“Imagine saying a thing like that!”

The Irish Times report can’t quite bring itself to say the word, but no such inhibitions at the Guardian which also quotes “a leading Vatican official” calling homosexuality “a deviation, an irregularity, a wound” [an abomination? – Ed]. Indeed. As Malachi O’Doherty points out

When the MP Iris Robinson said that she found homosexuality an abomination she was pilloried by those of us who defend gays as equals and friends. Now the pope has said that ‘human ecology’ requires the abolition of homosexual activity. Nasty old Nazi. Imagine saying a thing like that! Pope Benedict has provided his critics with all the evidence they need that he is a throwback, except that you don’t get to throw a pope back to where you got him from; you are stuck with him until he dies. He tells us with from his wisdom that homosexual activity is something man has to be saved from, much as the earth has to be saved from the destruction of the rain forests. What offends here is not the recitation of the old teaching that same sex union is sinful, but the sense of proportion implied.

Of course, “the definitive emancipation of man from creation and the creator” that Benedict warns of is really Sir Francis Bacon’s fault.. natch.. Adds Others are questioning whether the pope said what he’s reported to have said. But although the original speech was only released in German and Italian, the BBC has translated extracts. And via Andrew Sullivan, here’s a reasonalble take on it at America: The National Catholic Weekly – “Although the pope didn’t specifically talk about same-sex marriage, the meaning was clear enough to prompt some unusual headlines about rain forests and homosexuals.”

, , , ,

  • veritas

    more evidence that politics and religion don`t mix, the Catholic Church has a cheek to lecture anyone about sexuality!

  • daisy

    There just isn’t enough hatred in the world, is there? Time to stoke some more.

    It would be great to see catholics around the world stand up and reject this man’s pronouncements.

  • circles

    My deleted post (the apparently way too incendiary F.T. that chap in the pointy white hat) was actually coming from my own perspective of having grown up and been educated as a catholic – thought it was nice to finally get to use it myself.
    Maybe Benedict shouldn’t worry though – I don’t think the post removal would have been half as swift had I said F.T.R.F (as in Rain Forest), so somebody stil has their traditional priorities “right” here.

  • Driftwood

    I wonder if Malachi considers Pope benedict to be a ‘prat’? It will be interesting to hear Sinn Fein and the SDLP air their views on this, but I will nor be holding my breath.

  • Yes, Malachi regards the Pope as a prat. Of course – and worse. One even has to worry about his ideas on human ecology being redolent of political and cultural influences which impressed him in his youth.

  • blinding

    This Pope is infallible only as an Idiot

    It is time for decent catholics to take a stand against this reactionary old buffoon.

    This popes reign will define the future(if it has one) of the catholic church

    He will steer it to irrelevance if it is not already there.

    He is desperately searching for demons to make his mark as other despots have done before.

    What nice bedfellows this pope(and his acolytes)make with the reactionaries of the DUP.

    This oh so brave pope declines to challenge world leaders and capitalist corruption but goes for the easy target.

    The Catholic church must ask itself what question they asked themselves when choosing their new leader and the answer was this.

  • Driftwood

    How can ‘decent’ Roman Catholics take a stand against Gods representative on earth. If they do that, surely they cease to be Catholics? At least Iris Robinson and co can be voted out of power (hopefully). But this is not an option, any more than the monarch.
    Good to hear Pat Buckley on Talkback talking a bit of common sense at least.
    Malachi, so Benedict stands alongside Dawkins in your opinion?

  • lorraine

    a priest poured water over my very young head while muttering an indecipherable language and declared me a catholic – a few years ago.

    as a catholic (albeit in name only) i would be interested to know if the pope, or any of the catholic clergy, ever indulge in a good old lump of roast pork, eat an ulster fry, or even tuck into a perfectly boiled lobster after a prawn cocktail? anybody know of any? all equally abominations before the lord(well, accoring to the good book)

    malachai, i agree:redolent of political and cultural influences which impressed him in his youth! when he nearly saved mankind from the horrors of bolshevism by decimating half of europe and most of the jews.

  • Ulsters my homeland

    Razi the Nazi is simply diverting attention from the homosexuality in the Roman Catholic church to homosexuality in society. The vast majority of the paedophile cases are actually cases of homosexuality (if we take away the age of consent).

    Same old Papal tactics, blaming the wrongs within the church to the situation outside, when he knows fine well Priests should be allowed to marry, and the problem stems from a past anti-Christ (pope) making infallible laws.

  • blinding


    You point out the absurdity of people with control on the levers of power having jobs for life.

    It is time for catholics to come clean and admit that their pope is just an old guy and is as likely as the next guy to have human frailties.

    The catholic church is a wounded animal and is hitting out at easy targets.
    On its present path I hope it is its death throes.

  • Dave

    Malachi’s theory of balanced commentary seems to be hurling invective as atheist icons and theist icons in equal monosyllabic measure.

    Homosexuality is, by definition, abnormal. So, let’s not pretend that it is a normal practice in order to comply with a dim PC agenda. Whether or not such abnormality is harmful to society is a seperate (and highly legitimate) question. If it is harmful, then society should rightfully act to protect its collective interests in whatever manner it sees fit. Censoring debate on the issue, as though it was no business of society to act in its own interests, and thereby allowing gay marriages without any consideration of the wider social impact is a foolsih practice.

    Don’t let the ‘Gay Nazis’ cower you into silence. 😉

  • Harry Flashman

    [b]”Pope in Gay Shocka!”[/b]

    “Apparently the Catholic Church disapproves of homosexuality”

    “It’s against the rules says Pope”

    Full story in pages 2,4,5, 6, & 9, major investigation in week-end supplement.


  • jone

    ‘The vast majority of the paedophile cases are actually cases of homosexuality.’

    So I take it if you raped a little girl it would actually be a case of heterosexuality?

    I think what makes this a story is as Malachi points out the knuckleheaded sense of proportion implied: Cutting down a rainforest equals copping off at the Kremlin.

  • Why am I still a UUP voter?

    But wait, there’s worse Hazza! Apparently this old weirdo SS-loving git actually believes that if you have a little drink and a tiny snack, you’re magically eating some dead Jewish cove or other. But as you so rightly imply, Has There Ever Been a Worse Thing at Christmas than a Christian Leader Restating Basic and Well Known Tenets of His Church?! I’m shocked so I am, shocked. But it is good to see that sneery Liberal intolerance certainly doesn’t take a break for the “holidays”. Wherever would be without youse lads?

  • OC

    Combining homosexuality with either homosexuality, or heterosexuality, would suggest the former would help relieve the pressure on the ecosystem by reducing the population without war, or disease. Not so the latter.

    And why the rush to “normality”? Quel square!

  • Earnan


    1. “Razi” is hardly a Nazi. Don’t be ridiculous. And in case you missed it, when he was in America he loudly and straightfowardly criticized the Church on it’s record with pedo priests and clergy. Many in the secular camp, who can hardly find a good word to say about the Church, complimented him on tackling the issue head on.

    2. He is hardly trying to divert attention away from a story (pedo priests) that is 8 years old and well known…if anything, by speaking publically on homosexuality he is asking for people to bring it up again and criticize the church more (like you are doing!!).

    Could it be that he really believes homosexuals are not healthy and need our prayers?

    I think he could take a bullet for Queen Elizabeth and you would still criticise him.

  • jone

    Yes UUP voter it’s a splendid Christmas message:

    “Goodwill to all men. Except the queers. Who are ruining it for everyone.”

  • bollix

    Every time those of us who are religious try to promote the positive side of our faith, along comes some prat pope who just fecks the whole thing up.
    Someone asked for catholics to stand up and complain about him? here I am. Ratzinger, stick to the stuff about loving your neighbour as yourself, giving all your money to the poor, turning swords into ploughshares etc. Don’t start talking utter nonsense about sexual orientation or how men are better than women.

  • Dave

    Does the Pope read Slugger?

    “Religion is designed to rescue the human race from human nature, whereas the more deluded use circular logic to see human nature as rescuing said race from religion.” – Dave, 21/12

    “The church must protect not only the earth, the water and the air as gifts of creation that belong to everyone. It must also protect man against self-destruction. The tropical forests certainly deserve our protection, but man as a creature does not deserve any less.” – Pope Benedict, 22/12

    He is correct about the gay marriage issue: it is a non sequitur. Society uses marriage as a legal structure wherein a man and a woman may produce other citizens (governs property and inheritance rights; establishes paternity, legitimacy, and the rights and responsibilities of parenthood, gives taxes breaks, etc). As science has not found a way for same sex genders to procreate, the only interest they have in marriage is in subverting social norms to promote an amoral, liberal left agenda which holds that individual rights should take precedence over societal rights.

  • Ri Na Deise

    Who cares? As if what he said will have any real effects outside of a few oddballs who like to be offended anyway. Where is the commitment from the pope to deal with the real elephant in the room and turn any evidence regarding paedophile priests over to the respective authorities where cases occurred,rather than re-homing said perverts somewhere else?

    Has the church even any relevance these days outside of aforementioned oddballs?

    What a man/woman, man/man, woman/woman get up to in privacy in their own time is nobody elses business.

  • Paul O’Toole

    The issue of homosexuality is one which is dividing both the catholic and anglican churches.

    As an atheist (albeit one who has been known to say the odd hail mary on a plane!) I can see the churches’ problem, on the one hand they have to stay true to what they believe, and what they believe (no matter how wrongly) is that homosexuality is a sin, if they admit that this is unjustifiable and unnacceptable then where do all of their other beliefs stand?

    How do you risk giving up all that power and influence for the sake of being decent human beings and admitting that in the end, no matter what someones sexuality, the only thing which matters is whether ot not they are a decent person.

  • eranu

    that homosexuality is a sin is something all Christian faiths agree on (as far as i know). its not new news.
    the interesting thing to ponder here is the reaction of the secular world when they encounter a different set of rights and wrongs that contradicts their world view. basically they freak out and cant handle it! they immediately lose their minds throwing all sorts of insults but unable to make a sensible point to show how they’re right and the Christian view is wrong. to the secular mind there is no possibility that anything they think could be incorrect. people of a Christian faith can go around doing what they like as long as it fits into to what the secular society thinks is right and wrong. but woe betide any Christian that for example condemns something as sinful, or even an abomination, that the secular world thinks is perfectly fine. Because every secular non believing person reading this thread thinks homosexuality is perfectly normal don’t they? They think gay marriage is great and that kids brought up in the environment of the gay lifestyle would be perfectly fine. Its all wholesome stuff. don’t think so. thats the big problem with the secular world view, they know homosexuality is somehow wrong but they cant explain why because they have rejected the thing that explains it all, the bible.

    its sad, but only people with biblical knowledge can see the bigger picture. the secular people having rejected the bible without even learning what it has to say, have left themselves with only a fraction of the knowledge of whats really going on in the world. They are like a rudderless ship.

  • circles

    Dave – as you seem to be the expert on “abnormality” and “normaility” could you do us all a favour and tell us all what “normal” is?
    I mean I have a fair idea (as I’ve always considered myself to be rather normal. Indeed had I a name other than circles I always though it would be billy normal) but if for example you’re not like me, which one of us is the abnormal one?

    Waiting with breath held for your wise arbitration,

    P.S. Funny how bigoted some of these righteously indignant posts are. Before i had the time to even think the words “Godwin’s Law” UMH and UUP voter had their Nazi brushes out and were tarring away. Of course I mean there wouldn’t have been any sectarian element to that old knee-jerk there now lads would there?

  • circles

    Oh Dave and while you’re at it (if you have time in between jumping the gun on the Pope’s new year message tha is), could yo clear up this bit – “Society uses marriage as a legal structure wherein a man and a woman may produce other citizens (governs property and inheritance rights; establishes paternity, legitimacy, and the rights and responsibilities of parenthood, gives taxes breaks, etc).”
    Does that mean that a marriage between a man and woman where they both know that either one or both of the partners is unable to conceive a “citizen” is null and void?

  • susan

    I’m with bollix.

  • eranu

    its not nonsense bollix. the bible contains donts aswell as dos. they come as one package.

    “how men are better than women.”
    i think you are refering to the different roles intended for men and women. men are supposed to be the spiritual leader in the family, not women. cant remember what book of the bible its in but if a womens lib person was reading it they would explode in monty python fashion! i think that part of the bible defining the roles for men and women is one that really grates against the conditioned mind in the modern world.

  • Comrade Stalin

    It’s sad, but not surprising, that the Pope has chosen this time of year to remind us of his message of hate for people who are different. Shameful.

  • Why am I still a UUP voter?

    Withdraw his honorary membership of the APNI now! That’ll learn him.

    And Circles, you’re a pr*ck: I was defending Old Red Socks from the baying, herd-like, intolerant Liberal mob.

  • GavBelfast

    Once a Nazi, always a Nazi?

  • Earnan

    The Pope wasn’t trying to be hateful. He’s not a hopeless bigot like UMH

  • blinding

    Earnan said

    “The Pope wasn’t trying to be hateful. He’s not a hopeless bigot like UMH”

    This pope is a natural and is hateful with great ease.

  • Driftwood

    McAleese said only prods could be Nazis. Good for SS Obersturmbannfuhrer Ratzinger to prove her wrong.

  • Jimmy Sands

    It’s a very silly speech. The argument for saving the rain forests has nothing to with reverence for any “Creator Spirit” but the more prosaic consideration that failure to do so may kill us.

    As for his other theme, if you think gay sex is a bit icky then you should probably steer clear of it. If you talk about it a lot, people are going to wonder why. Leviticus is down on shellfish too, but I’m still waiting for the encyclical on prawn cocktails.

  • Jimmy Sands

    “McAleese said only prods could be Nazis.”

    No she didn’t.

  • Franzipan

    What I don’t get is people who call themselves Catholics and then say that the Pope is wrong on his teachings on a matter like this.

    If you’re a western Christian and you don’t accept the authority of the Pope then I hate to break it to you but you’re actually a Protestant. So be consistent and turn up at a Protestant church next Sunday. I hear that some varieties of Anglicanism even do all the smells and bells.

  • Jimmy Sands

    I can’t. My eyes are too close together.

  • The Spectator


    But in that case, where are you if you reject the demonification of homosexuality, or for that matter the doctrine of papal infallibility (which is a relatively modern invention) but still accept the concepts of transubstantiation, apostolic succession, or the sacrement of reconciliation (confession)?

    One can be a good catholic, a bad catholic and an indifferent catholic, as well as being a catholic, or not a catholic.

  • The_Analyst

    A depressing message from God’s representative on earth in what should be a season opf goodwill to all men and women. A further depressing sight was Fr Tim Bartlett ‘batting’ for the Pope on UTV LIve tonight (Tues). It was fairly obvious he didn’t have his heart in it so anemic were his answers to Lynda Bryans ‘gentle’ questioning. I have enjoyed his honesty hithertofore on Sunday Sequence with William Crawley. His integrity does not deserved to be abused in such a way by the Down & Connor clerical establishment who sent him out to defend the indefensible. Am I the only one who felt that his body language with P A McLochlainn revealed how uncomfortable he felt about the whole task he had to perform. Other than that it was an example of pure bad manners as he sat with his body turned away from P A refusing to make eye contact with an individual whom I have know for over 30 years and who always treated others with the utmost courtesy.

  • Ri Na Deise


    I hate to break it to you. Bit yis are all Catholics! In some sense:

  • ahh…the usual constricts of the Judea-christian fascistic attitude towards sexuality come to the fore. Seems that the whole homosexual debate loses the fact that up until pretty recent history so-called homosexual/hetrosexual boundaries were neither in place or even considered. Ancient Greek and Roman figures (alexander the great, julius Caesar, various Japanese shoguns, Chinese Emperors) had lifelong male ‘companions’ and wives yet there was no dichotomy. In a strictly evolutionary point of view (there goes an unexploded hand grenade for the fundamentalists…) it makes sense for people within a grouping to establish bonds that are enhanced and strenghtened by sexual expression. That we feel the need to corral within labels says more about the reactionary and pernicious nature of 2,000 of religious indoctrination than anything else

  • Harry Flashman

    No Spectator, on certain issues concerning fundamental teachings on mortal sin if you reject the teachings of the Church then you cannot claim to be a Catholic, bad or otherwise, abortion and homosexuality I’m afraid are deal breakers, you don’t accept the Pope’s teaching on these issues you ain’t a Catholic, simple as that.

    As to the wildly hysterical nonsense that is posted here about “hate” and “sin” and so on, has anyone read what he actually he said? He made a point that the promotion of homosexuality is not beneficial for the furtherance of the human race, given that the human race is furthered by hetrosexual acts this is actually a bit of a no-brainer. Nowhere does he talk about “hating” homosexuals.

    When it comes to discussing homosexuality try to take down the offence meter by a degree or two, it’s an issue like any other and it is not helpful if everyone gets their speedoes in a twist every time someone to say something you don’t happen to agree with.

  • circles

    I know I’m doing something right when I can get your y-fronts all a-twist UUP Voter! 🙂
    Merry christmas one and all!!!

  • The Serpent

    I agree with Susan …am with Bollix too although not in the biblical sense !!!

  • Jimmy Sands


    I can think of quite a few products of heterosexual activity whose contribution to furthering the human race is debatable at best.

  • Comrade Stalin

    As to the wildly hysterical nonsense that is posted here about “hate” and “sin” and so on, has anyone read what he actually he said? He made a point that the promotion of homosexuality is not beneficial for the furtherance of the human race, given that the human race is furthered by hetrosexual acts this is actually a bit of a no-brainer.

    That’s wrong, Harry, on so many different levels. Uncontrolled reproduction in any species leads to a correction, one way or another. And there are plenty of heterosexual couples who have made deliberate decisions not to propagate the species (temporarily or permanently).

    Nowhere does he talk about “hating” homosexuals.

    It isn’t necessary to use the word “hate”.

  • poor gays

    Hang on maybe the popes a secret MUSLIM they hate despise and detest homosexuals and lesbians they want them all dead. So altogether now muslims are nazies the beautiful religion of peace is all a big fat lie.

  • poor gays

    where have all the self opionated anti christian sluggers gone then lolololololololololololol.No takers for the anti mullah anti muslim critique then lolol my my oh dear ho hum maybe it aint safe to say anything about them please say it aint so.