Gay Marriage in America

[qui_est_ce]

You may not know how those that leave the faith can be saved, but I have faith that God does. The Church does not teach that such people are damned.

TMC, I don’t know what your religion is, but the Catholic Church does teach the heretics are damned. Of course we will never know the state of the soul at the point of death. The Church does not declare a person damned, but acts which can lead to damnation. Heresy is a mortal sin. The Church teaches that one who dies in mortal sin is damned. Again, we cannot know the state of the persons soul at death. It is not for us to judge.

What Is Heresy?
The Catechism of the Catholic Church states, “**Incredulity is the neglect of revealed truth or the willful refusal to assent to it. Heresy is the obstinate post-baptismal denial of some truth which must be believed with divine and Catholic faith, **or it is likewise an obstinate doubt concerning the same; apostasy is the total repudiation of the Christian faith; schism is the refusal of submission to the Roman Pontiff or of communion with the members of the Church subject to him” (CCC 2089).

To commit heresy, one must refuse to be corrected. A person who is ready to be corrected or who is unaware that what he has been saying is against Church teaching is not a heretic.

A person must be baptized to commit heresy. This means that movements that have split off from or been influenced by Christianity, but that do not practice baptism (or do not practice valid baptism), are not heresies, but separate religions. Examples include Muslims, who do not practice baptism, and Jehovah’s Witnesses, who do not practice valid baptism.

I hope this helps.

 

[tm30]

You may not know how those that leave the faith can be saved, but I have faith that God does. The Church does not teach that such people are damned.

Why does one need to be Catholic then?

 

[tm30]

Why won’t you answer the question? In what school are you theologically trained?

 

[michelleds]

This claim is merely superstition, as is the Muslim claim that a Muslim who converts to Christianity is going to end up in Islamic hell. Both claims reflect a primitive, superstitious take on reality, and I agree with people like **Richard Dawkins **who consign this sort of silly theology to the dustbin. (Unfortunately Dawkins can’t see a greater reality beyond this.)

If God is infinitely wise, I’m sure **She **can recognize that the created order is confusing to those creatures who over millions of years have evolved into rational self-awareness and spiritual consciousness. I imagine God hopes the best for all his creatures, and gives them the benefit of the doubt as they search for God with sincerity of heart. Actually we make a prayer for this intention on Good Friday.

StAnastasia

Could you change your identifier to Liberal Relativism since that would more accurately reflect the religion you espouse? It is the absolute height of heterodoxy to make some of the outrageous, and quite frankly insulting, claims that you have made in this thread. according to what you claim to believe, we all might as well be anything but Catholic.

 

[TMC]

TMC, I don’t know what your religion is, but the Catholic Church does teach the heretics are damned. Of course we will never know the state of the soul at the point of death. The Church does not declare a person damned, but acts which can lead to damnation. Heresy is a mortal sin. The Church teaches that one who dies in mortal sin is damned. Again, we cannot know the state of the persons soul at death. It is not for us to judge.
I hope this helps.

I am Catholic, and the Church does not teach that all heretics, all non-Catholics or all former Catholics are damned to Hell.

 

[qui_est_ce]

Could you change your identifier to Liberal Relativism since that would more accurately reflect the religion you espouse? It is the absolute height of heterodoxy to make some of the outrageous, and quite frankly insulting, claims that you have made in this thread. according to what you claim to believe, we all might as well be anything but Catholic.

Michelle-
I really like your posts and would hate to see you banned. It is against forum rules to questions a person’s faith. Better to state what the Catholic Church teaches.

It also helps the lurkers. I’ve known many who come to these threads looking for Truth and eventually convert. These converts are some of most orthodox Catholics.

 

[TMC]

Why does one need to be Catholic then?

Catholicism is not a rewards program where you pick the best religion in order to get the best after-life. We are Christians and Catholics because we believe that Catholicism represents the truth. To me, Cathlocism is about how to best live this life, not about securing a place in the next. If we were only Catholic because we expect our “investment” to reap the greatest reward, what is moral or redeeming about that? Would you convert to another religion if it made you a better “offer” for the after-life, or would you stay with what you think is right and true?

 

[qui_est_ce]

I am Catholic, and the Church does not teach that all heretics, all non-Catholics or all former Catholics are damned to Hell.

As I stated earlier, we cannot judge a person’s soul at the moment of death.

• The Church teaches that all who die in unrepentant mortal sin go to Hell.
• Heresy is a mortal sin.

Therefore, all unrepentant heretics, at the time of death, go to Hell.

Which part of my premises are incorrect?

 

[sedonaman]

…"Affirmed in the recent [New York] vote is the disturbing reality that the Catholic hierarchy has lost most of its credibility with the wider culture on matters of sexuality and personal morality, just as it has lost its authority within the Catholic community on the same issues. There are reasons – and they have little to do with secularism, relativism or lingering influences of the wild 1960s – why people are no longer listening to the bishops.
…

To say that “the Catholic hierarchy has lost most of its credibility” is to say that it had it at one time. The message hasn’t changed in 2,000 years. So what has? Peoples’ attitudes. To say the bishops “lost” credibility is therefore incorrect. A more correct statement would be the people have come to reject the message. It’s no accident that this rejection coincided with “secularism, relativism, and the lingering influences of the wild 1960s.” What else influences the way people think more than the culture at large?

 

[TMC]

As I stated earlier, we cannot judge a person’s soul at the moment of death.

• The Church teaches that all who die in unrepentant mortal sin go to Hell.
• Heresy is a mortal sin.

Therefore, all unrepentant heretics, at the time of death, go to Hell.

Which part of my premises are incorrect?

All three are incorrect. As you said in this very post, the Church does not teach that we can know that any particular person is in Hell or going to Hell, including that the Church does not rule out salvation for those that are in mortal sin. Heresy is not always a mortal sin. All unrepentant heretics do not go to Hell.

 

[qui_est_ce]

Catholicism is not a rewards program where you pick the best religion in order to get the best after-life. We are Christians and Catholics because we believe that Catholicism represents the truth. To me, Cathlocism is about how to best live this life,** not about securing a place in the next**. If we were only Catholic because we expect our **“investment” to reap the greatest reward, **what is moral or redeeming about that? Would you convert to another religion if it made you a better “offer” for the after-life, or would you stay with what you think is right and true?

I like this post. It explains exactly what puts me off about the “Are you saved” people.

I would say, though, that Catholicism is about living our life in constant praise of God.

 

[qui_est_ce]

All three are incorrect. As you said in this very post, the Church does not teach that we can know that any particular person is in Hell or going to Hell, including that the Church does not rule out salvation for those that are in mortal sin. Heresy is not always a mortal sin. All unrepentant heretics do not go to Hell.

I think you might be unclear as to what a heretic is. According to the CCC (see my earlier post). A heretic is a Catholic baptized person who willfully and obstinately rejects the teachings of the Church. A person born outside the faith is not a heretic. For example, Arius was a heretic. If he had any children who he raised as Arians, they would not be heretics.

There is a difference between declaring a person damned and teaching what sins lead to damnation if unrepented at the hour of death.

 

[tm30]

Catholicism is not a rewards program where you pick the best religion in order to get the best after-life. We are Christians and Catholics because we believe that Catholicism represents the truth. To me, Cathlocism is about how to best live this life, not about securing a place in the next. If we were only Catholic because we expect our “investment” to reap the greatest reward, what is moral or redeeming about that? Would you convert to another religion if it made you a better “offer” for the after-life, or would you stay with what you think is right and true?

But your posts indicate you can oppose the Church have salvation. That’s patently false.
We’re not Catholics because it’s True (although it is). We’re Catholics because we’ve been given the incredible gift of spiritual adoption through Baptism, and are kept spiritually alive through the sacraments.

Meanwhile Pope Innocent III declared infallibly in 1208:

“By the heart we believe and by the mouth we confess the one Church, not of heretics but the Holy Roman, catholic, and Apostolic (Church) outside which we believe that no one is saved.” (D.E.S.; The Sources of Catholic Dogma; 30th edition, # 423)

 

[StAnastasia]

Catholicism is not a rewards program where you pick the best religion in order to get the best after-life. We are Christians and Catholics because we believe that Catholicism represents the truth. To me, Cathlocism is about how to best live this life, not about securing a place in the next. If we were only Catholic because we expect our “investment” to reap the greatest reward, what is moral or redeeming about that? Would you convert to another religion if it made you a better “offer” for the after-life, or would you stay with what you think is right and true?

If I have 300,000 purgatory-year credits saved up, can I carry those over to Islam? Do they expire if I don’t use them?

 

[Santi2]

No, it’s a real family unit.

No, it is not. It is a pretend family unit arising from social engineering. As stated in the Gay Liberation Front Manifesto 1972.

“…

The oppression of gay people starts in the most basic unit of society, the family. consisting of the man in charge, a slave as his wife, and their children on whom they force themselves as the ideal models. The very form of the family works against homosexuality.
…

We’ve all been brought up to believe that the family is the source of our happiness and comfort. But look at the family more closely. Within the small family unit, in which the dominant man and submissive woman bring up their children in their own image, all our attitudes towards sexuality are learned at a very early age. Almost before we can talk, certainly before we can think for ourselves, we are taught that there are certain attributes that are ‘feminine’ and other that are ‘masculine’, and that they are God-given and unchangeable. Beliefs learned so young are very hard to change; but in fact these are false beliefs. What we are taught about the differences between man and woman is propaganda, not truth.

…that is why we, along with the women’s movement, must fight for something more than reform. We must aim at the abolition of the family,

so that the sexist, male supremacist system can no longer be nurtured there.”
…*

I refuse to provide a link to the manifesto but, you can access it online.

As an aside, there’s a statement towards the end of the manifesto which gay advocates might find interesting as they barrel on with the campaign for the redefinition of marriage to include same sex unions:

“It is especially important for gay people to stop copying straight-“

 

[qui_est_ce]

No, it is not. It is a pretend family unit arising from social engineering. As stated in the Gay Liberation Front Manifesto 1972.

**

I refuse to provide a link to the manifesto but, you can access it online.

As an aside, there’s a statement towards the end of the manifesto which gay advocates might find interesting as they barrel on with the campaign for the redefinition of marriage to include same sex unions:

**

What an angry bunch of people. We must pray for them.

“Most Sacred Heart of Jesus, I place my faith in Thee.” :getholy:

 

[StAnastasia]

Why won’t you answer the question? In what school are you theologically trained?

FYI, I don’t answer inquisitions. But I was trained at Oxford and other universities, and my theology professors have included Dominicans, Franciscans, Jesuits, Anglicans, Presbyterians, and Catholic diocesan priests.

 

[qui_est_ce]

Santi2;8412680:

No, it’s a real family unit. At my sons’ parish school there are quite a few couples who were not able to have children of their own, and who adopted children them from China, Mexico, Colombia, Africa. One of our friends lost her husband to cancer when her daughter was born – they are a family of mother and daughter. There is another family consisting of a father and his adopted daughter. Adopted children are just as real as biological children, and all are part of real families.

The exception does not define the norm.

 

[qui_est_ce]

FYI, I don’t answer inquisitions. But I was trained at Oxford and other universities, and my theology professors have included Dominicans, Franciscans, Jesuits, Anglicans, Presbyterians, and Catholic diocesan priests.

Obviously in institutions not in union with Rome. Not judging, just stating the facts based on your posts.

 

[StAnastasia]

No, it is not. It is a pretend family unit arising from social engineering.

It’s no more a pretend family than is a “family” which includes infertile heterosexuals who have adopted children. Both are real families by any definition except a bigoted exclusive “nuclear family” definition.