Rome, Italy, Apr 27, 2017 / 09:01 pm (CNA/EWTN News).- A leading scholar in the Arab world has applauded the goodwill of both the Vatican and the prestigious Islamic al-Azhar university Pope Francis will visit for aiming to increase Catholic-Muslim dialogue.
But she also issued a warning that goodwill isn’t enough for things to change.
“Dialogue is good, generally any dialogue is good. Any kind of debate and any steps to show goodwill, to show a commitment, to show a recognition of the other in principle is very good,” Mariz Tadros told CNA in an interview.
However, “the extent to which this will translate into a change in eliminating or reducing the appeal of militant Islam, that’s what I’m questioning.”
Tadros, who spoke over Skype from the U.K., is an author and scholar on persecution in the Arab world. She is currently a fellow at the Institute of Development Studies at Sussex University in the U.K.
She spoke ahead of Pope Francis’ April 28-29 visit to Cairo, where he is set to meet with Coptic Pope Tawadros II and the Grand Imam of the Mosque of al Azhar, Sheikh Ahmed Mohamed el-Tayyib, as well as Egypt’s president Abdel Fattah el-Sisi and the bishops of the local Catholic Church.
His visit comes as the result of a recent thawing in relations between the Vatican and the al-Azhar University, which had been strained since 2011. The imam of al-Azhar is considered by some Muslims to be the highest authority the 1.5-billion strong Sunni Muslim world and oversees Egypt’s al-Azhar Mosque and the prestigious University attached to it.
Dialogue picked up between the two after el-Tayyib visited the Vatican in May 2016 with a message condemning the acts of Islamic fundamentalism, culminating a year later in the Pope’s visit to Egypt this weekend.
However, in addition to the heightened prospect for dialogue, the trip will also have an inevitable undertone of the very real risks Christians still face in Egypt, particularly from extremist factions of militant Islam.
While Catholic-Muslim dialogue has picked up over the past year, so have attacks against Coptic Christians.
According to His Grace Bishop Angaelos, general bishop of the Coptic Orthodox Church in the United Kingdom, there have been at least 40 reported murders of Christians in Egypt in the past four months alone.
In February 2015, Egyptian society was shocked by the grisly beheading 20 Orthodox Coptic faithful in Libya carried out by ISIS, the video of which was circulated online. The extremists have also claimed responsibility for several other high-profile attacks, including a bombing at St. Mark’s Coptic Orthodox Cathedral in Cairo in December that killed 29 people.
Most recently, ISIS claimed responsibility for twin bombings in Tanta and Alexandria April 9 that left some 45-people dead. The blasts took place on Palm Sunday, one of the holiest days in the Christian calendar commemorating Jesus’ entrance into Jerusalem before his Passion and Death.
With these attacks looming closely in the rear-view mirror, many are asking whether the Pope’s attention to dialogue with Islam, particularly his relationship with al-Azhar and his trip to Egypt, will make a difference.
The debate surrounding al-Azhar
According to Tadros, the prospect of any dialogue is good and shouldn’t be discouraged. However, she cautioned that despite the well-intentioned gesture of meeting with the Pope and cementing good relations with the Holy See, there is still cause for concern regarding al-Ahar – particularly the university’s duplicitous curriculum.
“When we look at institutions such as al-Azher, there have been many Egyptian non-Islamist Muslims, very progressive Muslims, who have sought to hold al-Azhar accountable for the duality of its discourse,” she said.
On one hand, “al-Azhar will sit with you and say we love you, we care for you, we’re all one citizenship, we’re all one people.” But on the other hand, “if you look at the syllabi, what they are teaching the generations of scholars that graduate from that university about the religious other, it is horrendous.”
What they are teaching is “undoubtedly a message that these are infidels, and at best they should be tolerated and at worst, killing them is not such a travesty.”
If one actually looks at what comes out of al-Azhar, “there’s a massive, massive disconnect between the public discourse and what is being taught to people across the country,” she said, explaining that there have been several moderate Muslim activists who have called on the university to reform their syllabi, including a man who was jailed for his activism, but who has recently been released.
While al-Azhar is seen by many militant Islamic groups as lacking legitimacy for not following the “right path” of Islam, others have criticized the university for failing to speak out strongly enough when condemning extremist groups such as ISIS.
Many have asked al-Azhar to put their money where their mouth is, so to speak, and declare ISIS as “un-Islamic.” In short, it’s no longer good enough to simply condemn what they are doing, but the entity itself must be recognized as not being faithful to the Muslim religion.
“As a Christian you can tell me, ‘if you lie that is not consistent with Christianity,’ but you are not telling me, ‘for shooting people in the name of Christianity, you no longer belong to Christianity.’ Do you see the difference?” Tadros said.
But when it comes to Al-Azhar, they have “consistently cowed away from declaring ISIS as not part of the Islamic community.”
Although some might say making such a declaration is playing into the game of name-calling and labeling one another as infidels, Tadros stressed that “unless you tell the broader international community that those who kill and maim and commit genocide in the name of Islam no longer are part of the Islamic community, they do not have the right to claim themselves as Muslim,” nothing will change.
That, she said, is “a very different story and they have cowed away from doing that.”
Tadros clarified that she is “in no way” saying that dialogue between Pope Francis and al-Tayeeb isn’t good or that it shouldn’t happen. “All I’m saying is let’s not count on that as a way of making militant Islam less appealing.”
She stressed that there are “a lot of Muslims” that have shown solidarity with Christians in Egypt, including speaking out on their behalf after the most recent bombings earlier this month, proving that not all Muslims espouse the radical views of ISIS or other like-minded branches.
However, while not all Muslims are extremists, she said history has proven that no matter how much dialogue is done, fundamentalism will never entirely disappear from Islam.
When asked if she thought this was a realistic eventual outcome of the dialogue between the Vatican and al-Azhar, she said “absolutely not.”
“I think that is the biggest myth that exists in the West and it’s a myth that history has dispelled and is it a myth, the perpetuation of which, only serves to increase the vulnerability of religious minorities in the Middle East. In fact, I would say it directly contributes to it.”
The growing threat of militant Islam “is one that we should not take lightly,” she said, “because they are networked.”
“Even though organizationally they follow different leaders, there are links between them, they are well-resourced, they are recruiting people globally from around the world, and they represent an existential threat to Christians and religious pluralism and all kinds of pluralism in the region.”
So while the importance of dialogue as an expression of finding common values and forging friendships across religions should be appreciated, it should only be valued to the extent that true goodwill and respect for the religious other result, she said.
“But I do support those who challenge their effectiveness in making militant Islam more appealing or undermining its power and influence and implications for Christian minorities.”
A history of persecution
Christian persecution has happened on and off for centuries in Egypt, but this intolerance recently spiked in the 1970s under President Anwar Sadat, who empowered radical Islamists, but was assassinated by fundamentalist army officers in 1981.
A period of higher tolerance ensued after Sadat’s death, but attacks targeting Christians picked back up during the Egyptian Revolution of 2011.
The 2011 revolution, part of the Arab Spring, had overthrown Hosni Mubarak, a military officer who had been Egypt’s president since 1981. The following year Morsi, of the Islamist movement the Muslim Brotherhood, became the first democratically elected Egyptian president.
On July 3, 2013, Egypt’s military ousted Morsi, and in August began a crackdown on the Muslim Brotherhood. Violence then spread across the country, with Islamists killing hundreds of people from August to October. Churches were vandalized, burned, and looted, as were the homes and businesses of Christians.
In January 2014, the interim government approved a new constitution, leading to the May 2014 election of Abdel Fattah el-Sisi as the country’s new president. The elections were boycotted by the Muslim Brotherhood as well as other political groups.
Tadros explained that part of the chaos after the revolution was due to “a complete breakdown in public safety and law and order” in which police left the streets and organized groups of “thugs” took over, meaning public safety was no longer a guarantee.
With a lack of secure borders given the crisis in Egypt and the collapse of nearby Libya, extremists became emboldened, and began smuggling and trading weapons with greater confidence and ease.
Radical Islam also began to take on different forms in this time, Tadros said, explaining that whereas previously terrorists were homegrown and committed smaller acts of violence, the rise of factions such as ISIS looking to impose maximum damage through suicide bombs is new.
“The fact that ISIS is now a player is a game-changer,” she said, explaining that with an increase in deadly attacks, there is greater need for security. However, she voiced doubt that the current state of emergency declared by el-Sisi in wake of the April 9 bombings will be effective in terms of protecting Copts.
From a scholarly and historic point of view, emergency law has done nothing, she said, noting that it was implemented by both Mubarak and Morsi when they were in power, “and in both cases it was not conducive to the well-being of the Egyptian population in general.”
Since his election el-Sisi has been praised for receiving representatives from both the Orthodox and Catholics, as well as Protestants.
However, even though the situation has “officially” improved under el-Sisi, who has said and done the right things, Tadros said the improvement is due not so much to el-Sisi’s efforts as it is to the fact that Morsi was driven from power.
“The situation under el-Sisi is very complicated, because on the one hand there is an improvement in the Copts’ everyday experience. Not directly as a consequence of any of el-Sisi’s policies by any stretch of the imagination, but it is an unintended outcome of ousting Morsi,” she said.
“Never in the modern history of the Copts have they been such a target of militant targeting as they are today,” she said, explaining that if fundamentalists want to target Copts, there is realistically little that can be done to stop them.
How can Christians be helped?
With Christians in Egypt increasingly becoming a target of systematic violence and a bleak prospect of effective help from the government, Tadros suggested several things that can be done now to help the 9 million-strong Coptic community in Egypt.
First, “security is crucial,” she said, explaining that the ability to ensure basic protection of schools, places of worship such as churches and monasteries, and faith-based organizations, “is extremely important.”
Another essential help is “drying out the sources of funding,” Tadros said, noting that currently “we do have a problem with Saudi Arabia, Qatar and other Arab countries funding Islamist movements.”
“They have to be named and shamed, and even if it goes to the point of economic sanctions against any country that funds Islamist movements, that would significantly help the Christians,” she said, adding that this is “one of those unintended outcomes: if you remove their sources of income, they can’t buy arms, and therefore their ability to strike is significantly decreased.”
A third option Tadros mentioned is the growth and promotion of solidarity among the different churches in the region. As an example, the scholar noted how Pope Francis called Coptic Pope Tawadros personally to offer his sympathies after the April 9 attacks.
“We need to see more of that,” she said, stressing the need for Christians of all rites and practices to band together, because “divided we fall, united we’re strong.”
Finally, she pointed to the importance of raising awareness in international Christian communities of the “existential threat” that Christians in the Middle East face.
“We’re no longer talking about what we saw in Egypt four or five years ago where it’s a number of Muslim mobs burning a number of houses,” she said. “We are now talking about a broader, new strategic plan to eliminate Christianity from the region.”
The global community, she said, needs to “raise awareness and sensitize their congregations of the need to support the churches in the Middle East” in various ways, such as through prayer and concrete initiatives that will help those who have lost everything to rebuild their lives.
Another important aspect is “strengthening local Christian civil society,” she said, “because sometimes Church leadership, such as in the case of Egypt, find themselves in a position where they can’t come out and criticize governments, there’s too much at stake.”
“So you need Christian civil society that play the role of monitoring the situation, raising alarm bells when they see signs of genocide and of strengthening local initiatives.”
Holding governments accountable is also part of the equation, she said, sometimes by “criticizing the government, and sometimes mobilizing against government policy if it’s not going to be conducive to citizenship.”
[…]
There it is again, ‘Mal’.
Where is Francis?
I know Ramjet, it is big news in many Catholic websites.
However, this is not in keeping with the agenda put forward by Pope Francis. He has made it clear that the discussions should be about Church structure and how best we could evangelize in today’s world.
Also remember this: lots of topics might be discussed by different organizations all over the world, including the non-western members of our ever-increasing Church. What is important is what is finally proclaimed by the Pope.
The article states: “These persons are called to fulfill God’s will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord’s Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.” Is this not what the Church teaches?
What are you missing here? You quote the article in your final sentence, yet that is not what the German Synodal Way calls for, rather 7 demands are made that the Church “must” change her teaching, that Church Doctrine “need to be revised on the basis of theological and human-scientific findings.” That is inconsistent with your quote “… if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord’s Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.”
Add to that, the “…basis of theological and human-scientific findings” which is rolled out is smoke. There are no theological and scientific findings that support
adherence to the 7 demands called for by the Synodal drafters.
Just think about it — the parallel to demands made in the USA these days on the same basis, namely, theological and scientific findings. It is just so much smoke for managers (politician, doctors and law makers) to either dismiss what is Catholic Doctrine or to impose unjust laws.
What no one who supports this German “synodal way” that demands the Church change its teaching is, what are the “theological and scientific” findings that it is OK to be LGBQT+ and that the Holy Catholic Church needs to change our/its teaching. Where is the Theological support for this? From Theologians and Religious who TELL us that it is LGBQT+ is “normal and acceptable in todays secular world? What is the scientific support or proof that this is OK? Did God create these people this way so therefore it is our “responsibility” to change the Teaching that the acts of LGBQT+ and their incessant demand that we approve of those acts is “just and God’s will”? If this is OK why not approve of “sexual abuse”, what about infidelity in marriage, what about it is ok for sex anytime with anyone you like? None of the German Synodal way demands are valid nor are they supported by “findings” of any kind; simply stated they are required by the need to “be up to date with a God-less secular society’s requirements.
Ramjet, here is another article which exposes the deep divisions in the German Church. Here we see that Pope Francis publicly received a document from a delegation of German Catholics who attended his regular weekly public audience, who oppose the group of Bishops seeking to control the discussions. https://www.catholicculture.org/news/headlines/index.cfm?storyid=53442
We are tutored: “What is important is what is finally proclaimed by the Pope.” Yes, if all goes well, but the question for some, however, is whether Pope Francis will proclaim anything at all?
Some questions:
FIRST, will the Holy Father exercise his option to remain silent as he has with the dubia? Nothing proclaimed and nothing rejected? In a relevant interview (posted somewhere on CWR), Cardinal Grech, General Secretary for the Synod, recently speculated on whether (problematic) results from the continental synods might first have to be recirculated back to their originators? Then what? An unresolved and evolving federation of continental/synodal churches? He also expressed present uncertainty (this is my memory) what to do if matters of doctrine were contested (surely as already with Germany).
SECOND, would the unresolved packages then remain in play? And might some simply default into the attitude that the “endless process” of synodality IS the end product? A “symphony,” or a possible cacophony of parts? And, would this possible incoherence—-the synodal process itself—-finally posture itself as the needed unanimity for sensus fidei, simply/simplistically because everyone had participated?
THIRD, does all of the above boil down to the future role of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF) and how this office might fit with the awaited new super-dicastery for Evangelization? Does the lowest common denominator become the new Tradition—-generic Christianity?
FOURTH, this trajectory…an extrapolation beyond even what Martin Luther had in mind when he affirmed the Creed, surely, but diluted Tradition and the communal sacrifice of the Mass into only a communion within an assembly? Along the way, why are priests—-acting in persona Christi—-neutered into replaceable “presiders,” and now in the synodal process itself, why are bishops—-the successors of the apostles who are accountable for at least the Deposit of Faith—-to function “primarily as facilitators” (the Vademecum)?
IN SHORT, the infiltrating (!) novelties of the German “synodal way,” How, When, and by Whom will such blood-sucking leaches be peeled off from the Eucharistic and Mystical Body of Christ?
Synodality: “Communion, Participation, Mission”…Quo vadis? Just askin’…
Thank you. Real freedom is Freedom from sin. The Bible is very clear on the subject. Anyways our short life on earth is to Love and Serve God in this life and be happy with Our Lord in the next. We are not here to please ourselves. The Ten Comandments are written in stone, and are commands not suggestions. Nevertheless we are free to choose not change.
The organizers of the dissatisfied church-of-one-sown in Germany cherry-pick one sentence from the Catechism of the Catholic Church relating to prevalence of persons with homosexual tendency. They accept one sentence but denounce the next which asserts the homosexual tendency is ‘OBJECTIVELY DISORDERED.’
They claim that Christ’s bride defames. Why not leave it? They claim that Christ’s bride is outdated. What age should she be?? Why not join the hordes of heretics, apostates, and schismatics throughout history who’ve who said same? Why is your claim to entitlement special or unique to keep you ‘members’ of Christ’s Mystical Body?
Do you really believe that staying within the Church while spouting such sin will bring Christ or His family to “know” and “love” you on Judgment Day? Why stay in a Church which gives such offense? Why not create your own personal made-to-order misery-loves-company club?
If I were Christ and the info in this article appeared in my face, spit would fly.
The title of the Synodal forum was: “Living in Successful Relationships.:”
That title is a dead give-away.
One of Pope Francis’s favourite theologians – Prof. Dr. Anne-Marie Pelletier – at the time of the Synod on the Family said that in our enlightened age we must accept ‘successive fidelities’. In other words serial adultery. Cardinal Marx was there listening to her. I suspect these have now become successful relationships of the successive kind.
More of the same. Surprise, surprise.
We read: “Because with the Synodal Way, we learn to understand more deeply that sexual orientation and gender identity are part of the person…” And, yet, those outside of the synodal-way bubble are less well-groomed in these matters. A partial sampling:
FIRST, one recent study of two hundred peer-reviewed studies on sexual orientation and gender identity: The conclusion: scientific evidence does not support the popular notion that “gender identity is an innate, fixed property of human beings that is independent of biological sex” (Mayer/McHugh, The New Atlantis: A Journal of Technology and Society, Ethics and Public Policy Center, No. 50, Fall 2016).
SECOND, research into the human genome: https://news.yahoo.com/no-gay-gene-study-finds-180220669.html
THIRD, if you say it often enough (synodally!), then it must be so: A recent study completed at University College London (using MRI technology) strongly implies that a habit of lying tends to suppress the part of the brain (the amygdala) that responds emotionally to a “slippery slope” pattern of small and then larger lies (Garrett/Ariely/ Laxxaro, Nature Neuroscience Journal, October 24, 2016; reported by Erica Goode, New York Times, October 25, 2016).
FOURTH, just because the pope says “God made you that way,” doesn’t make it so. Instead, there’s this from some layman named St. Thomas More, in a play having more credibility than the script now being acted out in Germany: “Some men think the Earth is round, others think it flat; it is a matter capable of question. But if it is flat, will the King’s command make it round? And if it is round, will the King’s command flatten it? No, I will not sign” (Robert Bolt, “A Man [!] for All Seasons”).
QUESTION: By what pretense is sex first reversed front to back, and then the world turned upside down top-to-bottom, by a handful of imposter bishops? ANSWER: Luther approved the bigamy of Philip of Hesse, and after five centuries this one thingy leadeth to another, and another!
The German Church reminds me of King Solomon’s foreign wives.
So marriage is not about children or families after all.
It’s really all about orgasms.
Hmnh.
“I demand” that Herr Dieser and Herr Hesse be excommunicated, along with all of the Bishops, priests and laymen involved in the German sexual perversion apostasy.
“I also demand” that the Vatican City-State renounce all money flowing from all German dioceses.
Those are my “demands.”
I’m with you.
Brineyman above – that’s it in a nutshell.
Yep. Nuts protected by a shell of a church.
The German Church, barring a few faithful remnants, has become a gangrenous limb of the universal Catholic Church that needs to be amputated to save the body.
Absolutely spot on. It is sometimes proper for a man to cut off an offending limb to save his body.
Pope Pius X had it right in 1910 when he stated in his Apostolic Mandate that “Further, whilst Jesus was kind to sinners and to those who went astray, He did not respect their false ideas, however sincere they might have appeared. He loved them all, but He instructed them in order to convert them and save them. Whilst He called to Himself in order to comfort them, those who toiled and suffered, it was not to preach to them the jealousy of a chimerical equality. Whilst He lifted up the lowly, it was not to instill in them the sentiment of a dignity independent from, and rebellious against, the duty of obedience. Whilst His heart overflowed with gentleness for the souls of good-will, He could also arm Himself with holy indignation against the profaners of the House of God, against the wretched men who scandalized the little ones, against the authorities who crush the people with the weight of heavy burdens without putting out a hand to lift them. He was as strong as he was gentle. He reproved, threatened, chastised, knowing, and teaching us that fear is the beginning of wisdom, and that it is sometimes proper for a man to cut off an offending limb to save his body. Finally, He did not announce for future society the reign of an ideal happiness from which suffering would be banished; but, by His lessons and by His example, He traced the path of the happiness which is possible on earth and of the perfect happiness in heaven: the royal way of the Cross.”
A moral posture in Germany’s Synodal Way, and in Germany reflects similar Vatican developments that likely account for Pope Francis’ silence. This is the increasing acceptance of [stable] adult homosexual relationships. It may also account for a diminished CDR within Curial structure eminence now placed with Propaganda Fides. As well as: The appointment as prefect Cardinal Luis Antonio Tagle who is empathetic to such relationships. The appointment by Francis to executive positions of personnel with similar leanings Fr James Martin appointed to the Vatican’s Secretariat for Communications.
Origins for this development can be traced to Persona Humana 1975. “A distinction is drawn [with] homosexuals who are definitively such because of some kind of innate instinct or a pathological constitution judged to be incurable. People [who] conclude that their tendency is so natural that it justifies in their case homosexual relations within a sincere communion of life and love analogous to marriage. These homosexuals must certainly be treated with understanding and sustained in the hope of overcoming their personal difficulties and their inability to fit into society. Their culpability will be judged with prudence” (Persona VIII).
Although corrections were made since insofar as treating adult homosexuality as a [moral] disorder the question under apparent revision is whether it is a disorder and not a behavior inherent to the person. It is in this writer’s estimate the moral Rubicon of the day. Crossing this long held impasse would subject all moral doctrine to modification determined not by the tradition rather by the current acceptability.
This is not Catholic, if they want to change Catholic doctrine, they should break off and start their own church.
That’s already been done. I refer you to the Protestant Reformation and the tens of thousands of Christian denominations that have sprouted from it’s root. They want to drag the Catholic Church down that same path.
A telling postscript to my comment is what’s happening in our seminaries, “With a rise in social acceptance of gender-reassignment procedures, some U.S. seminaries have already been forced to deal with applicants who identify as men but are biologically women — and bishops and seminary formators have been warned to prepare for a potential increase in the number of such cases” (Ann Schneible NatCR). Will Francis intervene and declare our sovereignty as a Church or will he be silent?
If Francis is as Francis has done, our questions need no asking. O woe are we of little listening ears of hearts of little love, left to reign in rigid rules and rituals and rubrics and liturgies and mouthing of pieties and casuistries like vipers and bones of whitewashed sepulchral Pharisees. There is no room on the road, the newly reformed, remade, revised, re-paved broad swath of a path. The invited include Protestants, Hindus, Muslims, pagans, secularists, atheists, agnostics, apostates, sinners against God and nature, and vaccinated abortifacts. We arrived sans wedding garment.
What’s bound on earth is bound in heaven; a certain set of keys have SPOKEN, and we have LISTENED.
Thank God for His salvation outside which all else means nothing.
I pray and hope that transsexual females are not in any seminary! Do you know of any and which ones, if I may ask?
I’m a simple man. Genesis said that God created man and woman. That’s it…two…binary…genders/sexes/human forms or whatever you want to call it. When God saw that Adam needed a mate/partner…he didn’t say, “Adam…meet Bob.” He pulled out a rib out of Adam and crafted Eve, a woman. The Catholic Church in Germany specifically and Europe in general (as well as America) is essentially lost. Don’t forget that it was a German (Luther) who begat the “reformation” which now has how many ten’s of thousands of Christian denominations? Don’t forget that it was Germany who begat Pope (emeritus) Benedict XVI. The last Pope to abdicate was Pope Gregory XII who, ironically, abdicated in 1415 to resolve the Western schism with the Antipope in Avignon, Benedict XIII. What did Pope Benedict XVI’s abdication resolve?
We hear a lot about the Pharisees. Especially the story of the Pharisee and the publican. As I recall the Pharisee was the proud one and the publican was humbly asking for mercy and was not trying to whitewash his sins. In the modern world who has created pride movements, and expected the Church to embrace and fly pride banners/flags celebrating their lifestyle? Many of today’s sinners have the pride of the Pharisee and the lifestyle of the publican. The Good Thief on the Cross was very public about owning up to what he had done and publicly defended Christ. In the modern Church one wonders how many kindred spirits the Good Thief would find. Would he die of loneliness?
“The basic message of the Church is God’s unconditional love for all people — in their diversity and uniqueness. This must also apply to all relationships, provided they are based on love and mutual respect,” he commented.
This is partly true because we are asked to love the sinner but not the sin. Yes, it is people we love and not necessarily their deeds. In fact, if their deeds are sinful then they need to be rejected.
So, respecting relationships also must be in keeping with this call from our Lord. If a relationship is unnatural or sinful, it is not to be “loved”.
So, the last sentence in this Bishop’s quote should really read: “This must also apply to all relationships, provided they are based on love and mutual respect and God’s eternal natural law embedded in humans”.
The LGBTQAI+ is a political group with political ambitions and goals. Being recognized as a type of separate race or gender(s) is a means of piggy-backing onto civil rights legislation that overreaches its original intent. It’s a power play. The “I” (Intersex) in this ever expanding list of letters is the latest addition, it’s been appropriated for selfish means, and of all the letters it’s the only one with a factual genetic basis. I explore both these themes in these two Blog Posts.
https://humanlifereview.com/identity-alphabet-soup/
https://humanlifereview.com/life-liberty-and-the-pursuit-of-ridiculous/
Thank you. Real freedom is Freedom from sin. The Bible is very clear on the subject. Anyways our short life on earth is to Love and Serve God in this life and be happy with Our Lord in the next. We are not here to please ourselves. The Ten Comandments are written in stone, and are commands not suggestions. Nevertheless we are free to choose not change.