Why Shouldn’t the Vatican Go ‘Woke’?

The RCC is already a joke with a clown at its head; why then should it not go 'woke'?  It has needed defunding for a long time now. It is up to us to make it true that 'go woke, go broke.' Story here:

VATICAN CITY — An unprecedented global canvassing of Catholics has called for the church to take concrete steps to promote women to decision-making roles, for a "radical inclusion" of the LGBTQ+ community . . . .

The document also asked what concrete steps the church can take to better welcome LGBTQ+ people and others who have felt marginalized and unrecognized by the church so that they don't feel judged: the poor, migrants, the elderly and disabled, as well as those who by tribal or caste feel excluded.

Perhaps most significantly, the document used the terminology "LGBTQ+ persons" rather than the Vatican's traditional "persons with homosexual tendencies," suggesting a level of acceptance that Francis ushered in a decade ago with his famous "Who am I to judge" comment.

Satanists must feel terribly marginalized by the RCC even at this late date. They need to be recognized so that they don't feel judged.  'Catholic' means universal; so shouldn't everyone be included?  Diversity, equity, inclusion!  In fact, Satanists are more worthy of inclusion than New Atheists (Dawkins, Dennett, Hitchens, Harris, et al.) because the former, unlike the latter, believe in the super-natural, the meta-physical.  In any case, the New Atheism is so passé! Hell, nobody knows what it is is anymore. Satanism is the current thing and must be honored as such. Diversity demands the inclusion of Satanists! And (superlunary) equity, equality of soteriological outcome, for all, regardless of merit or demerit!

Moral judgment must be avoided at all costs since, as we all know now, there is no difference between making moral judgments and being judgmental, and no bien-pensant wokester wants to be perceived as judgmental.

"LGBTQ+ persons" absolutely must replace the Vatican's traditional "persons with homosexual tendencies," because of the latter's implied distinction of tendency/disposition and exercise.  It was traditionally held that there is no sin in having the innate homosexual tendency or disposition; the sin consists in exercising or acting upon it. But this distinction is quite obviously homophobic and hateful because it marginalizes those who act upon their inherent homosexual desires. Besides, it's a bogus distinction; it sounds like some dusty punctilio from some superannuated scholastic manual of the sort the beatific Bergoglio rightly excoriated.   Both disposition and exercise are to be, not tolerated, but celebrated.  By her own astute admission, Karine Jean-Pierre, as the first black, female, lesbian WH press secretary, is a historic figure.  No doubt about it, and qualifications for the job have nothing to do with it.

Pope Buffoon

See? I'm a clown! Who am I to judge?

What me worry

10 thoughts on “Why Shouldn’t the Vatican Go ‘Woke’?”

  1. Joe, Sometimes the truth is so evident, as with the salvific mission of the Church, entrusted to it by Christ, that no more than a few words are needed to express it:
    “Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God” (I Corinthians, 6:9-11).

  2. Broither Bill, I think we are also at this point:
    2 Timothy 4:3-4
    King James Version
    3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;
    4 And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.
    ° ° ° ° ° 
    And yet, when I go outside every morning, I always see how incredibly quiet the world actually is.

  3. Bill,
    Francis is an admirer of Pascal, so he must have had had a hand in the letter; whether he wrote it or not is unclear, since it is known that he uses ghost writers; these include Mgr. Paolo Luca Braida and Mgr. Osvaldo Neves de Almeida for his speeches and public statements, and Archbp. And Víctor Manuel Fernández for Amoris Laetitia. This does not mean that Francis does not know Pascal; in fact, he not an entirely uncultured person, having an appreciation classical music and literature.

  4. Vito,
    Thank you for the measured response. Bergoglio’s ghostwriters did a fine job with the Pascal piece.

  5. Joe,
    It is your inner spiritual quietude that allows you to appreciate the outer physical quiet.
    Hans Urs von Balthasar’s PRAYER arrived today. It may interest you. He is a first-rate theologian, but his writing is not ‘popular.’
    As for lust, our concupiscence is at the root of many of out troubles.
    See: https://williamfvallicella.substack.com/p/the-role-of-concupiscence-in-the
    and: https://williamfvallicella.substack.com/p/abortion-and-the-wages-of-concupiscence

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *