is of the same nature as our feelings towards perpetrators of these other acts. There are plenty of other sins which we find arouse our ire but which do not cause us to feel such strong emotions towards the people who commit them.

    For example, people who lie, defraud and cheat to the detriment of a great many others, or even ourselves directly – this is a sin we rightly abhor, but we do not feel the same way regarding the sinner as we would a child abuser or wife-beater. Or even a murderer – we may feel very strongly that what they have done is an outright injustice, but not feel hatred towards the murderer. Why suppose that feelings towards active homosexuals be of the kind you describe, and not of these (or many other cases where we routinely hate the sin and not the sinner)? To do so is to assume the conclusion of your argument rather than to prove it.

  39. Tom Fisher says:

    Hi Michael,

    this is a sin we rightly abhor, but we do not feel the same way regarding the sinner as we would a child abuser or wife-beater.

    Why suppose that feelings towards active homosexuals be of the kind you describe, and not of these (or many other cases where we routinely hate the sin and not the sinner)?

    Perhaps my supposition reflects incomprehension on my part, or at least a cultural gap. I simply can’t imagine composing or sharing some of the rhetoric which I have read. I simply can’t conceive of posting without comment, the quote from Ann Bernhardt. I find it to be dehumanizing, and I simply can’t understand (and I accept this is a limitation on my part), composing, or sharing without comment the following; unless it reflects hatred of the people being demonized. It’s beyond my understanding:

    …completely self-absorbed, utterly devoid and incapable of empathy, and capable only of the diabolical emotional palate: anger, hatred, jealously and fear. They freely choose to adopt the demonic psycho-spiritual posture and emotional palate. They are, whether they realize it or not, Hell’s Mercenaries, soul-killing monsters prowling the earth seeking the ruin of souls out of pure, unquenchable spite

  40. Tom Fisher says:

    Why suppose that feelings towards active homosexuals be of the kind you describe

    To reiterate, the quote in my previous comment surely answers your question?

  41. Tom Fisher says:

    And we must remember that the words we post are read and repeated in contexts we do not intend. Unjustified violence, especially among young men, towards homosexuals is hardly unheard of. A forum which sends the message that it’s within the bounds of civil discourse to describe homosexuals in general as Hell’s Mercenaries, soul-killing monsters prowling the earth seeking the ruin of souls out of pure, unquenchable spite — risks having these words co-opted.

  42. Michael says:

    Tom,

    I do in fact agree with you about the propriety of Anne Barnhardt’s piece, and also think that, given Saint Peter Damian’s quotes were not supplied with the context needed to appreciate their fervour, the responsibility for the overall tone lies more with her than him. I am, I must confess, generally not a fan of Barnhardt – whilst I can’t disagree with the basic message, namely that homosexual activity is gravely immoral and much more destructive than our society wishes to acknowledge, I do not find her tone helpful, here or in other articles I’ve read.

    Having said that, your understandable distaste at the tone of the article does not warrant making the assumption that everyone at CP&S approved of everything in it. Nor does a visceral reaction to Peter Damian’s own words necessarily imply that he was what you seem to think – this seems to me to be an unhelpful generalisation, and (as I said above) usually the sort of thing employed by lobbyists to shut down debate.

    Furthermore, no the quote above does not surely answer my question – it does not necessarily mean that Saint Peter Damian hates homosexual persons; it is at least as plausible that he is deeply angry about what their indulgence of their inclination has made them become (and again, remember what sort of specific behaviour he is actually railing against – the context left out by Barnhardt). More importantly though, just because one person (or even several people) speak in this way, it does not mean that everyone who abhors homosexual activity hates homosexual persons – there are many different reactions to different sins, and it is perfectly possible to separate the sin from the sinner.

  43. Michael says:

    Correction – Anne Barnhardt doesn’t leave out context completely, insofar as she does mention the book the quotes were taken from, and so someone can look this up and discover the specific situation he was talking to. But she does give the impression that there is an equivalence between what Damian was railing against, and homosexual ‘culture’ today – whilst there may be many similarities (as I say, our society drastically downplays how destructive the homosexual lifestyle can be, and how much depravity is often encouraged therein), this is, I think, misleading.

  44. Tom Fisher says:

    Hi Michael,

    Furthermore, no the quote above does not surely answer my question – it does not necessarily mean that Saint Peter Damian hates homosexual persons

    Actually, (and I also confused the two of them yesterday as well) the quote I posted was not from Peter Damien, it was from Ann Bernhardt, speaking in her own voice. Unlike Peter Damian she has no known history of fighting Church corruption.

    I do appreciate the points you have made; but I really do have to harp on about the same thing just one more time

    There are ways of speaking about people, or groups of people, that define them as something less than human. — Ms Bernhardt chooses to use rhetoric that dehumanizes homosexuals — and it goes well beyond any condemnation of homosexuality in Catholic teaching.

    My fundamental objection is that I am disturbed that this dehumanizing characterization can be posted without editorial comment; they are… Hell’s Mercenaries, soul-killing monsters prowling the earth seeking the ruin of souls out of pure, unquenchable spite

    Is that not inherently violent language? Is it not troubling? Isn’t the lack of editorial comment troubling?

    Thanks, especially Michael and Kathleen, for responding to my concerns. In the final analysis I recognize that you all think it’s a bit irritating that I haven’t just dropped the issue. I’ll leave it now, there’s nothing further to be gained.

  45. Michael says:

    Tom,

    Your point regarding what Anne Barnhardt says and the way she says it is a valid one, and again, I personally think that an affirmation of her basic point (that it is not merely homosexual activity that is disordered, but the inclination itself as well) got a bit smothered by the language she chose to use to make that point. As to the language itself, I wouldn’t say it is inherently violent, but that it could easily inflame already-existing feelings of hatred in others is certainly probable, and you make another valid point here.

    The thing that I had a problem with though is that you went on to suggest several other things – that any expression of revulsion at homosexual behaviour necessarily implies a hatred of the persons engaging in such behaviour; that intemperate expressions of such revulsion necessarily implies repressed homosexuality; and that all the CP&S team must have been in full agreement with Barnhardt’s piece. These points I found, and find, to be unjustified, and thus it was these that I had a problem with, not that you wouldn’t drop the other (valid) points you mention above.

  46. Tom Fisher says:

    These points I found, and find, to be unjustified, and thus it was these that I had a problem with

    Hi Michael, just a quick note. I do get what you mean in your last comment — it’s time to move on to new disagreements — but the three points in your last comment are well taken

  47. Michael says:

    it’s time to move on to new disagreements

    Haha – indeed!🙂

  48. clintoncps says:

    This is a great article. It is true that homosexualism (sodomy) is, as St. Peter Damian says, a vice surpassing all others in savagery, which is to be compared to no other. As one of the four sins that cry out to heaven for vengeance, we see the evil fruit produced from the rotten tree of sodomy since its immoral erasure from the catalog of psychological disorders in 1973:

    – open nudism and sexual perversion paraded through the streets in so-called “pride” parades.
    – sexually-confused children being similarly paraded at these “pride” parades under the banner of transgenderism.
    – homosexual practitioners being given a “right” to marry and gain custody of children, which degrades society and robs children of their right to be raised by a father and mother in a human family, not a Transhuman one.
    – Perverse “Comprehensive Sexuality Education” which pollutes the minds and fertile imaginations of little grade-school children with homosexualized and transexualist fetishism from the earliest years, which is a blatant recruiting tactic of fishing for vulnerable children to take the bait being set for them.
    – Inventing a lexicon of Sexual Transhumanism that shatters the human pronouns “he” and “she” and invents multiplying, delusional Transhuman pronouns to describe sexual virtual-reality personae.

    This evil — this Sexual Transhumanism — would not be possible if it were not for the disastrous decision to try to normalize what is not normal and naturalize what in unnatural back in 1973. How gullible the psychological community was back them by helping to unleash this demon. Sodomy is a pulsating evil that bloats and excretes in ever-multiplying degrees and modes. Don’t be taken in by the quite homosexualist couple living down the street who mind their own business. Once the devils of sodomy are unleashed on a society, the very worst elements will rise to positions of power and influence and promote the sickest, coarsest, and most pedophilic aspects of this poison.

    May God deliver our society from this hateful abomination, and may He set free the many people who are at this moment enslaved to Sexual Transhumanism. The very nature of man, and the Image of God in the human person is what’s under attack. Pray for the conversion of hearts and that the love of God will prevail over man’s self-will.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s