Bishop: ‘I would hate if people voted No for bigoted, nasty, bullying reasons’

[saintjohnxxiii]

thejournal.ie/bishop-vote-no-bigoted-reasons-2112302-May2015/

THE BISHOP OF Derry has said churchgoers can vote Yes in this week’s referendum on same-sex marriage ‘in good conscience’.

The Bishop said that “two gay men or two gay women are capable and very able to raise a child in a loving environment”, but said legalising same-sex marriage could be a “dangerous experiment”, citing concerns for the impacts on children in future.

While the headline is not the source of this scandal, I must find his comments are confusing.

First off, I would imagine those above him would disagree that one can vote in favor of same sex marriage in good conscience. Secondly, for him to say that same sex couples can raise a child in a loving environment and then say its a dangerous experiment seems to contradict itself.

 

[Murmurs]

thejournal.ie/bishop-vote-no-bigoted-reasons-2112302-May2015/

While the headline is not the source of this scandal, I must find his comments are confusing.

First off, I would imagine those above him would disagree that one can vote in favor of same sex marriage in good conscience. Secondly, for him to say that same sex couples can raise a child in a loving environment and then say its a dangerous experiment seems to contradict itself.

I’m not sure but I imagine he means that it’s entirely possible for a same-sex couple to raise a child just as well as a heterosexual couple (and in or out of marriage for that matter) - but nevertheless we do know what does work and meddling for the sake of it might be a bad idea ?

 

[eightydeuce82]

thejournal.ie/bishop-vote-no-bigoted-reasons-2112302-May2015/

While the headline is not the source of this scandal, I must find his comments are confusing.

First off, I would imagine those above him would disagree that one can vote in favor of same sex marriage in good conscience. Secondly, for him to say that same sex couples can raise a child in a loving environment and then say its a dangerous experiment seems to contradict itself.

:banghead: Does this surprise anyone? There is a clear message coming from an alarming number of Bishops about this very thing that seems counter to what our holy church teaches?

 

[ProdglArchitect]

thejournal.ie/bishop-vote-no-bigoted-reasons-2112302-May2015/

While the headline is not the source of this scandal, I must find his comments are confusing.

First off, I would imagine those above him would disagree that one can vote in favor of same sex marriage in good conscience. Secondly, for him to say that same sex couples can raise a child in a loving environment and then say its a dangerous experiment seems to contradict itself.

See, I think you’re missing the point of the Bishop’s statement. It is entirely possible for two homosexual individuals to truly love the child they are raising. That is not in question, homosexuals are just as capable of genuine love as the rest of us, even if their standard expression of such love is disordered.

What is at issue is whether or not such arrangements are good for the child. The scientific data, along with personal testimony from several individuals who were raised in same sex households, seems to indicate that these are not positive environments geared towards the healthy emotional and spiritual growth of a child. With that in mind, I completely disagree with the Bishop’s assertion that you could vote in favor of such situations with a clear conscience.

I hope that the USCCB speaks out against this proclamation, and universally reaffirms the Church’s teaching on the nature of marriage and the innate right of every child to be raised by their mother and father.

 

[Captain_America]

re: above. Of course, the problem you then have is that the child never seriously experiences relationships with both sexes, but just one. . . and even then, an injured/wounded member of that sex.

The female trope and male trope are both things we must learn.

I think this quisling leadership really is the main problem with the church on these issues. Bishops are in the public spotlight more and more. . . but they’re not trained or ready or experienced in dealing with it. . . they are good at theology but horrible at appreciating the public sphere.

We’ve lost at present the homosexual debate, due to non-aggressive passivity of our church leaders at its earliest phase, when the nonsense was most likely to have been shown up as foolishness.

We need to vigorously, now, fight the euthanasia business, the genetic engineering business and the other factors killing family life, notably the forces that help generate single motherhood.

 

[SWolf]

re: above. Of course, the problem you then have is that the child never seriously experiences relationships with both sexes, but just one. . . and even then, an injured/wounded member of that sex.

The female trope and male trope are both things we must learn.

I think this quisling leadership really is the main problem with the church on these issues. Bishops are in the public spotlight more and more. . . but they’re not trained or ready or experienced in dealing with it. . . they are good at theology but horrible at appreciating the public sphere.

We’ve lost at present the homosexual debate, due to non-aggressive passivity of our church leaders at its earliest phase, when the nonsense was most likely to have been shown up as foolishness.

We need to vigorously, now, fight the euthanasia business, the genetic engineering business and the other factors killing family life, notably the forces that help generate single motherhood.

Whenever hear from a person who wants same-sex couples to have the ability to adopt, I always ask “Who is more disposable, the mother or the father?”

 

[GEddie]

I don’t live in Ireland, so have no skin in this “game”, however:

Am I alone in thinking that when statements like this come from Hierarchical members, that someone has sold out??

ICXC NIKA

 

[ProdglArchitect]

I don’t live in Ireland, so have no skin in this “game”, however:

Am I alone in thinking that when statements like this come from Hierarchical members, that someone has sold out??

ICXC NIKA

Definitely not. When Bishops turn from the Truth and actively promote falsehoods and immorality, I can’t help but think about all the people who’ve died throughout history to upholds the Truths they’re so flippantly denying.

 

[Tigg]

We all have a skin in this game and I liken it to falling dominoes. WHERE is the clear and consistent teaching that the faithful have a right to. Lord, have mercy!

 

[acadiANNA]

Sorry, but I would not have wanted two dads or two moms to raise me.

 

[zz912]

First thing that came to mind when I read that article.

Rev 3:15 I know your deeds, that you are neither cold nor hot. I wish you were either one or the other! 16 So, because you are lukewarm–neither hot nor cold–I am about to spit you out of my mouth.

Quit with the wishy-washy, mealy-mouthed doublespeak. NOOOOO, a Christian cannot in **GOOD **conscience vote for this evil. Only an improperly or malformed conscience could do so.

Priests and bishops need to speak boldly and clearly. Of course you’ll hurt a few feelings, but better to have some hurt feelings than to be coddled to hell. Jesus was absolutely rough when necessary, as noted above. He called people vipers, sons of satan, and filthy tombs. He didn’t give these type of answers so that the flock is confused or misled.

 

[unstoppable_II]

I’m not sure but I imagine he means that it’s entirely possible for a same-sex couple to raise a child just as well as a heterosexual couple (and in or out of marriage for that matter) - but nevertheless we do know what does work and meddling for the sake of it might be a bad idea ?

Evidently, he is not familiar with the case of the US Catholic adoption agency shutting down rather than placing children in homosexual households.

 

[Dorothy]

First thing that came to mind when I read that article.

Rev 3:15 I know your deeds, that you are neither cold nor hot. I wish you were either one or the other! 16 So, because you are lukewarm–neither hot nor cold–I am about to spit you out of my mouth.

Quit with the wishy-washy, mealy-mouthed doublespeak. NOOOOO, a Christian cannot in **GOOD **conscience vote for this evil. Only an improperly or malformed conscience could do so.

Priests and bishops need to speak boldly and clearly. Of course you’ll hurt a few feelings, but better to have some hurt feelings than to be coddled to hell. Jesus was absolutely rough when necessary, as noted above. He called people vipers, sons of satan, and filthy tombs. He didn’t give these type of answers so that the flock is confused or misled.

Thank you for your post!

 

[Beryllos]

It is true that we should do all things, including voting, out of love and not hate. However, I am disappointed that the Bishop would use that line without a strong argument in favor of voting No on the basis of love.

 

[SonOfMan]

Its writings on the wall like this, that affirm my belief that the Church will change (of course not on “doctrine” ) later this year after the Synod. The mood of the Church has already changed and it wont stop there IMO.

 

[SonOfMan]

First thing that came to mind when I read that article.

Rev 3:15 I know your deeds, that you are neither cold nor hot. I wish you were either one or the other! 16 So, because you are lukewarm–neither hot nor cold–I am about to spit you out of my mouth.

Quit with the wishy-washy, mealy-mouthed doublespeak. NOOOOO, a Christian cannot in **GOOD **conscience vote for this evil. Only an improperly or malformed conscience could do so.

Priests and bishops need to speak boldly and clearly. Of course you’ll hurt a few feelings, but better to have some hurt feelings than to be coddled to hell. Jesus was absolutely rough when necessary, as noted above. He called people vipers, sons of satan, and filthy tombs. He didn’t give these type of answers so that the flock is confused or misled.

Careful, you are attacking a Prince of the Church.

At least there’s no denial and putting blinders on in this thread, probably due to the extreme clarity of the Bishops’ words (although somewhat contradictory, but means nothing if he clearly gave the OK). No squirming out of this one.

 

[ProdglArchitect]

Careful, you are attacking a Prince of the Church.

At least there’s no denial and putting blinders on in this thread, probably due to the extreme clarity of the Bishops’ words (although somewhat contradictory, but means nothing if he clearly gave the OK). No squirming out of this one.

No one’s putting on blinders or trying to squirm out of it. Bishops have been wrong in the past, and even actively promoted immorality. Heck, there were even a couple of popes who shamed the office and promoted immoral and decadent lifestyles. Despite that, not a single substantive word of doctrine has changed. This is nothing new, and will continue till the second coming. Despite the gloating tone of your other post, the Church will not be changing. The bishops do not have power over the Holy Spirit, the Holy Spirit has power over the bishops. Those who refuse to promote Christ’s teaching will be cast out. Either that, or Christ is not God because he lied about his eternal protection.

(Note, I say substantive word of doctrine not to imply that doctrine has changed, but to account for the fact that language has been updated to allow modern readers to follow what is being said.)

 

[CruceSignati]

Anathema sit!

Excommunicate this bishop (and a bunch of the other liberal ones while you’re at it)!

 

[unstoppable_II]

… Bishops have been wrong in the past, and even actively promoted immorality. …

The Book of Destiny by Fr. Herman Kramer was written in the late 1960s. It’s hard to find because it’s been out of print for over 20 years, but it might still be available on-line through used book sellers.

In this book about Revelation, Fr. Kramer predicted the priesthood would go through scandals due to its shortcomings. But the most interesting is his take on the Vision of the Woman in Chapter 12, which is widely interpreted as that of being Mary. “And a great sign was seen in heaven; a woman clothed in the sun, with the moon under her feet …” However, he says this is not Mary, but a symbol of the Church [it can’t be the BVM anyway because at least one event, the birth of her child [Jesus] has already happened. The stars in the sky are the bishops, and “third of the stars in the sky” swept down by the dragon’s tail is that third of the bishops of the Church who were unfaithful. Something for them to think about.

 

[SonOfMan]

No one’s putting on blinders or trying to squirm out of it. Bishops have been wrong in the past, and even actively promoted immorality. Heck, there were even a couple of popes who shamed the office and promoted immoral and decadent lifestyles. Despite that, not a single substantive word of doctrine has changed. This is nothing new, and will continue till the second coming. Despite the gloating tone of your other post, the Church will not be changing. The bishops do not have power over the Holy Spirit, the Holy Spirit has power over the bishops. Those who refuse to promote Christ’s teaching will be cast out. Either that, or Christ is not God because he lied about his eternal protection.

(Note, I say substantive word of doctrine not to imply that doctrine has changed, but to account for the fact that language has been updated to allow modern readers to follow what is being said.)

Im not gloating, I am actually more impressed in a sense. The quicker people start to admit to the problems, the quicker they can be solved. Part of the reason the Church is in such a mess is because people have always ran or looked the other way or pretended something was not happening.