metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
I've never claimed as such.
BTW, didn't Jesus say something like "judge ye not..."?
Also, maybe if one really wants to see God, maybe they should just look all around at Nature.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Pope Francis allows priests to bless same-sex couples (not marriage)
- Thread starter Evangelicalhumanist
- Start date
I've never claimed as such.
BTW, didn't Jesus say something like "judge ye not..."?
Also, maybe if one really wants to see God, maybe they should just look all around at Nature.
If Scripture is but the man-made reflection of cultural mores of the time and place of its authorship, then there's no reason to accept any of it. Who cares what Jesus teaches if Jesus if but a character in an old, long irrelevant tome.
The Biblical narrative often recounts people doing immoral things. It's silly to claim that everything recounted in Scripture is endorsed by Scripture.
I want the Church to act like the custodian of divine revelation it claims to be. I want the Catholic Church to regain the seriousness it once possessed. If you're going to claim to be the sole custodian of the one true religion, then you better act like it.
A Church more concerned with accommodating (extremely recent) western sexual obsessions then it is with teaching the religion it claims to hold is fundamentally unseriousness. Pope Francis, fundamentally, is a symptom of that unseriousness, which has existed long before 2013.
Last edited:
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
There is no logical reason whatsoever to supposedly have to go to either extreme.
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
So, the church has to do what you say. Even the pope doesn't take that extreme position.
Doc Helpful
*banned*
Here's the thing. We Gain No Merits and No Indulgences in the State of Mortal Sin.
Our prayers, fasting, and almsgiving do not profit our souls if we are in the state of mortal sin. We can gain merit and atone for sin only when we are in the state of grace. Therefore, a same sex couple, unless they remain chaste and in the state of grace, do not benefit from priestly blessings either individually or as a couple.
Our prayers, fasting, and almsgiving do not profit our souls if we are in the state of mortal sin. We can gain merit and atone for sin only when we are in the state of grace. Therefore, a same sex couple, unless they remain chaste and in the state of grace, do not benefit from priestly blessings either individually or as a couple.
It is one thing to say that Scripture speaks in a way that reflects the culture and understanding of its authors. For example, it would indeed be silly to insist on a flat Earth on the basis that the Old Testament authors assumed it.
It is another thing altogether to insist that we can overlook an explicit moral teaching affirmed in both testaments. That teaching is that sexual sin disqualifies a person from salvific grace. In both testaments, same-sex activity is singled out as a particularly egregious violation of the moral law. You cannot handwave that away as but a cultural artifact of the ancient authors while simultaneously claiming to take Scripture as divine revelation. Either God speaks though Scripture or He does not. You cannot have it both ways. At least not honestly.
The Holy Father's obligation is to teach only what has been given to him to teach. The deposit of faith. He has no right to redefine the Catholic faith in order to make it more palatable for a decadent, atheistic culture. You do not compromise with sin. Our Lord Himself states that it is better to lose your bodily members than to fall into sin. Because sin ruins the soul.
The rot in the Catholic Church is not just sexual and financial wrongdoing on part of some of the clergy; it is the loss of supernatural faith throughout the whole Church. In this the laity are as guilty as the clergy. We have all allowed ourselves (to varying degrees) to be taken in by worldly ideas that detract from our commitment to the perennial truths of the Christian faith. (And yes, I am just as guilty of this as everyone else).
Today the idea that has so infected our culture and now the Church is that sex exists primarily for our recreation. If it feels good, do it. But the Church teaches that sex exists for the good of spouses and the procreation of children; that we may not separate the sexual act from its end in the natural law. We all struggle with impurity. (Those who claim otherwise are probably lying). But if the teaching of the Catholic Church is inspired by the Holy Spirit then purity and the proper use of the sexual faculty is what God requires from us whether we like it or not.
That is why Fiducia Supplicans is such a scandal. To claim to maintain Catholic teaching on paper while denying it in action is sophistry.
Last edited:
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
Your opinion-- not mine. With me, as long as making love is between two consensual adults, that's fine. Judgementalism and hate ain't my thing.
And, again generally speaking, the older (conservative) bishops will be dead before the younger ones. That is how change eventually gets adopted in societies. We must not forget that most of the liberties we take for granted today were fiercely fought for against prior conservatives who would deny them to us.
Npt at all. Even the Church does that.
Are you really taking the Vatican as a role model?Npt at all. Even the Church does that.
Maninthemiddle
Active Member
What direction, away from their Gods word and replacing it with their own.
Should the Pope be cherry picking from the Bible.
As theology is 100% a construction of human thought, this is a ridiculous statement.
In the direction of virtuous action.
I don’t do loaded questions. You’d need to demonstrate the cherry picking for me to provide a response.
Religions of all sorts don't fare too badly at sucking money out of their congregations, judging by their current worth:
Sree Padmanabha Swamy Temple, 1,200,000,000,000
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints 200,000,000,000
Sree Venkateswara Swamy Temple 35,000,000,000
Catholic Church in Germany 26,000,000,000
Catholic Church in France 23,000,000,000
Catholic Church in Australia 20,000,000,000
Seventh-day Adventists 15,000,000,000
Church of England 11,970,000,000
Church of Sweden 11,420,000.000
Trinity Church, U.S. 6,000,000,000
Opus Dei (part of the Catholic Church) 2,800,000,000 (Italy)
Church of Scientology 2,000,000,000
Or how about these individual "religious" leaders?
Joseph Prince- $5 Million
Juanita Bynum- $10 Million
Ernest Angley- $15 Million
Joyce Meyer- $25 Million
Rick Warren- $25 Million
Billy Graham- $25 Million
Kenneth Copeland- $25 Million
Creflo Dollar- $27 Million
Joel Osteen- $40 Million
Benny Hinn- $42 Million
Chris Oyakhilome- $50 Million
T.D. Jakes- $147 Million
David Oyedepo- $150 Million
Pat Robertson- $500 Million
Edir Macedo- $1 Billion
In re-reading through this thread again, I am saddened by the number of responses that speak volumes to me about the reasons I really dislike a lot of religion. There is, in many posts within this thread, more about judgement and hate than there is of love and charity. There is far more about everybody needing to be like everybody else (or be damned) than there is about human diversity -- which is knowable to all by JUST BLOODY LOOKING AROUND!
It really is disheartening. It is so hurtful when people tell us "if you weren't born just like me, then you must either become like me or remain miserable throughout your life or YOU WILL GO TO HELL!"
That seems to be what a lot of Christians think about their Jesus Christ, their "God IS Love!" I would so hate to be among them.
It really is disheartening. It is so hurtful when people tell us "if you weren't born just like me, then you must either become like me or remain miserable throughout your life or YOU WILL GO TO HELL!"
That seems to be what a lot of Christians think about their Jesus Christ, their "God IS Love!" I would so hate to be among them.
All that money, earned by selling twaddle to the gullible. There oughta be a law!
Clizby Wampuscat
Well-Known Member
Why do LGBTQ+ people want to be Catholic? Why would you want to be part of an organisation that officially condemns who they are?
I rather think that one is (usually) Catholic (or Protestant, or Hindu or Muslim) before they even recognize themselves as LGBTQ+. And as we have certainly discovered in all of our respective dialogues around religion, once it's been indoctrinated into one, it's very, very hard to get rid of it.
Doc Helpful
*banned*
Hate and judgment doesn't apply when the sodomite is told that unless both he and his lover repent and cease to sodomize and be sodomized, they are going to lose their immortal souls to hell. Indeed, it is the duty and it is incumbent upon the Christian advisor to warn the sinners or the advisor himself will be held to account before God for failing his duty. Sinful acts have consequences. When this advice is said out of love and concern for their immortal souls, it is fraternal correction, it is charity, not hate. I can understand if homosexuals so identify with their sin that they cannot separate their identities from their sinful acts. It would explain why they feel would feel hated; however, sodomy and the sodomizers are of TWO separate substances, not one; they do nor coinhere. When parents rebuke and correct their children for misbehavior, do they hate them? Of course not. They hate their behaviors. Even so, Our Heavenly Father hates not us, but our sin.
I don't think I will ever fail to be shocked that there are apparently people who actually believe in that.
It is a real strong mark against so-called religion.