K
Kindnessmatters
Guest
I don’t think 99% of us would research what the nutcracker is about.
I was curious what that meant as well.Honestly, jan10000 identifies herself as a “cultural Catholic”, whatever that means.
I don’t buy that… As it reflects not Catholic Church Teachings…They also recognize that LGBT people had been oppressed for a long time and view their fuller inclusion as a social justice issue. I would like to think that some people in the congregations my partner and I have attended over the years changed their minds on this issue because they came to know us.
With the response:They also recognize that LGBT people had been oppressed for a long time and view their fuller inclusion as a social justice issue
Was what prompted my answer. Catholic Teachings DO speak of respect, do recognize that this is a trial for our brothers and sisters, etc.I don’t buy that… As it reflects not Catholic Church Teachings…
Yes that’s so… yet you seemingly (conveniently?) left this following Teaching out…2358 The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God’s will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord’s Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.
The Church cannot accept something that is not…if nothing else the Church is called to be a good observer of human nature, as it is revealed.vz71:
I just said I wouldn’t be surprised that in 500 years Catholics accepted gay marriage, women priests, and so forth. Imagine 500 years ago if I said I wouldn’t be surprised if most Catholics thought Genesis a myth and not scientific reality?And it does not stand up well to the facts.
Yes… and to quote just what you quotedAgain, I never once said to ignore the rest of the chapter (I’d advise the entire chapter, not just 1 or 3 paragraphs).
These have been infallibly ruled against.I just said I wouldn’t be surprised that in 500 years Catholics accepted gay marriage, women priests, and so forth.
As I said, many people “also recognize that LGBT people had been oppressed for a long time.” That is to say that they were subject to “unjust discrimination” for a long time. Many were fired from their jobs, harassed and sometimes arrested by the police, disowned by their families, experienced physical violence, etc.TheLittleLady:
Yes that’s so… yet you seemingly (conveniently?) left this following Teaching out…2358 The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God’s will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord’s Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.
In Fuller Context - The Church also Teaches This:
**[2357] Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex. …
Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity, tradition has always declared that “homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered.” … They are contrary to the natural law.
They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.
2396 Among the sins gravely contrary to chastity are masturbation, fornication, pornography, and homosexual practices.
And BEFORE it even started!Thank you.
It would have been one thing if they’d stood up and started protesting. But they didn’t, they left in an orderly and non disruptive manner.
That’s already been adressed multiple times in the thread before, so it is not neccessary to say it again.Yes… and to quote just what you quoted
can mislead those who aren’t familiar with all Church Teachings on homo-sexual sex.
There’s nothing in the Magisterium which supports that notion…also recognize that LGBT people had been oppressed for a long time.”
If your only objection is to the term “LGBT,” you can replace “LGBT people” with “homosexual persons” (a term used in Catholic documents) and people who suffer from gender dysphoria. That would be fine with me. If your objection is to the notion that these people suffered from “unjust discrimination,” that’s more problematic. I don’t think that the Catholic Church holds the position that it’s a good thing for homosexual persons (active or not) to be fired from their jobs or arrested or denied housing or be subjected to violence or expelled from their families because of their sexuality. And yet that is what happened to many homosexual persons and it was unjust.Thorolfr:
There’s nothing in the Magisterium which supports that notion…also recognize that LGBT people had been oppressed for a long time.”
The Magisterium neither employs that ‘alphabet’ - nor does it use the secular term ‘gay’