PST

View current page
...more recent posts

Tuesday, Jun 14, 2005

Catholic Fundamentalism

I suppose I came of age when it was cool to be a cafeteria Catholic. Most of my peers ranged from "kind of religious" to "it's just part of the deal". Of course, there were a few outliers in the "fuck this bullshit" camp. The only fundy Catholic I had regular conversation with was Sister Joanne, who I've mentioned before.

Catholic fundamentalism is different. It's not about the sacred text, literally interpreted, as seen in Islamic and American fundamentalism For Catholics it's all about the church, and its divinely inspired teachings.

Julia Sweeny had a brilliant critique of Catholocism recently on NPR's This American Life. Her reanalysis of the Church was the outcome of a Bible reading class, in which she realized the Bible is perhaps not the best guide for living.

An equally withering critique could be made on the basis of the catechism and related official teachings of the Church. (Catechism is Catholic for "talmud".) For example, consider the teachings of the sexually confused man known as the Archbishop of Denver.

"If ovulation has occurred, there's a potential for new life in that woman, so then the church's responsibility is to protect both the woman and the new baby," says Alia Keys, coordinator of the Office of Marriage and Family for the Archdiocese of Denver.

The sacred sperm which is unspoken in this statement is the sperm of a rapist. I'm sorry Alia, I don't care which vestment-wearing dude told you to say this, but this is a perversion of the entire concept of marriage and family

I started debating with an apologist over here, and felt like I had gotten into a sustained argument while at the cocktail party of a friend of a friend. Perhaps in my spare time, I should take on a Sweeny-type project. Suppose I read the whole Catechism ... nah.

I did take the time to refresh my memory on fucking -- er -- Catholic style. There's pretty much just the one way to fuck. That's it. Anything else is unnatural. It violates G-d's natural law. Because, see, in Nature, all mammals pretty much limit their sexual activities to procreation within the pair bond. More or less. With a few minor variations. Take my dog for example. I believe he truly intended to procreate with that couch. So that's why a rapists sperm must be allowed to impregnate a rape victim. Q.E.D.

from catholic.com

Contraception is wrong because it’s a deliberate violation of the design God built into the human race, often referred to as "natural law." The natural law purpose of sex is procreation. The pleasure that sexual intercourse provides is an additional blessing from God, intended to offer the possibility of new life while strengthening the bond of intimacy, respect, and love between husband and wife. The loving environment this bond creates is the perfect setting for nurturing children.

See, this is where the Chuch goes wrong. It selects a questionable axiom (e.g. fucking is for making babies and nothing else, ever), and extrapolates willy-nilly from there. The Church considers even coitus interruptus to be a sin. Onan was killed because he wouldn't fuck his brother's widow without pulling out. Tell me, what kind of man would do his sister-in-law like that!

Since the Church considers hormone suppliment pills to be sinful, I'm assuming the Church would also consider it sinful for a rape victim to ask her rapist to use a rubber.

So what exactly is the 'natural law' purpose of rape?

older posts...