Dramatic move as Synod Fathers set out new pastoral care for gays, cohabiting couples and divorcees

  • Thread starter Thread starter gilliam
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
gilliam said:
My guess is that this section will be rewritten before the final vote on Saturday
Click to expand...
Why was it made public with such poor wording then? How are those who decided to release it in the current form not guilty of causing divisions?
 
Whatever they REALLY mean by this, they were just plain stupid to publish it.

No one outside the church is going to study it and understand the difference between the sinner and the sin. We’ve been saying that for years, and they don’t understand it now. What makes anyone think that using even softer, more ambigious language is going to help?

Francis needs to have a much better understanding of the press and the world we live in.
This never should have been published. It will be used left, right and centre to say that the Church has finally allowed divorce, remarriage, gay sex and contraception. They will say the Church has done away with sin.

I just can’t believe the stupidity.
I don’t think the previous two popes would have been so unconscious of the wider implications.

Even if it doesn’t stand, we have an even steeper uphill battle to wage, against misunderstanding of our church.
 
PaulinVA said:
Wow. I totally disagree. Totally. A couple in an irregular marriage shouldn’t even come to Church and sit together? Really?
Click to expand...
Not quite my meaning. I knew a divorced and remarried couple who came to church but sat apart, thereby acknowledging they were not demanding social acceptance of their irregular situation. Parishioners knew them and kept on friendly terms with them. It was an uncomfortable and unhappy situation but that is what so many people’s lives are - they get into a false situation and can’t get out of it.
PaulinVA said:
I have to ask you something. Can you cite any magisterial documents that support your position that people that seem to be steeped in sin should not go to Mass?
Click to expand...
I don’t know of any and I certainly wouldn’t advocate such a thing myself.
PaulinVA said:
Or, alternatively, a document appointing certain people in each parish to be the “Keepers of the Purity” to bar people they don’t consider worthy from entering?
Click to expand...
These days that’s the priest’s job. A priest can and should bar a homosexual couple from entering his church if they insist on sitting together. Quem tacet consentire - Silence give consent. He has to speak up.

None of this in any way undermines charity.
 
I just don’t understand how they can propose that we find value in an orientation that God found, finds gravely sinful to the point that he destroyed because of it. If God looked at the fidelity and love within the homosexual relationships in Sodom and Gomorrah as something good, then why did He destroy them? This seems to be such a contradiction.
 
Pronger1 said:
Why was it made public with such poor wording then? How are those who decided to release it in the current form not guilty of causing divisions?
Click to expand...
This is a dialog we will all be involved in. It will go on for a year. These are the initial notes that will be refined to a document on Saturday that the bishops will vote on. Even then it will be a rough draft meant to create dialog which will last a year and ultimately they will come up with recommendations to give the pope (which again, he can act on or not at his discretion.) It’s a process.
 
ringil said:
You follow the Pope. Period.

Otherwise join the SSPX.

Thoughts of “breaking up” the Church are of Satan.
Click to expand...
The Devil seeks to destroy the Church from within and from without. I believe this is one of his attempts to destroy it from within. The Pope bears the brunt of the attack. We should pray for our Holy Father.
 
lakotak said:
I just don’t understand how they can propose that we find value in an orientation that God found, finds gravely sinful to the point that he destroyed because of it. If God looked at the fidelity and love within the homosexual relationships in Sodom and Gomorrah as something good, then why did He destroy them? This seems to be such a contradiction.
Click to expand...
Orientation itself is not sinful. Actions are sinful.
 
FollowChrist34 said:
I mean beautiful in the sense the crucifixion was beautiful in what it brought about. I merely mean that the Christian life in truth often involves redemptive suffering, individually and collectively. And, believe me, I mourn schism. But sometimes it’s the will of God. Have you read Schneider? That was the basis of my reference.
Click to expand...
I haven’t read Schneider. But you believe schism is sometimes God’s will and you said in another post you would be happier in a smaller Church which was purer to doctrine. Fair enough if that’s what you believe. But smaller means less people. So less in the pews than even now. I don’t understand how exactly that will work to bring CC teachings to their ears if they aren’t there to hear it.
 
Sy_Noe said:
I haven’t read Schneider. But you believe schism is sometimes God’s will and you said in another post you would be happier in a smaller Church which was purer to doctrine. Fair enough if that’s what you believe. But smaller means less people. So less in the pews than even now. I don’t understand how exactly that will work to bring CC teachings to their ears if they aren’t there to hear it.
Click to expand...
Our Lord did ask if He would find any faith when He returned. :o
 
Yesterday, when I heard the Gospel being read, I thought to myself that it is a sad day in the Church when Our Lord begins to sound harsher than the present Church.
 
EIF5A said:
Orientation itself is not sinful. Actions are sinful.
Click to expand...
If all of this is true, then I am assuming they will define in some way that the orientation does not include the sexual practices too. Yes, the orientation is one thing, but the actions are another with the orientation…
 
I come from a different perspective than others on this. I am now divorced as my wife left to pursue a lesbian relationship. She is now in a state sanctioned gay marriage. There are MANY in the gay community that will use any ambiguity to further push their agenda. It is already on social media feeds. They will be at church sitting together. They will lie as it is perfectly acceptable to win their own converts. Whoever decided to release this just held the door open for Satan and said, come on in.
 
FollowChrist34 said:
Keep in mind that we’ve yet to hear fully from all of the bishops. They haven’t voted on anything and they haven’t had a chance to speak out to the laity. Maybe there are some saints out there after all. There could more turns and twists ahead than you would ever imagine. I wonder what Thomas More is thinking right now? A LOT of the Church doctrine and tradition is soon to be obsolete, if not now, in the near future.
Click to expand...
I am sure Thomas More was already disappointed in the Church. After all, it has given up the venerable tradition of burning heretics at the stake, and More was directly involved in three such executions. 😃
 
That’s it, I’m gone. I tried to be the voice of reason on this thread, and was callously ignored. Good day.
 
Sy_Noe said:
I haven’t read Schneider. But you believe schism is sometimes God’s will and you said in another post you would be happier in a smaller Church which was purer to doctrine. Fair enough if that’s what you believe. But smaller means less people. So less in the pews than even now. I don’t understand how exactly that will work to bring CC teachings to their ears if they aren’t there to hear it.
Click to expand...
More people in the pews aren’t going to learn the CC teachings if the message is distorted.
 
manualman said:
We are a hospital for sinners. But a hospital that welcomes in wounded and sick people, hugs them, talks to them and is friendly to them while never actually informing them of what’s wrong, much less offering any treatment to HEAL them isn’t much of a hospital, is it? That’s the effective danger here if our leaders don’t correctly read the public and preach to them accordingly. A doctor who is so afraid of offending his 350 pound alcoholic smoker of a patient that he needs to eat better, exercise and quit the sauce and smokes is NOT helping any. The trick is to walk the tightrope between discouraging/alienating them (mistake on the right) and enabling their continued self destruction (mistake on the left). Narrow road, you know…
Click to expand...
In his homily this morning, the priest commented that mercy is not giving a person whatever he or she wants and thinks will make them happy. Mercy is giving them the truth.
 
Justin_Swanton said:
These days that’s the priest’s job. A priest can and should bar a homosexual couple from entering his church if they insist on sitting together. Quem tacet consentire - Silence give consent. He has to speak up.

None of this in any way undermines charity.
Click to expand...
I’m having trouble with, “In all Christian charity, you are not welcome here.”

This is indeed a thorny subject, but I don’t think sending people away is the way to convert them.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top