I
irenaeus1
Guest
Cupich is already on record for his erroneous understanding of the primacy of conscience, and received a number of corrections from brother bishops.
- Status
O
oppositeman13
Guest
It amazes me that just because you have legitimate questions on the words or actions of a member of the clergy that it is automatically viewed as “bashing”. Remember, our allegiance is to Christ and not to any human - we need to always keep in mind Christ’s teachings which are reflected in official catholic teaching. If I would ask the question - why doesn’t our pope declare that what he presents is a clarification or reasonable extension of official catholic teaching? A good question in my estimation.
I
irenaeus1
Guest
I would hope that to be true, but he’s on record stating that the Church’s teaching on homosexuality is cruel. He also never addresses those with same-sex attraction who fully accept the Church’s teaching and heroically try to live in accordance with the Church’s teaching. Fr. Martin also never mentions Courage, and all the great work being done in that ministry. And the list goes on…
J
Jig_Saw
Guest
Because saying that a bishop “does not unequivocally uphold Catholic teaching” isn’t bashing.
J
JimR-OCDS
Guest
No he didn’t say that.
What he said is, the way people present the teaching comes across cruel.
Pretty much the CAF modus operendi
Jim
What he said is, the way people present the teaching comes across cruel.
Pretty much the CAF modus operendi
Jim
A
AlNg
Guest
Because according to:
Code of Canon Law, can. 752-753
Although the bishops who are in communion with the head and members of the college, whether individually or joined together in conferences of bishops or in particular councils, do not possess infallibility in teaching, they are authentic teachers and instructors of the faith for the Christian faithful entrusted to their care; the Christian faithful are bound to adhere with religious submission of mind to the authentic magisterium of their bishops.
And
“Lumen Gentium n. 25”. In matters of faith and morals, the bishops speak in the name of Christ and the faithful are to accept their teaching and adhere to it with a religious assent.
P
pnewton
Guest
From the articles, “I look forward to speaking with the people in Chicago about Jesus, the one who is at the center of my life and at the heart of all of my ministries." Does the name of Jesus scare people here?
Some think a progressive position should be presented to theology students. But how can a Christian think a priest should not talk about Jesus? Surely everyone can realize that a priest will not give the same talk to the laity that he would seminary students. Right? And he does have some dates open now.
Some think a progressive position should be presented to theology students. But how can a Christian think a priest should not talk about Jesus? Surely everyone can realize that a priest will not give the same talk to the laity that he would seminary students. Right? And he does have some dates open now.
Last edited:
1
1neophyte
Guest
It is very easy to make up your own “Jesus”. Yes, it is scary when His name is used in vain.
1
1neophyte
Guest
What does that have to do with anything? Which bishops do you propose we “assent” to? Because at this point, we certainly can’t assent to all of them. There is too much disagreement.1neophyte:
Because according to:
Code of Canon Law, can. 752-753
Although the bishops who are in communion with the head and members of the college, whether individually or joined together in conferences of bishops or in particular councils, do not possess infallibility in teaching, they are authentic teachers and instructors of the faith for the Christian faithful entrusted to their care; the Christian faithful are bound to adhere with religious submission of mind to the authentic magisterium of their bishops.
And
“Lumen Gentium n. 25”. In matters of faith and morals, the bishops speak in the name of Christ and the faithful are to accept their teaching and adhere to it with a religious assent.
O
Oneofthewomen
Guest
Well, aside from the Bishop of Rome, the only other Bishop that really matters is your own.
P
pnewton
Guest
No, it is not easy as there is but one Jesus. I do not think using the name of the Lord in vain means what you think it means. So why don’t we let Jesus speak for himself in this regard.
1
1neophyte
Guest
That’s great. So same-sex relationships should be affirmed and celebrated?1neophyte:
No, it is not easy as there is but one Jesus. I do not think using the name of the Lord in vain means what you think it means. So why don’t we let Jesus speak for himself in this regard.
Last edited:
P
pnewton
Guest
Boy, when you bring out a straw man, you really stuff it full of hay no one is using.
No.
1
1neophyte
Guest
Oops…isn’t this the thread about Fr. Martin? I’m sorry from straying from the topic of casting out demons and drinks of water. I got confused.1neophyte:
Boy, when you bring out a straw man, you really stuff it full of hay no one is using.
No.
P
pnewton
Guest
Lenten reflections are not the same thing as celebration and affirmation of same-sex relationships.
I can’t believe I have to explain this.
I can’t believe I have to explain this.
1
1neophyte
Guest
When someone directly opposes an important Church teaching, their credibility disappears. When someone has no credibility, they must not be permitted to give Lenten reflections in a Catholic church. If he’s casting out demons or handing out beverages, that is wonderful. But he should not be teaching anything.
I can’t believe I have to explain this.
P
pnewton
Guest
I see. The Church does not prohibit priests from teaching based on the opinions of the laity. That he has no credibility with you, I assume that means no credibility in any area of theology or spirituality, then I understand why you would not attend. However, the Catholic Church does not “blackball” based on internet chatter. There is a procedure for laicizing, excommunicating and censoring priests. In absence of this procedure, he most definitely is permitted to perform all functions of a priest.
I really do not get the issue with him giving some sort of mainstream, non-controversial reflection. It is almost like his detractors want to keep him controversial so they have someone to be mad at.
I really do not get the issue with him giving some sort of mainstream, non-controversial reflection. It is almost like his detractors want to keep him controversial so they have someone to be mad at.
1
1neophyte
Guest
Opinions of the laity? Internet chatter? What was that you were saying before about a “strawman” or something? You’re actually right, opinions of the laity and internet chatter are certainly irrelevant. It is HIS opinions and HIS chatter that are at the root of the problem. Have you even heard him speak? Have you read his book?
P
pnewton
Guest
I have heard him speak. He seems rather articulate. I would like to here him give some sort of retreat or reflection, but not on gay stuff. I have never read his book. Quite frankly, I have never understood this fixation on homosexuality. Sin is sin. It is all bad, yet we all do it. His approach to homosexual sin may be awful, or helpful. I simply have no opinion on this.
However, he is a priest. I have a respect for that.
However, he is a priest. I have a respect for that.
S
SuperLuigi
Guest
That’s simply not the case.
- Status