Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘morals’

Playboy and the Virgin Mary?

Playboy and the Virgin Mary?

CNN and others have reported on the “offense” generated by the Mexican edition of Playboy.

Sanchez: We do. It’s right here. This is from the publisher of the magazine, Raul Sayrols. He says, “The image is not and never was intended to portray the Virgin of Guadalupe,” — which is the Virgin Mary — “The intent was to portray a renaissance-like mood on the cover.” Interesting. Let me bring in somebody for whom this hits home. He’s one of the best known priests in the United States. His name is Father Cutie. I worked with him in Miami many times, has his own show — actually he’s got his own book out now. It’s called “Real Life, Real Love.” Bestseller, by the way. Father, are we as Catholics just too sensitive when it comes to this kind — after all, it’s a beautiful woman being shown to represent what is, in our minds, to all of us, a beautiful woman.

Father Albert Cutie: Listen, there’s no doubt that she’s a beautiful woman. But a stained-glass window and the veil that looks like that, certainly there’s a reference to Mary. Whoever tells you there isn’t is simply being hypocritical or not very honest. And that’s what I don’t like about the statement from Playboy magazine. I think that they timed it not only with the Virgin of Guadalupe, as Glenda was saying, but also with the month of December. How many nativity scenes are out there this time of the year? How many times is Mary a central figure in this whole celebration? And this is offensive. This is very offensive. It’s blasphemous.

Puhlease.

You read in this interview about all sorts of intentions and indications and meanings.  Folks, gimme a break.  Of course this sells magazines.  Of course this is “offensive”.

Really, though,  We’re asking Playboy to apologize for this and not other images?

What really are we objecting to?

What’s offensive?

And why this depection versus the Ivy League’s Hottest or heffner’s twins.

Or why isn’t the continued struggles (for various sexual issues) of the Catholic church constantly objected to?

These are rhetorical questions of course.

The Catholic image does more to sell sex than any other image, certainly online.  Think Britney Spears.

Sometimes when you reinforce something as a punishment (sex is bad) so long it becomes an reinforcer for other things (attention for breaking protocol).   The more you issue the punishment the more you reinforce the other behavior.

Sometimes the best approach is no reinforcement at all.

Read Full Post »

We all know that if you want to get your point across you need to begin teaching it early and with much fanfare and pomp. Families use holidays and traditions to cement the family unit and the values they collectively hold every time there is a birthday party, birth, wedding or death. Clearly getting to the youth early makes them become part of the unit early and potentially moves to maintain them in the fold for as long as possible.

 

It is not surprising then that the Catholic Pope Benedict XVI moved to get to the important stuff at the World Youth Day this week in Australia. I’ve been to one before and they are something to behold! Clearly the faithful and searching youth need to know what’s most important in their life. What great timing. He gets to tell the gathering eager searchers how to make the world a better place.

 

Worldwide AIDS/HIV fight…? No…

Condemnation of sexual abuse by priests…? No…

End to war..? No..

End of 43 years of impotence on genocide in Europe or Africa? No..

Return of art from the masses taken for “safe keeping”…? No…

Lead a simple life…? No…

Support of sex education in poor nations…? No…

 

The Pope attacked moral relativism! Right! The Pope made it clear what the enemy was and attacked – again – the idea that there are no absolute truths.

 

Nothing infuriates the Catholic Church and some less voracious church fathers as much as relativism (the denial of absolute truth which they, not surprisingly, are in charge of) that leads to moral relativism that leads to – according to their thinking – preventing ‘human minds’ from the ability to arrive at truth. For Catholics, denial of an absolute reference denies God.

 

But wait, there’s more. Some have referred to the subject matter as the “dictatorship of relativism” (Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger). In this sense, any thinking is to be done, any evaluation, they will do it.

 

“Relativism… …has made ‘experience’ all-important. Yet experiences, detached from any consideration of what is good or true, can lead not to genuine freedom, but to moral or intellectual confusion, to a lowering of standards…”

 

Those would be the standards we’ve seen in the news for the last 20+ years (for actions of 60+ years) and that resulted in 3 excommunications out of the 244 priests that have been dismissed for inappropriate actions. Nineteen have served jail time. Oh, those absolute truths…!

Read Full Post »