I think that here the motivation for this act is absolutely not some religious arguments, but arguments related to a new religiosity and a new morality, which is religiosity and morality of political correctness, religiosity and morality of tolerance, the so-called non-discrimination and all that follows– says the portal wPolityce.pl Fr. prof. Paweł Bortkiewicz, referring to the act of solidarity of some Polish Catholic clergy for an LGBT activist nicknamed “Margot”.
READ ALSO:
wPolityce.pl: Fr. Adam Boniecki and Fr. prof. Alfred Wierzbicki, together with the Chief Rabbi of Poland, Michael Schudrich, decided to vouch for an LGBT activist nicknamed “Margot”. How is it possible that the clergy show solidarity with the attacker and not with the victim of the assault?
Fr. prof. Paweł Bortkiewicz: Of course, it is very difficult for me to answer this question, because such an act contradicts the basic principles of not only logic, but most of all Judeo-Christian morality, since we are talking about three clergymen. Probably one can say unequivocally that Judeo-Christian morality very clearly indicates what is good and what is evil, what should be done in such situations. I think that here the motivation for this act is absolutely not some religious arguments, but arguments related to a new religiosity and a new morality, which is religiosity and morality of political correctness, religiosity and morality of tolerance, the so-called non-discrimination and all that follows. It is simply creating new cultural and civilization foundations. Unfortunately, the aforementioned clergymen, representatives of two religions, are somehow abandoning their ranks and entering a space that has nothing to do with Judaism or Christianity, with Orthodox Judaism – this should of course be emphasized – and with Orthodox Christianity.
What social impact will the clerical support for illegal LGBT activist activities have?
I think it will create some confusion and chaos in the first place. This is a phenomenon that will provoke some imitators of the people mentioned here to follow this path of originality. Because in the situation we live in today, such scandalous – I do not hesitate to use this word – behavior obviously provokes imitation, especially among young people. This is a very dangerous phenomenon. On the one hand, therefore, we have an incentive to follow a specific kind of imitation, but on the other hand, it is indeed – and this is the most dangerous thing – undermining the foundations of the rule of law, a statement that there is a total moral and legal relativism that does not respect any rules. This is the most dangerous consequence of this statement.
I am wondering about the motives that could have motivated the granting of this guarantee … In your opinion, could it be more about following a certain fashion, willingness to exist, or rather the willingness to give a certain sacred dimension to the LGBT ideology and actions related to it?
It’s a hard question. I think that all three mentioned people are public figures, and noble figures, who in many cases have made a very positive mark on our cultural and religious space with their biography. I will not refer to these achievements here, but I do say it with full conviction and without a trace of irony. Both Rabbi Schudrich’s merits are known, as well as Fr. Boniecki or Fr. prof. Wierzbicki, nota bene my friend from the years of studies at the Catholic University of Lublin. Therefore, I think that it is not about existence, because these are people who have already existed, so it is rather a matter of giving some legitimacy, a certain sacredness. But for what is this done? It’s really hard for me to say. I am helpless. I find no answer here.
Two or three years ago I participated in the Warsaw Areopagus, where I discussed, inter alia, with Fr. prof. Wierzbicki and I must admit that this discussion was a great surprise for me. Admittedly, I studied moral theology, Fr. prof. Wierzbicki – ethics, but we met in ethics classes, we had common masters, especially Fr. prof. January, which repeatedly convinced us of the theses, which, moreover, resulted from the concept of ethics by Karol Wojtyła, related to the fact that ethics derives from a human vision that ethics should be normative, not descriptive – then it loses its character if it uses the sociologization of the norm moral, and thus accepts public opinion as a criterion of morality, loses its identity, loses its character. We came from the same school, from the same words of the masters, but it turns out that you can understand reality differently. For what is this happening? This remains a dramatic question for me, which unfortunately I cannot find an answer to.
There is also the question of the Gospel itself. Those priests who opted not for the victim but for the perpetrator probably have a problem with this Gospel.
Not only them, because, as we know, the community of Tygodnik Powszechny supported it Ms Wielowieyska’s article, about which the portal wPolityce.pl wrote very extensively, an article disassembling the foundations of Christian morality, in which Ms. Wielowieyska tried to convince “Gazeta Wyborcza” that Christianity is very ambiguous, that the Gospel is very incoherent and even chaotic. It turns out that there are people who have trouble reading the Gospel. At the same time, I do not overestimate the intellectual abilities of the editors of Gazeta Wyborcza, it is no surprise to me that they have difficulties reading this text, but I am really surprised that two very prominent representatives of the intelligentsia of the Catholic clergy also hold similar views. Of course, it is absolutely impossible to reconcile whether it is the attitudes of Mr. / Mrs. “Margot” or the LGBT movement or gender ideology in general – it is in no way possible to reconcile these trends and attitudes with the truth of creation and, above all, with the truth of the redemption brought through Christ. Christ comes to free man from his sins, from his weaknesses, from his disorders, and not to tolerate evil. Christ is not the god of tolerance, but is the God of man’s affirmation, and this affirmation presupposes conversion and this is a fundamental Christian truth. If we ignore it, we are ignoring the Gospel. Once again, I would like to emphasize it very strongly, because this is a topic that I think we must very much realize that it is impossible to reconcile gender ideology – in any form – with the Christian faith. There is no possibility of community, dialogue and understanding between these two realities and this, unfortunately, has its consequences. We cannot count on an agreement here. We have to prepare ourselves for a fight that will have its consequences, but which must lead to the victory of Christianity, because it is a guarantee of human saving.
Let us add that this is a fight for every human being.
This is a fight for every human being. This is not a fight that is fought for someone somewhere outside of us, but it is a fight for us, for our families, and since John Paul II said that the future of the world goes through the family, it can also be said that the future of Poland goes through the family . Our future goes through the family. It is a fight for our future, for our today and for our tomorrow.
Thank you for the conversation.
Anna Wiejak interviewed
–
