Påvens tal häromdagen skapade mediastorm i västvärlden. Och det han sade har tolkats godtyckligt, och som kritik mot homosexuella, trots att han inte nämnde om homosexuella i sitt tal.
Hans koppling mellan miljöfrågorna (framförallt berörde han frågan om att bevara regnskogarna) och värnandet om äktenskapet och kyrkans traditionella pro-life inställning håller jag helt och hållet med om. Hans kritik är ju framförallt riktad mot kyrkor och kristna ledare som talar om värnandet om miljöfrågor men inte lyfter fram värnandet om äktenskapet och den klassiska kristna sexualsynen.
Länkar in följande sammanfattning av talet (som jag hämtat hos Joel Halldorfs blogg):
At the same time, Benedict clearly distinguished the church’s approach from secular environmental movements – insisting that concern for tropical rain forests and the church’s traditional pro-life commitments, including sexual morality, are indissolubly linked.
‘[The church] must defend not only the earth, water and air as gifts of creation that belong to all,’ he said. It must also defend the human person against its own destruction. What’s needed is something like a ”human ecology,” understood in the right sense. It’s not simply an outdated metaphysics if the church speaks of the nature of the human person as man and woman, and asks that this order of creation be respected.’
‘Here it’s a question of faith in creation, in listening to the language of creation, disregard of which would mean self-destruction of the human person and hence destruction of the very work of God,’ the pope said. ‘That which is often expressed and understood by the term ‘gender’ in the end amounts to the self-emancipation of the human person from creation and from the Creator. Human beings want to do everything by themselves, and to control exclusively everything that regards them. But in this way, the human person lives against the truth, against the Creator Spirit.’
‘Yes, the tropical forests merit our protection, but the human being as a creature merits no less protection – a creature in which a message is written which does not imply a contradiction of our liberty, but the condition for it,’ the pope said.
On that basis, Benedict offered a defense of traditional marriage and Catholic sexual morality.
‘Great Scholastic theologians defined marriage, meaning the lifetime bond between a man and a woman, as a sacrament of creation, which the Creator instituted and which Christ – without changing the message of creation – then welcomed into the story of his covenant with humanity,’ the pope said. ‘This witness in favor of the Creator Spirit, present in the nature of this bond and in a special way in the nature of the human person, is also part of the proclamation which the church must offer. Starting from this perspective, it’s important to re-read the encyclical Humanae Vitae : the intention of Pope Paul VI was to defend love against treating sexuality as a kind of consumption, the future against the exclusive demands of the present, and the nature of the human being against manipulation.””