the big kerfuffle in the trad Catholic blogosphere is a funeral for a trans atheist that was celebrated with what we old fashioned types used to call blasphemy and obscenity.

Sorry, I'm a great grandmom and still remember those times.

But more thoughtful people are also disturbed about the episode:

First Things:

As a number of individuals associated with the funeral commented to the press, Jesus did not turn people away and even welcomed prostitutes. That is true. But the key thing to remember is that he did not offer them affirmation. He offered them the possibility of forgiveness and grace and liberation from the self-destruction to which they were in bondage.

as a doc who has seen too many sick and dying, I am happy that this writer recognized what was really going on: to deny the of the reality of death:  

 Billy Porter might use the word “grace,” but upon his lips it is an empty cypher that connotes nothing but feckless sentimentalism and impotence in the face of an overwhelming reality—death—to which he has no response.

italics mine. 

And, most tragically of all, he and his friends seem to think that (death) is something to celebrate. Desecrating the cathedral is not the only thing they should be ashamed of.

Sigh.

the poor lady wasn't even given the dignity of knowing her friends mourned her passing.

it says a lot that the cause of death was not reported. 

So I wonder: How much of their shouting was not to silence the opposition of "normals" by ridiculing what they hold sacred, but to silence the small quiet voice of conscience, and to silence the suspicion that the person died in a state of despair?

================

in a semi related matter: Kuya said he was tired of Hallmark movies and shoot-em-ups, so how about a story that teaches you about history, different cultures, and how people lived in different times and places.

So I showed him this film:

one of the themes in the film is: how do you forgive yourself when you've committed the worst sin? (In the film, the Robert Deniro Character kills his beloved brother). 

You can chose to shout that you are proud of the deed and shake your fist at heaven. But at the end of the day, often what happens is trying to lose the guilt by using alcohol, drugs, partying, risk taking, etc. and often the person dies of suicide either directly or from self harm/overdose/DUI.

The DeNiro character was essentially starving himself to death and refused to see those who sought to help him. Until the Jesuit came to him and offered him a third way: repentance, penance and ultimately forgiveness, including forgiving himself for what he did.

but the film is also about different cultures.

It says a lot about today's world that missionaries who would place a mission with indigenous people are now condemned for destroying their culture and for converting them. 

But of course, what is the alternative? Missions are not about simply preaching to the heathen, and the PC books that push this idea are either naive or stupid.

 Missionaries come first, teach people that there are alternative beliefs. The good of the culture is praised, and the negative and harmful things are slowly discouraged. And then one tries to reshape the culture so that they can cope with the changes that will certainly come.

So you build society and a community: you teach literacy, cleanliness, supply medical help, and then you encourage skills in trades and agriculture, such as introducing advanced methods to grow crops. In such a way, the people can continue with the good parts of their culture, but adapt in ways  to survive in the more modern world.

The film also tackles a subject that I know about but few Yanks have had to confront: When given the choice between slavery/tyranny and fighting back, which do you chose?

This film was made at a time when the Jesuits were pushing liberation theology in South America and in parts of Africa, but alas the Jesuits went too far and made socialist revolution their god, and forgot about the God part of life, and the result was a lot of dead people killed in their clueless revolutions, and a lot of Catholics leaving the church of socialism for the local Protestant Church that taught about Christ.

Revolutions can indeed be considered a just war.

The problem? Most of them replace a bad government with a worse one.

 I witnessed this in Zimbabwe: when the just war was won by the rebels, the result was not peace but plundering the land by those who won, and since there had been a desensitization of killing, you had the idea that murder of the political opposition for good reasons was okay.

the movie asks: What would Jesus do, and the answer is: refuse to kill and probably die with your people.

 But others would say: Lay down your life fighting to save your friends.

not an easy thing to answer.

But I must also point out that there is a third way: Peaceful resistance.

In the film, the Jeremy Irons character greets the conquering army with the Blessed sacrament and prayer. Any practicing Catholic would pause at this point and maybe change their mind.

But it doesn't stop them: Mainly because the DeNiro character chose violent resistance, and helped other Indians to ambush the soldiers coming to enslave them..., and so the soldiers saw every Indian as the enemy and the procession as a trap.

Sometimes, the peaceful opposition works: Martin Luther King, the fall of the Iron curtain, and the People power revolution here in the Philippines all showed how people of faith could peacefully overthrow tyranny.

a lesson for Gaza, and a lesson for the Ukraine, and maybe a lesson for right wing Yanks who seem eager to go to war with their enemies instead of trying to make them friends.