A CULTURE OF DECEIT?

Shortly before Christmas The Daily Telegraph reported that two of its reporters went to the constituency surgeries of Liberal Democrat government ministers trying to get them to say unpleasant things about their Conservative government colleagues. The extent to which they were successful was big news. What was not nearly such big news was the fact that this “respectable” newspaper (which has had and continues to have “practising Catholic” editors) spun a deep and complicated web of deceit about their lives and concerns (and, who knows, their loves) to our legitimate leaders. This, let us note, was without even a suspicion, let alone evidence of, serious wrong doing on the part of their victims.

Now telling lies is wrong. Telling serious lies to legitimate ministers of the Crown is seriously wrong. Publicly boasting of such lies and gaining money from them is also seriously wrong. If one continues to do seriously wrong things in public (without repudiating them) one should not go to Holy Communion. This is not withstanding the fact that Telegraph editors are probably not in mortal sin given the fact that they probably “know not what they do”. This would be so given that the journalistic “sting”, and indeed being “economical with the truth”, has become acceptable in our modern British culture.

Which brings us to another, more recent, exhibition of such culture. Last week a Christian counsellor was due to appear before a Professional Conduct Panel for giving therapy to a “homosexual activist”. The latter performed a “sting” upon the former by spinning a web of intimate lies, which included claiming to be a Christian, to persuade the counsellor that he wanted help in changing his homosexual inclinations.

This led to none less than the influential Radio 4 Today programme presenting an expert, a Professor of Mental Health at University College London, to affirm that “we don’t know why people become hetero-sexual or homosexual” and to imply that our state of knowledge concerning “evolutionary advantage” is on equal terms. He also claimed that there is “absolutely no evidence” concerning a difference in the nature-nurture balance concerning the development of sexual orientation. This latter is not true – there is consid-erable evidence concerning the relationship with a father which, for whatever reason, have been wounded – which evidence has been aired in recent media discussions. Concerning the former “evolutionary” claims these are surely false – however often they are repeated in our culture. Common sense does tell us something significant about why people become heterosexual – namely the ability to reproduce the species. Producing babies is acknowledged by virtually all biologists as one of the most fundamental drives in the evolution of life. Heterosexuality is profoundly natural in a way that same sex attraction is not.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church (n. 2357-9) gives a clear and balanced overview of the Church’s position in this delicate area which we will comment upon in this space shortly. We also will mention some other relevant & prominent falsehoods that relate to a current Channel 4 series which has been described by the leading broadcasting watchdog, Mediawatch, as “soft porn”. For the time being one would note that, given what such watchdogs feel is acceptable, this comment makes it immoral for most of us to watch it!

Fifth Sunday of the Year A 6th February 2011

A CULTURE OF DECEIT? - PART 2
Two weeks ago we wrote in this space about some immoral deceit (see our website), and received quite a bit of feedback. We referred to the so-called “sting” operation when it is applied to people against whom there is little or no evidence of serious malpractice. This telling of serious lies seems to have become a culturally acceptable practice in post-Christian Britain, at least when the results sell lots of newspapers to the British populace. Even when, as in the Daily Telegraph case in question, the victims are our legitimate leaders. Thus we see that the value of truth and of appropriate respect of authority has become profoundly relativised in our agnostic culture. We would also note that prurient interest in other people’s, especially “celebrities”, dirty washing plays a significant part in this dynamic and is another symptom of distance from God.

We then went on to mention an even more recent ‘sting’ by a homosexual “activist” of a Christian psychotherapist, inviting her to counsel in the light of Christian teaching on homosexuality - which is the supposed crime – and then recording her so doing. The Independent proudly published the activist’s own account and the psychotherapists’ Professional Conduct Panel dutifully summoned her. The case is adjourned after claimed intimidation of defence witnesses.

Now, in the last week, we have heard of a second Christian couple, running their own home as a B&B, being prosecuted for having refused to give a double room to a homosexual couple. This follows the case of Mr and Mrs Bull, parents of a young family, who were recently fined £3,600 for refusing to allow a same-sex couple to sleep together in their (the Bull’s) own family home.

Andrea Minichiello Williams, of the Christian Legal Centre, commented appositely: “The level of intolerance against those who wish to live by their faith ... appears to be reaching endemic proportions.” “Gay rights” increasingly trump Christian rights and reason. Actually, as Pope Benedict powerfully pointed out here last year, a coherent concept of “rights” is rooted in God.

It is timely to review the balanced approach of Catholic teaching concerning homosexuality. Here’s some snippets from the Catechism of the Catholic Church. You can look up the full text yourselves in your family’s copy. It is fairly self-explanatory- though given the massive cultural advance of materialistic philosophy in recent times we will offer a few comments shortly.

2357 [Homosexuality’s] 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." ... Under no circumstances can they be approved.
2358 ... [The homosexual] inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, & sensitivity...[avoiding] unjust discrimination 2359 ... by the virtues,...friendship, by prayer & ...grace, they can ... gradually... approach...perfection.