Depends what you mean by useful and to whom. I donate some of my clothes to others because they are no longer useful to me but are to others. But that’s not what is meant by mutatio gratia mutationis, which is more objective.
Feeling some relief…
That’s an interesting observation, considering that previous Popes have removed excommunications of divorce among other things and even lessened the gravity of certain sins like eating meat on Friday. Perhaps wisdom dictates that we start recognizing the consequences of what comes out of these ongoing discussions. For example, when Pope Paul VI had moral theologians discussing and voting positively on artificial birth control, priests and even bishops started allowing people to “use their consciences.” Seems like the final decision (HV) meant nothing to many as it was the process that changed their consciences in the first place. I’m not saying these discussions are worthless but perhaps we’re making them too transparent, for the lack of a better term.
Yes let’s hope children can be protected.
So why would some say “that gay Catholics’ orientation should be valued and that some elements of same-sex partnerships can be praised”? Isn’t that ushering in gay marriage? And also, what about the teachings of the Church. Are they going to look over the teachings of the Church about homosexuality and gay marriage? Not read certain passages from the Bible now at Mass? I mean, where does this lead? I wish lay people had more leverage in this.
In the Catholic church? What if the question is about birth control? Do you still want lay people to have more leverage?
‘Genetic causes’ do not merely undermine Saint Paul, who our faith says was inspired by the Holy Ghost, but it also undermines moral responsibility, the concept of free will and of free moral agency.Well, here Paul says homosexuality is the result of divine punishment for idolatry. Is he right? Or could it be that he had no idea about biology or genes, and shared the prejudices of his own culture and religion? In fact, the the CCC directly contradicts him, because it says that the genesis of homosexuality is largely unexplained. Not so according to the “Infallible” Paul
I agree that people who are struggling with Catholicism to be hard or difficult, and that people who have left the church find its doctrines in some respect faulty.
Does that continue even today?
And what does the difference in the two phrases mean to you?
My wife stopped being an Extraordinary Minister of Holy Communion because, as long time members of our parish, she knew the people in irregular marriages, used birth control, etc, and she grieved when they continually presented themselves for Holy Communion.
Jesus did not come to call the righteous, but sinners.
I have no idea what your post means in the context of my post.
First…we are all sinners. Second, Jesus came for all of us…not only the sinners that “adhere” to Church rules.
Are you saying that the printed guidelines for reception of Holy Communion found in most misallettes are void and should be entirely disregarded?
No, simply that this is a problem of the human institution. In Matthew’s gospel Jesus himself says Go and learn the meaning of the words, ‘I desire mercy, not sacrifice.’[a] I did not come to call the righteous but sinners.”