June is the month of the Sacred Heart of Jesus. In the last few years, a collective of public relations consultants and groomers have also named it “Pride Month.” If you have not heard — in which case you have blessedly taken refuge under a rock — this is an expression of pride for those vices properly known as the “sin of Sodom.”
One may ask if June’s dedication to the Sacred Heart makes its usurpation as “Pride Month” particularly egregious. I do not think so. Our God is the Lord of all time, and sins crying to heaven for vengeance ought never to be celebrated. Would May, the month of Our Lady, really be less awful? Or March, dedicated to Saint Joseph? Or any Sunday, especially dedicated, as each is, to the Holy Trinity? With the full literal force of the words, we should have no time for such things. There is nothing on our Christian calendar that can rightly coexist with the celebration of sins against nature. Antithetical to the virtuous love of the Sacred Heart, this celebration is a carefully calculated campaign to normalize unnatural lust among the populace in general, and, specifically, to target youth for recruitment. Such an agenda is not simply wicked; it is diabolical.
We know that God not only can, but does, work good out of evil, as in the monstrous crime of deicide being the occasion of the greatest work of mercy: the salvation of the world. What good, we might ask, could possibly be occasioned by turning June into a celebration of depravity?
The first good might be to consider some martyr-saints on the calendar this month (its third day, to be exact), who died as victims of a sodomite king whose advances they rebuffed. I speak of the Ugandan Martyrs, Saint Charles Lwanga and Companions, whom Father George Rutler has briefly eulogized. These brave Africans preferred death rather than to commit unnatural sexual depravity. Consciousness of the circumstances of their martyrdom will help us to demythologize the narrative that the victim status of the aberrosexual grants him a unique claim on our Christian charity and justice.
It should go without saying — but I will say it anyway — that everyone has a claim on our Christian charity and justice. What is under scrutiny here is the disingenuous claim that a highly successful and aggressive lobby, united by nothing other than a shared vice and its attendant agenda, can demand acceptance based upon specifically Christian principles of charity and justice. This inversion of Christian principles is tantamount to weaponizing the Gospel against itself.
After cultivating a devotion to the Ugandan martyrs, we might review the Promises of the Sacred Heart and how they apply here. Several if not all are relevant, but, in light of my next point, I will highlight number six: “Sinners will find in my Heart the source and infinite ocean of mercy.” Repentant deviants, like Eric Gill and Oscar Wilde, efficaciously availed themselves of the divine mercy. Condemning their sins and confessing them, both obtained the grace of the sacrament of Penance.
The third good we might get out of June’s peculiar concurrence is a deeper appreciation of the nature of Christian charity and how it applies to homosexuals and suchlike. Father James Martin strongly resents the admonition “hate the sin but love the sinner” being applied to the LGBT clientele he serves as an apologist. He even gratuitously posits that the term is applied to them more than to any other sinner, a dubious claim we may freely reject. While he is correct in saying that the expression is not found in Holy Scripture, Saint Augustine clearly advanced the idea in his Rule: “Yet remember to let love of the sinner be ever united to hatred of his sin.” The homosexualist Jesuit may find the distinction to be far too psychologically challenging (see for yourself; oh, the pathos!), but Saint Augustine is not alone in the matter. Replying to the question as to whether sinners should be loved out of charity, Saint Thomas Aquinas wrote, “Augustine says (De Doctr. Christ. i, 30) that ‘when it is said: “Thou shalt love thy neighbor,” it is evident that we ought to look upon every man as our neighbor.’ Now sinners do not cease to be men, for sin does not destroy nature. Therefore we ought to love sinners out of charity.”
The further explanation that Saint Thomas gives in the respondeo is worth quoting in full:
Two things may be considered in the sinner: his nature and his guilt. According to his nature, which he has from God, he has a capacity for happiness, on the fellowship of which charity is based, as stated above (Article 3; II-II:23:5), wherefore we ought to love sinners, out of charity, in respect of their nature.
On the other hand their guilt is opposed to God, and is an obstacle to happiness. Wherefore, in respect of their guilt whereby they are opposed to God, all sinners are to be hated, even one’s father or mother or kindred, according to Luke 12:26. For it is our duty to hate, in the sinner, his being a sinner, and to love in him, his being a man capable of bliss; and this is to love him truly, out of charity, for God’s sake.
If you choked on that last sentence, I suggest that you reread it a few times. While not being very modern, it is very wise.
Given that Saint Thomas reckons a small collection of sins against nature, including homosexual acts, to be “the greatest sin among the species of lust,” we may be confident that he would count the practitioners thereof among the “sinners” spoken of above — setting aside Father Martin’s adolescent claim that such charity victimizes people for “the way that they love one another.” Note that Saint Thomas says we must love such a person as “being a man capable of bliss [heavenly beatitude]; and this is to love him truly, out of charity, for God’s sake.
That is the charity to which the LGBT(and-so-on) people rightly have a claim.
One of the crucial aspects of divine charity is that it orders our loves, in accordance with that sublime passage of the Canticle (2:4): “He brought me into the cellar of wine, he set in order charity in me,” which Saint Thomas uses in his explanation of the fact that there is, indeed, an order to the theological virtue of charity. Digging deeper, we discover that the gift of wisdom perfects charity by uniting the intellect of man to the Mind of the Eternal Lawgiver by a certain “connaturality for Divine things.” This helps us to judge rightly concerning the Eternal Law.
The Holy Ghost’s gift of wisdom will more perfectly help us to see what in the sinner is to be loved and what is to be hated — so that he whom we love might be delivered from the evil that we rightly hate. This is Christian love; this is true wisdom. I know that “hate” is a bad word these days. The aberrosexual public relations consultants and groomers accept the conventional folly of the ADL and SPLC, which dictates that the one thing we are allowed to hate is hate itself. (Why go to the trouble of refuting your enemies’ ideas when you can conveniently label them “hate groups”?) But this is neither Biblical nor, in the strictly Christian sense, traditional. On that point, a stirring passage from the writings of Venerable Emmanuel d’Alzon comes to mind:
In these days with no energy left for either love or hate, men do not see that their tolerance is just another form of weakness. We are intolerant because we draw our strength from our love of Jesus Christ.
Long before Father d’Alzon, Saint Paul exhorted the Romans, “Let love be without dissimulation. Hating that which is evil, cleaving to that which is good” (Rom. 12:9).
We have a sacred obligation to hate this movement that is attempting to pervert children, even encouraging them to mutilate themselves chemically and surgically as “trans people.” We are also obliged to love these children enough to condemn their being biologically, psychologically, and spiritually immolated on the altar of an anti-human agenda. The Sacred Heart of Jesus was pierced on the Cross for their salvation. As for the propagandists and groomers themselves, loving them in truth, we must never forget that they are attacking reality itself, and this is an affront to the Author of created reality. Our love of God, first and foremost, should urge us to defend and make reparation to His divine majesty for these crimes.
Availing ourselves of all the riches of God’s grace won for us by the Sacred Heart of Jesus, let us humbly love God and neighbor enough to hate and oppose the hellish madness that is “Pride Month.”
