Angelqueen.org Is “love the sinner, hate the sin” biblical? April 1, 2013 Posted by tantamergo on Blog for Dallas Area Catholics _veneremurcernui.wordpress.com/2013/04/01/is-love-the-sinner-hate-the-sin-bi blical/_ (http://veneremurcernui.wordpress.com/2013/04/01/is-love-the-sinner-hate-the-sin-biblical/) I was reading the Bible on Good Friday, and came across yet another explicit condemnation of contraception, or, more generally, taking acts that offend against the natural end of procreation. This was in Leviticus 15, confirmed again in Dt 23:10, which is even more explicitly condemned in Gn 29 in the story of Onan. And while I was interested to see another biblical condemnation of what the Church has always held to be true – going back to the very earliest teachings of the Apostles, the Didache – I was also moved to think about how the Lord, through Moses, referred to those who engaged in impure acts as defiled, and unclean, and certainly unfit to offer sacrifice at the Temple/Tabernacle. In having re-read much of the Pentateuch recently, I have noted that the Lord frequently condemned those who had engaged in various sinful activities in the strongest terms. Not the sin they engaged in, but the perpretrators themselves. Our Lord did not just engage in strong rhetoric:when two sons of Aaron, Nadab and Abiu, committed blasphemy by offering “strange,” possibly magical fire before the Lord, Lv 10 reports that the Lord destroyed them, immediately, for their sin. In Lv 18, after mandating against all manner of sexual depravity, the Lord said through Moses (Lv 18:29) “Every soul t hat shall commit any of these abominations, shall perish from the midst of his people,” which perishing meant they would be destroyed by divine action. That’s a kind of final judgment and punishment that seems to point towards a divine approbation against not just the sin, but the person who commits the sin. Now, one could argue that that was the old law, which is no longer operative, and they would have a point. But our Savior spoke quite frequently of sheep and goats, pious and sinners. He also stated that he came not to abolish the law, but to fulfill it. There doesn’t seem to be a strong distinction in this regard to persons, and the sins they commit, in Jesus testimony. In fact, since mortal sin requires consent of the will and, frequently, the commission of a bodily act, it would seem the entire person is involved. Before I go further, I should state that I recognize that, even with the most hardened sinner, we must have compassion on them, for they are still the child of God. We should not hold ourselves aloof, pretending we are somehow better. For, all have sinned. If “love the sinner” means have compassion on them, pray for them, work to convert them, then I’m all for it. But I am concerned that, quite frequently, “love the sinner, hate the sin” becomes a sort of cover for “love the sinner, cover up for/explain away/minimize the sin.” I know, such an elegant turn of phrase! In our modern culture, where “judging” someone and making them “feel bad” is about the gravest evil one can commit (whereas serial infidelity or engaging in the grossest of sexual depravity is just one of many lifestyle choices), I have to wonder if many people don’t view sin as a sort of disembodied act of evil, something separate from the person, something that almost “happens” to a person, rather than being committed by a person. But this is nonsense. Commission of a mortal sin requires full consent of the will – and those lost in fundamentally sinful lifestyles like addiction or sexual depravity are, in a sense, almost inseparable from the sins they commit, and sometimes glory in. Anyway, the final prompt for this post was Cardinal Dolan’s very weak defense of marriage and his inability to condemn homosexual acts over the weekend, during his PR offensive on the Sunday talk shows [tantamergo's comments in brackets]. Cardinal Timothy Dolan of New York told ABC’s George Stephanopoulos that he thinks the Catholic Church could do a lot to improve its relationship with gays and lesbians. Dolan told Stephanopoulos on This Week that the Church isn’t “anti-anbody.”Dolan acknowledge that gays and lesbians feel unwelcome in the Church but the Church doesn’t want them to feel that way though.[Umm.......this is just very muddled. Why make it an issue of being "welcome?" Why not say, we know that homosexual acts are terribly sinful and destructive to the soul. We know true happiness cannot come to someone lost in this sin. We welcome those who are lost in this lifestyle to come to the Church and come to understand the beauty of God's redemptive love which acts through a repentant soul........etc etc....] Stephanopoulous asked Dolan about how he would respond to a hypothetical gay Catholic couple that wanted to be active in the Church and raise a family in it. “God loves you and you were made in God’s image and likeness and we want your happiness,” he said he would tell them but added that “We gotta do better to see that our defense of marriage is not reduced to an attack on gay people. And I admit, we haven’t been too good at that. We try our darndest to make sure we’re not anti-anybody,” Dolan said. [Well, what do you mean by "attack?" Some examples would be helpful. Is it an "attack" to inform a person they are in a state of grave sin and in desperate need of conversion and repentance? Is it charitable to leave them rather comfortable in their sin? Could "we don't want to be perceived as attacking anybody" actually be a cover for "I don't want to stick my neck out and condemn a politically sensitive sin?" How about your failure to defend marriage, Cardinal Dolan?] Once again, the “sentiment trumps all” theme predominates. But is true charity to not exhort souls to conversion, to not call a sin, a sin? Why cannot Cardinal Dolan just plainly state “the Church has always known homosexual acts to be gravely sinful, it was constantly condemned in Scripture, and since we love souls and what is good for them, we have to try to convince people to repent and leave their sins?” Is that really too hard?
-- -- Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community <[email protected]> Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
