Church is in the dark about gays

[Riley259]

The Boston Globe published this column from a catholic who says that she disagrees with the church on some things including allowing gays to adopt. Read her rationale for disagreeing with some church doctrines - not only is her reasoning quite weak, she also really confuses some basic principles. For example, she sweepingly dismisses the churches teaching on sexual morality but then launches into a piece about forgiveness and says, “Jesus…forgave his Father in heaven for sacrificing him”. Huh?! That statement implies that the Father did something wrong and needed forgiveness. First of all Jesus willingly gave up his life and submitted to the Father’s will and obviously the Father did not need to be forgiven for what He and His Son were in perfect agreement about anyway. It’s sad that this woman came back to the church after being away for 17 years and didn’t take the time to do her homework on why the Church teaches the things that She does. Unfortunately, this woman represents alot of Catholics in this state.

boston.com/news/local/articles/2006/03/19/church_is_in_the_dark_about_gays/

 

[tamccrackine]

It’s a shame she feels as if she’s better than the Church… I cringed when she said she forgave the church for its trespasses… like the Church left her!!!

Some people won’t learn to truly love the Church until they get over their self-idolatry. It’s only then will they humble themselves to say “I am the sinner, not the Church Christ instituted… but ME. So I am the one that needs forgiveness.”

 

[trustmc]

I just read this woman’s article and agreed with the original poster that she misrepresents Catholic teaching. There is a link to send her an email at the bottom of her article where she may be reached.

It seems like her article was an expression of both charity and ignorance. In addition to her theological errors mentioned before, she states that the Church doesn’t allow two people of the same sex to love one another and be in a committed relationship. A mature Catholic would know that this isn’t the case. The Church teaches that two people of the same gender can’t have sex with one another, but this doesn’t preclude them from loving one another platonically and being committed to caring for one another. Their affections can be rich with brotherly love so long as it isn’t sexualized and presented as a type of romance or marriage to the public.

I recommend that if anyone reading this wants to offer her counsel, keep in mind that she has returned to the Church, and now needs to be loved and embraced by the truth. Do not condemn her, just offer her your wisdom and guidance. This is what I plan to do. Thank you, Riley 259, for this opportunity.

Mike

 

[m134e5]

Honestly…people would be much happier if they just submitted to the authority of the Church.

 

[Crow]

Riley259:

[snip]

Unfortunately, this woman represents alot of Catholics in this state.

boston.com/news/local/articles/2006/03/19/church_is_in_the_dark_about_gays/

You mean a lot of Catholics in the world - right?

People who do not know what they ared criticizing loose their right to critize. They should, ‘do their homework’ before being a critic.

If they did their homework though they would find that being a critic of the church is harder than they expected.

 

[Libero]

I understand where she is coming from though, she wants to promote a message of simple love. We, christians, are perhaps the religion that is most obsessed with doctrine, we bask in our power and our definitive understandings.

We are a cold and pedantic orthodoxy, when it would be so much nicer to be a dynamic and lively orthoproxy. We are always sure that we are right, to the point of excluding those who do not obey us, to the point of making others feel like outcasts and rejects, lesser children of God, when this is certainly not the case.

The author brings up an important point in regards to opening our arms and welcoming all into our church, unconditionally.

 

[Riley259]

Libero:

I understand where she is coming from though, she wants to promote a message of simple love. We, christians, are perhaps the religion that is most obsessed with doctrine, we bask in our power and our definitive understandings.

We are a cold and pedantic orthodoxy, when it would be so much nicer to be a dynamic and lively orthoproxy. We are always sure that we are right, to the point of excluding those who do not obey us, to the point of making others feel like outcasts and rejects, lesser children of God, when this is certainly not the case.

The author brings up an important point in regards to opening our arms and welcoming all into our church, unconditionally.

It’s unfortunate that you see the Magisterium as cold and pedantic. When you embrace orthodoxy in it’s authentic form then you find that it is exciting and liberating and that it can be a truly loving way to live precisely because it conforms to the will of God. Lovingly pointing out to people that conforming to the will of God is the best way that they will find true happiness - this is unconditional love at its’ best!

 

[Libero]

Riley259:

It’s unfortunate that you see the Magisterium as cold and pedantic. When you embrace orthodoxy in it’s authentic form then you find that it is exciting and liberating and that it can be a truly loving way to live precisely because it conforms to the will of God. Lovingly pointing out to people that conforming to the will of God is the best way that they will find true happiness - this is unconditional love at its’ best!

I understand what you mean, but it is who I am, perhaps an enthusiast? I don’t know.

But when I see people like Mother Teresa working, The choirs in the Gospel Churches, the peace keeping teams, the campaigners for solidarity and unity, the outreach workers… it is in them that I see faith, I see God, I see a love that stems from what I consider to be real Christianity. This is in contrast to the people who work to define doctrines, to defend them, so that these same words can be used for purposes like ensuring people adhere to eclesiastical authority, and for making people change who they are.

I just see so much more enthusiasm for Christ’s message in the people who I originally listed, over those who seem to want to ensure that the doctrines our theologians created are preserved…

 

[estesbob]

Libero:

I understand where she is coming from though, she wants to promote a message of simple love. We, christians, are perhaps the religion that is most obsessed with doctrine, we bask in our power and our definitive understandings.

We are a cold and pedantic orthodoxy, when it would be so much nicer to be a dynamic and lively orthoproxy. We are always sure that we are right, to the point of excluding those who do not obey us, to the point of making others feel like outcasts and rejects, lesser children of God, when this is certainly not the case.

The author brings up an important point in regards to opening our arms and welcoming all into our church, unconditionally.

So one promotes love when they condone behavior that puts ones imortal soul at risk? We are sure we are right because we have the infallible teachings of the One True Church to guide us.

 

[Libero]

estesbob:

So one promotes love when they condone behavior that puts ones imortal soul at risk? We are sure we are right because we have the infallible teachings of the One True Church to guide us.

One promotes love in ‘condoning’ actions because they recognise that they are no authority, they are no God, they are a human of the same importance to anyone else. They recognise that it is only for God to judge, and in doing this they choose to simply spread the love that Jesus told us to, as opposed to interfering with others affairs, causing distress and trying to impose a rule.

These people realise that in simply spreading love, they are acheiving far more in any given time than they would trying to convert gays etc.

 

[estesbob]

Libero:

I just see so much more enthusiasm for Christ’s message in the people who I originally listed, over those who seem to want to ensure that the doctrines our theologians created are preserved…

You see enthusiasm for what you perceive Christ’s message to be. Unfortunately your perception of Chrit’s message is not his message at all. It is your new improved version of the message that just happens promote your understanding of homosexual behavior. Too often I see people trade a emotion for the Truth.

 

[fix]

Forty years later a different priest called me a cafeteria Catholic, but not in a mean way. He said it with an understanding born of having said this many times before. But he said it with a warning, too. You cannot choose what to believe if you are a Catholic. You have to believe what the church teaches.

I didn’t. And I don’t. And I am not the only one.

Or or nothing at all? Either the Church is who She says She is, or the whole thing is wrong. As the Pope said recently, we cannot separate the Church from Christ.

Despite the inevitable weaknesses of human agents, the Pope continued, the Church reflects the face of Jesus Christ. Today’s Church, led by bishops to whom the faith was passed down from the original apostles, remains intimated linked with the Savior, and in the teachings of the Church "we can read the truth of Christ.cwnews.com/news/viewstory.cfm?recnum=42987

 

[estesbob]

Libero:

One promotes love in ‘condoning’ actions because they recognise that they are no authority, they are no God, they are a human of the same importance to anyone else. They recognise that it is only for God to judge, and in doing this they choose to simply spread the love that Jesus told us to, as opposed to interfering with others affairs, causing distress and trying to impose a rule.

These people realise that in simply spreading love, they are acheiving far more in any given time than they would trying to convert gays etc.

I am no authority but the church is. You reject the teachings of our Church and then criticize us for adhering to them. You are doing no favor for homosexuals by expressing love for them while not the same time expressing fear for their immortal soul.

 

[Libero]

estesbob:

You see enthusiasm for what you perceive Christ’s message to be. Unfortunately your perception of Chrit’s message is not his message at all. It is your new improved version of the message that just happens promote your understanding of homosexual behavior. Too often I see people trade a emotion for the Truth.

Christs message is not love? These people are not acting as Christ, sending aid and saving others, defending those with no place to call home, and trying to stop unecessary death?

I believe this is an instance where we shall disagree, and if Christ is not present in these people, then I could not care less, for I would far rather associate myself with these Christians who work for those who truly are poor, than the good Christians like Ian Paisley who manage to make homosexuals feel somewhat unwelcome in our church…

 

[Libero]

estesbob:

I am no authority but the church is. You reject the teachings of our Church and then criticize us for adhering to them. You are doing no favor for homosexuals by expressing love for them while not the same time expressing fear for their immortal soul.

Why is the church an authority? Because the popes of years past told us so? The church is not a council in heaven, and the pope is not a demi-God. The church is very much so flawed.

I do not reject teachings of the church either, I simply listen to some more than others, and I would not criticise others for having more faith in the institution of the church than me, but would rather want to help them to see that the church can only take us so far, sometimes we have to act in Christ by ourself.

 

[Riley259]

Libero:

Why is the church an authority? Because the popes of years past told us so? The church is not a council in heaven, and the pope is not a demi-God. The church is very much so flawed.

I do not reject teachings of the church either, I simply listen to some more than others, and I would not criticise others for having more faith in the institution of the church than me, but would rather want to help them to see that the church can only take us so far, sometimes we have to act in Christ by ourself.

The Church is the authority because Jesus gave the apostles and their successors the authority to teach and He promised that they would be guided by the Spirit in truth. I’d recommend reading G.K. Chesterson’s book Orthodoxy for a great explanation of why this is so important to our faith.

 

[Libero]

Riley259:

The Church is the authority because Jesus gave the apostles and their successors the authority to teach and He promised that they would be guided by the Spirit in truth. I’d recommend reading G.K. Chesterson’s book Orthodoxy for a great explanation of why this is so important to our faith.

Jesus gave the church the authority to teach what he had taught. The messages which were established, and the messages that he regarded to be so important.

Christ did not tell us to create doctrines and dogmas and then hold them in such high esteem, he taught us to live with religion, not to become obsessed with the words we have written in regards to it. Were we suppsed to go and make all these dogmas and doctrines and then give them a status of such importance as to imply that they are the words of God himself?

We are in a sense making our own religion more dogmatic than it is, instead of actually living the word.

 

[fix]

89 There is an organic connection between our spiritual life and the dogmas. Dogmas are lights along the path of faith; they illuminate it and make it secure. Conversely,if our life is upright, our intellect and heart will be open to welcome the light shed by the dogmas of faith.50

90 The mutual connections between dogmas, and their coherence, can be found in the whole of the Revelation of the mystery of Christ.51 "In Catholic doctrine there exists an order or hierarchy of truths, since they vary in their relation to the foundation of the Christian faith."52

http://javascript<b></b>:openWindow('cr/93.htm');

 

[rlg94086]

Libero:

I understand what you mean, but it is who I am, perhaps an enthusiast? I don’t know.

But when I see people like Mother Teresa working, …

Apparently, you are not that familiar with Mother Teresa. She was very orthodox in her beliefs and chastised President Clinton over life issues when she met with him in the US.

She was a great witness to the faith, but she was not a one-dimensional “do-gooder” like some people think. She spoke the truth…with authority.

 

[Libero]

rlg94086:

Apparently, you are not that familiar with Mother Teresa. She was very orthodox in her beliefs and chastised President Clinton over life issues when she met with him in the US.

She was a great witness to the faith, but she was not a one-dimensional “do-gooder” like some people think. She spoke the truth…with authority.

The moments when she ‘chastised’ so to speak were rare, frequently over matters such as abortion. She was one who did not concern herself with defending doctrines, but rather got into the nitty gritty, working with the people who needed it. Her orthodoxy, apparent as you say, did not interfeer with her work, she would frequently assist people dying of aids, and would not refuse help to those who contracted it through homosexual acts or other ways she deemed immoral.

And this is my entire point. Sometimes, love overides law. Do you think she cared about chastising the gay man who was dying of AIDS and suffering terribly, when in fact she could nurse him and give him a peaceful death?