Catholics in US overwhelmingly support homosexual unions [CWN]

  • Thread starter Thread starter CWN_News
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
estesbob said:
I am curious how you reconcile your population control views with the teachings of our Church?
Click to expand...
I’ve never seen a theological argument mandating that couples having more children than replacement rate.
 
StAnastasia said:
I’ve never seen a theological argument mandating that couples having more children than replacement rate.
Click to expand...
You have been referred to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, Pope John Paul II’s encyclical “Theology of the Body” and Pope Paul VIs encyclical "Humanae Vitae ". You can also refer to 2000 years of unchanging teachings of the Church and every single Christian denomination up until the early 1930s.I ask you again how ,as a Catholic ,do you reconcile rejecting Church teaching with your professed faith?
 
StAnastasia said:
I don’t. There is no room for dialogue, so I don’t even try.
Click to expand...
I am curious as to what insights you have gained that escaped John Paul the II , Paul VI and every member of the magestrium for the last 2000 years? You claim there is no theological basis for this which means that you, as a Catholic, says our church is wrong.
 
estesbob said:
I am curious as to what insights you have gained that escaped John Paul the II , Paul VI and every member of the magestrium for the last 2000 years? You claim there is no theological basis for this which means that you, as a Catholic, says our church is wrong.
Click to expand...
This topic has been rehashed so many times since 1967 that this is not the forum in which to rehash it yet again. We’ll have to agree to disagree one this one.
 
estesbob said:
I am curious as to what insights you have gained that escaped John Paul the II , Paul VI and every member of the magestrium for the last 2000 years? You claim there is no theological basis for this which means that you, as a Catholic, says our church is wrong.
Click to expand...
She didn’t say “no theological basis” - it was no “coherent” theological basis. Since there have obviously been multiple coherent theological explanations, one can rightly assume StAnastasia was unable to follow or understand the arguments and prefers to go with her limited, flawed understanding. Had she said there were coherent arguments that she just disagrees with, it would be a different matter.

Either way though, it is an issue of pride.
 
estesbob said:
You have been referred to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, Pope John Paul II’s encyclical “Theology of the Body” and Pope Paul VIs encyclical "Humanae Vitae ". You can also refer to 2000 years of unchanging teachings of the Church and every single Christian denomination up until the early 1930s.I ask you again how ,as a Catholic ,do you reconcile rejecting Church teaching with your professed faith?
Click to expand...
Is there a mandate to have more than 3 children?
 
rlg94086 said:
It is a very “coherent” theological work by John Paul II that explains the purpose and design of human sexuality, so I am just curious how StAnastasia, theologian, does not believe their is any coherent theological basis for Church teaching regarding birth control, the procreative nature of sexuality, etc.

I highly recommend you read it.
Click to expand...
So, you don’t have any significant passages for us here? No abstract? No thesis?
 
larkin31 said:
So, you don’t have any significant passages for us here? No abstract? No thesis?
Click to expand...
Nothing particular that I feel like looking up and posting. It’s a large piece of work. If it interests you, then read it and/or do some research on it.
 
larkin31 said:
Pride seems to be a common coin among Catholics here. Why should she be any different?
Click to expand...
Did I say she was? We all struggle with pride…that’s why it’s considered the greatest of sins. (look up the fall of an angel named Lucifer for a good example)
 
rlg94086 said:
Nothing particular that I feel like looking up and posting. It’s a large piece of work. If it interests you, then read it and/or do some research on it.
Click to expand...
I did look it up (series of lectures and all). Seemed pretty standard dogma that I have read here as well. But I thought I’d give someone a chance to highlight the most cogent stuff. Or new stuff.

Because I agree that the argument is not coherent and that it is based, ultimately, on a weak scriptural case.
 
rlg94086 said:
Did I say she was? We all struggle with pride…that’s why it’s considered the greatest of sins. (look up the fall of an angel named Lucifer for a good example)
Click to expand...
I can’t look that Lucifer thing up in the Bible, can I? Didn’t someone else first come up with that story?
 
rlg94086 said:
Did I say she was? We all struggle with pride…that’s why it’s considered the greatest of sins. (look up the fall of an angel named Lucifer for a good example)
Click to expand...
I try not to criticize others for the faults that I have as well. The mote and the beam, and all.
 
larkin31 said:
I did look it up (series of lectures and all). Seemed pretty standard dogma that I have read here as well. But I thought I’d give someone a chance to highlight the most cogent stuff. Or new stuff.

Because I agree that the argument is not coherent and that it is based, ultimately, on a weak scriptural case.
Click to expand...
Cool. So, read Theology of the Body, and you will be determine whether it is a coherent argument. 👍

Of course, you might want to look up “coherent,” so you know what it is you are judging. It’s possible for an argument to be coherent, even though you disagree with it.
 
larkin31 said:
I can’t look that Lucifer thing up in the Bible, can I? Didn’t someone else first come up with that story?
Click to expand...
Yes, the myth of Lucifer has a long and fascinating history. See Jeffrey Burton Russell’s *Lucifer, the Devil in the Middle Ages *(Ithaca, N.Y. : Cornell University Press, 1984).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top