> Did it occur to you, that some of the limericks, would have appeared to
> be in very poor taste to those who do hold religious beliefs? The same
> applies to some of the comments on the banned film on Teresa of Avila.
There seems to be > hegemonic view on the list that its members are
non-believers. Hence > personages or objects of veneration are fair
game for crude jokes but > convictions about the rightness or
wrongness of homosexual behavior are > may not even be criticized in
relatively civil language. Why are crude
> limericks about medieval saints funny but a crude joke about a gay person
> would (I assume, judging from the response to Joe Pope's non-joking
> statement) be instantly denounced.
> And why can't someone who thinks sodomy is wrong say so without being
> called a bigot? Why can someone who thinks sodomy is right call someone
> who says sodomy is wrong a bigot, ignoramus etc. without being ashamed of
> his incivility?
>
> Dennis Martin
Mr Martin,
Your post requires a response from me, as I believe I have been
quoted out of context on this issue. If you will recall, I stated
quite clearly that the idea of a politically correct thought police
controlling what is said on the list is not good. Further, I stated
that banning someone from the list because they present (presumably)
unpopular views is also a risky business.
I was not rude to Mr Pope in any way, nor did I call him names. My
objection to his post was based on the fact that biblical
pronouncements on the issue are very vague, and must be considered in
light of the time and culture, and should not be generalized. I fully
respect others' beliefs that I disagree with, but anyone who makes
such a statement should inform themselves of all of the possible
interpretations. Sadly, too many do not. I'm afraid that just because
something is in the Bible does not mean it must be taken without
question. I'm sorry if that offends, but it is in line with most
current theological thinking. The Bible is a complex work, assembled
at many different times in different cultures by many different
people. Indeed, one of the so-called condemnations of homosexual
practice occurs in I Timothy, which was not even written by Paul.
I recommend to all interested that you read "What the Bible REALLY
says about Homosexuality" (Alamo Square Press, 1995), by Daniel A.
Helminiak, a Catholic priest. Written primarily for believing
Catholics, it is valuable to all readers, and clearly presents much of
the current scholarship on the issue.
As to the issue of limericks, I stated at the time that I had no
intention of offending anyone, and had no malice toward Christianity,
or any other religion. They were a silly diversion, nothing more. I
doubt that anyone would be offended at poking fun at a saint named
Superius, so-called because it was the name of a corpse found on top
of a dead saint! Most modern Catholics would have no more devotion to
such a figure than they would endorse the Inquisition or the witch
hunts.
I do not presume that this list is composed of "non-believers", but
rather people of all backgrounds who share a common interest in
medieval religion. My own spirituality is essentially non-Christian;
does that make me damned as well? Am I going to be told that my
beliefs are "wrong"?
My PhD concerns the subject of Christian holy war and its
relationship to Islam as the perceived enemy during the first two
crusades. I detest war, considering it the greatest of evils. This is
a deeply-held, spiritual belief of mine. If George were to post an
advertisement about a medieval conference on war or military history,
how would everyone feel if I wrote in saying "Please do not endorse
this, as warfare is wrong". Most people do feel that war is wrong, but
the response from list contributors would probably be "Tim, shut up.
Don't let your personal views come into this." And rightly so. It is
a medieval topic, just like the homosexuality conference, and thus
would be entirely appropriate to the list.
I'm sorry sir, but your post to me was out of order, and didn't take
into account all of these things. Mr Pope must have known that his
posting would be provocative, and it could have been sent privately to
George, if he really feels that strongly. If someone truly feels that
homosexuality is wrong, they will have to do more than fall back on a
few vague biblical quotes for evidence, and such a debate is not
relevant to this list.
Tim Rayborn
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|