Where has Francis made it clear what the Church teaches regarding homosexuality AND homosexual acts? Why do you think that homosexuals consider him person of the year? How does "Who am I to judge?" teach Catholic teaching on homosexuality? Comments against gay marriage isn't enough.
If comments against gay marriage isn't enough then what is? Maybe the problem is that people are not listening.
The issue of "Who am I to judge" was in the context of the sinner and in the context of some who are in the Church seeking God with good will. If we break the bruised reed it may send a soul that otherwise might be saved to Hell. Then we also will go to Hell for our hardness of heart.
So if we TELL someone that Sodomites are going to Hell, which they surely are, we have a hardness of heart? I'd thought that was our Faith?!
In case you haven't read THE WHOLE verse: "The bruised reed he shall not break: and smoking flax he shall not extinguish: till he send forth judgment unto victory.
Haydock wrote that Sts. Jerome and Hilary (and Haydock) means Our Lord will protect the weak and infirm
until the day they are judged. So, Our Lord came, and He was gentle, but didn't lie, or pretend
, or other such lies of the devil. Then He told us to go forth and convert, Baptising, so some might
avoid an eternity in Hell.
Given that we are all
sinners, and that Jesus' response to the adulterous woman was "Go and sin no more
" (that last part is getting lost these days, it seems), I think we have to assume the "bruised reeds" in this context are not the proud Sodomites with a loud voice.
In fact, in what universe
are the infirm and the weak
to be understood as the proud, unrepentant Sodomites? Uh, we know the endgame here; the "spoilers", because God has revealed it, and the proud and unrepentant go to HELL. They are THE DAMNED. They KNOW it, and we should know it.
I seriously can't wrap my mind around you, Poche, saying the proud Sodomites are the "bruised reeds" here. We have so many candidates for "the meek", "the weak", and "the infirm", like:
• the homeless
• the mentally ill
• the disabled
• the working poor
• the VICTIMS OF PAEDO RAPE
• those who lost access to Mass
• the lonely
• those who can't dress themselves in the morning
• those with cancer
• those in war-torn countries
...I can't even begin to enumerate all the legitimately "weak" or "infirm" people without a voice
on this planet; those few I dotted above barely scratch the surface of the unfortunates on this planet. But you know who is not
weak or infirm? Anyone who picks up a copy of the Advocate, which by definition is a voice (and a particularly loud, obnoxious, and proud voice at that).
I fear your post reads like you're kicking dirt in the face of those who lay on the street most in need of a sip of water, as you run past them with a fire hose to fill the pools of the fat cats with a publication and plenty of voice who are, in fact, The Damned. They could rename the magazine "Sodom Today" and it might just offend Sodom and Gomorrah.
I'm not trying to pick on you; I usually think your posts lend a different point of view to threads here; a calm, modifying voice. Maybe you're having a bad day and lost it for a moment; that happens to me often. But we can't step that
far away from Holy Scriptures when we're angry to defend someone we might want to apologize for.
If the Word of God breaks something, as it is prophesied to do (really it is!!), then God is merely preparing that something for the fires of Hell. For destruction. They're not the "bruised reeds", anymore than the rich and proud who claim they don't NEED God. Praying for such might be one thing; representing them as the meek,
though? Oh no; the proud Sodomites are NOT the poor in spirit referred to in Scriptures.