Bp. Barron Comes Out Swinging

Refreshing to see this.

Bishop Robert Barron has said that he is in “frank disagreement” with the final report of the Synod on Synodality’s claim that advances in the sciences require an evolution in the Church’s moral teaching on human sexuality....

 ...the deeper problem I have is that this manner of argumentation is based upon a category error— namely, that advances in the sciences, as such, require an evolution in moral teaching,” he added.

“Let us take the example of homosexuality. Evolutionary biology, anthropology, and chemistry might give us fresh insight into the etiology and physical dimension of same-sex attraction, but they will not tell us a thing about whether homosexual behavior is right or wrong. The entertaining of that question belongs to another mode of discourse.”...

Yah, but 'category errors' are swallowed whole by the Ignorant Crowd in the press and electronic media, so that's what the liars use.  Recall that lying is a favorite technique of Satan, and you'll have the pieces to the puzzle. 

This essay is related directly to the "scientific knowledge advance" claims.  Here's a small but pertinent taste:

...Reading carefully the fragments mentioned by Joseph Ratzinger, we first notice that consuming the forbidden fruit from the tree of knowledge of good and evil is a sin that literally modified the human nature: from immortals, men have become mortal. In other words, it represents an extremely grave moral error with huge consequences in terms of knowledge. More precisely, as we can see from the entire context of the statements of Saint Bonaventure, it is about a misguided orientation of a transformative knowledge....

Recall the story of Jesus and the Samaritan woman at the well and the 'two waters' in that story, then read this:

...To drink the “interior” water means to dedicate oneself to the contemplation (i.e., the knowledge) of the mysteries of the Holy Scriptures under the guidance of the Wisdom of the Holy Spirit. To drink the “exterior” water means to get lost in the labyrinth of “naturalistic” disputes about the real existence of a gigantic fish that could have swallowed a man (the prophet Jonah). Or to engage in “historical-critical” discussions about the differences between the manuscripts through which we have received the texts of the Old or New Testament. Thus, when Saint Bonaventura says, “he who is concerned only with knowledge eats of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil,” he is referring to that “exterior” knowledge, which, by replacing the contemplative, interior knowledge of God, ultimately gets lost in the labyrinth of the world,...

Sorta like the labyrinth of "scientific advances regarding homosexuality"?