Gay rights activists protest N. California mall

[fix]

Are you sure that you want to rehash the behavior of the Church? Do you know the 7 century history of Jewish persecution? Hitler did not invent jewish ghettos. hitler did not come up with idea of identifying jews with a patch on their clothing. He only took ideas from the history of the Church, promoted by popes, and applied 20th century technology to the ideas.

Are you ignorant of Catholic history? Or so you simply accept the whitewash version which comes from hierarchy?

This is a very sordid path that you propose that we explore. It includes popes who owned slaves and enjoyed shopping in slave markets, and so on. I would prefer not to go down that path. Tell me if you insist. I would prefer to remain in the 21st century and consider what we know and believe today.

Is revisionist history through a biased 21st century relativistic lens really history?

 

[scipio337]

Oh, and PS, if you want to start at the 7th Century oppression of Jews, you should probably be aware of 4 previous centuries of Muslim rule and persecution of Catholics in the Iberian penninsula.

History doesn’t exist in a vacuum.

 

[Denise1957]

Your claims are simply false, and they ignore history. Your attacks are personal and not based on fact.

Did you read the link on the real story of Galileo that Cor Cordis provided? The issue with Galileo is complicated. It is not simply a matter of the Church not wanting to believe that the sun is the center of the universe. But you accept the surface-level and simplistic explanation that the anti-Catholics and secular humanists like to use.

On a surface-level, it makes a certain amount of sense that homosexuals should have the same rights as everyone else. However, if one tries to look for a deeper context, rather than a simple context, it can be shown that the ramifications for these supposed ‘rights’ are a disaster for society. If the line on morality is not drawn sharply, the there eventually will be no line.

You pointed out the sins of the sex-abuse crisis as an example of why the Church has lost its moral authority. You are quite naturally offended by the crimes of a relatively few priests, and yet you cannot see that society is going in a direction in which these crimes may eventually be seen as ‘normal’ by some in our society as well; and in fact, there are those who believe that it’s normal to abuse children. Would you agree? Where do you personally draw the line, and why?

 

[epan]

I’m full aware of some of the actions of the Church (or more specifically, people in the Church) in the past, but surely you can differentiate between action, and dogma?

We are discussing apples and rutabagas. It’s been (correctly) pointed out that Church dogma hasn’t changed.

EX: Taking Communion in the hand, or directly is a practice of the Church, which can change. Christ as the begotten Son of God is dogma, which can’t.

OK. This is my last post in this thread, because I honestly do not want to get into this territory.

But let’s make it current. The Catholic Church is so morally depraved in its hierarchy that it makes headlines over sexual abuse after 20 years and an entire papacy of trying to clean it up. It persecuted Jews, in ways that are unmentionable, for 700 years. It persecutes homosexuals today. CARDINAL MAHONEY IS VOTING IN THE CONCLAVE!

When will the moral depravity end? I pose this as a very serious question. Please answer it directly.

You cannot divorce the actions of a pope or cardinal from the dogma of the church, and then claim that the pope defines the dogma of the church. don’t you get that?

I am out of this thread. Rant on.

 

[fix]

OK. This is my last post in this thread, because I honestly do not want to get into this territory.

But let’s make it current. The Catholic Church is so morally depraved in its hierarchy that it makes headlines over sexual abuse after 20 years and an entire papacy of trying to clean it up. It persecuted Jews, in ways that are unmentionable, for 700 years. It persecutes homosexuals today. CARDINAL MAHONEY IS VOTING IN THE CONCLAVE!

When will the moral depravity end?

You cannot divorce the actions of a pope or cardinal from the dogma of the church, and then claim that the pope defines the dogma of the church. don’t you get that?

I am out of this thread. Rant on.

If the Church does not have moral authority then who does? The people who think anything goes because they feel like it? Is that the standard?

 

[Lochias]

OK. This is my last post in this thread, because I honestly do not want to get into this territory.

But let’s make it current. The Catholic Church is so morally depraved in its hierarchy that it makes headlines over sexual abuse after 20 years and an entire papacy of trying to clean it up. It persecuted Jews, in ways that are unmentionable, for 700 years. It persecutes homosexuals today. CARDINAL MAHONEY IS VOTING IN THE CONCLAVE!

When will the moral depravity end?

You cannot divorce the actions of a pope or cardinal from the dogma of the church, and then claim that the pope defines the dogma of the church. don’t you get that?

I am out of this thread. Rant on.

 

[Denise1957]

OK. This is my last post in this thread, because I honestly do not want to get into this territory.

But let’s make it current. The Catholic Church is so morally depraved in it hierarchy that it makes headlines over sexual abuse after 20 years and an entire papacy of trying to clean it up. It persecuted Jews, in ways that are unmentionable, for 700 years. It persecutes homosexuals today.

When will the moral depravity end?

You cannot divorce the actions of a pope or cardinal from the dogma of the church, and then claim that the pope defines the dogma of the church. don’t you get that?

I am out of this thread. Rant on.

No, you don’t get out of answering all these questions so easily. It’s not fair to run away and not address these serious accusations you’ve lobbed at the Catholic Church. It’s a cowardly way of doing things.

How does the Church persecute homosexuals? It is really persecution to say that marriage is only the right of one man and one woman? No, it is not. Catholics are called upon to have love and understanding for those who suffer from same-sex attraction. But that does not extend to accepting same-sex behavior as normal.

 

[Lochias]

No, you don’t get out of answering all these questions so easily. It’s not fair to run away and not address these serious accusations you’ve lobbed at the Catholic Church. It’s a cowardly way of doing things.

Agreed. The last tactic of those with no actual argument is to simply “take their ball and go home.”

 

[JackyB]

Homosexuality occurs in nature, therefore it’s natural. Calling something unnatural based on the way you think things should be is more unnatural than homosexuality.

I think it’s more likely that it offends you because you find it disgusting, it has nothing to do with how natural or unnatural it is. Does polyester offend you too?

Some animals eat their young in nature.

 

[epan]

Agreed. The last tactic of those with no actual argument is to simply “take their ball and go home.”

OK. So explain how 12th century science trumps 21st century science. The ball in now in your court.

 

[Denise1957]

Agreed. The last tactic of those with no actual argument is to simply “take their ball and go home.”

True. It’s interesting how some of those who hold Far-Left views are more rigid and intolerant of the explanations of those who try to explain the Church’s teachings, and to explain why those teachings are still important even when some in the Church have committed grave sin.

 

[Lochias]

OK. So explain how 12th century science trumps 21st century science. The ball in now in your court.

…no. People asked you to explain YOUR thoughts and actions, not the other way around. AND, your request is a complete and total non-sequitor devoid of any context or function.

 

[Denise1957]

OK. So explain how 12th century science trumps 21st century science. The ball in now in your court.

If it weren’t for the Catholic Church, which supported the sciences even in the 12th century, would Galileo even have ever been able to do any research at all? The Church throughout history has supported scientific progress, which is why later, in the time of Galileo, he was able to even have a view to present.

If Galileo were more patient, rather than insist that his views on Copernicus had to be absolutely accepted, the situation may have been different.

 

[epan]

…no. People asked you to explain YOUR thoughts and actions, not the other way around. AND, your request is a complete and total non-sequitor devoid of any context or function.

Your proposal is that 12th and 13th century philosophy prevails over 21st century science. Stop dodging the question and explain how that works.

 

[epan]

If it weren’t for the Catholic Church, which supported the sciences even in the 12th century, would Galileo even have ever been able to do any research at all? The Church throughout history has supported scientific progress, which is why later, in the time of Galileo, he was able to even have a view to present.

If Galileo were more patient, rather than insist that his views on Copernicus had to be absolutely accepted, the situation may have been different.

Now that is hilarious. Are you claiming that Galileo was convicted of lacking patience?

 

[Denise1957]

Now that is hilarious. Are you claiming that Galileo was convicted of lacking patience?

So what EXACTLY was he convicted of? Please be specific.

 

[Lochias]

Your proposal is that 12th and 13th century philosophy prevails over 21st century science. Stop dodging the question and explain how that works.

…the two are related, but the Church doesn’t explain science. Similarly, science doesn’t explain philosophy.

Like another poster tried to tell you, apples and rutabagas.

Also, watch your tone.

 

[epan]

So what EXACTLY was he convicted of? Please be specific.

how tedious. consult your history books. he was convicted of heresy because he contradicted a pope who wanted the universe to rotate around the earth. look it up.

he avoided torture and possible death by recanting his heretical view that the earth rotates around the sun. he also was stripped of any revenues from the heretical publication which promoted the heretical truth.

are you serious?

 

[epan]

…the two are related, but the Church doesn’t explain science. Similarly, science doesn’t explain philosophy.

Like another poster tried to tell you, apples and rutabagas.

Also, watch your tone.

Watch your tone. You lower yourself to personal insult. I tend to stick to facts.

You propose on one hand that the church cannot address science, and on the other hand proclaim that the church can override scientific discovery by proclaiming moral authority. Which is it? This is why the example of Galileo is illustrative. Do you maintain the the Sun revolves around the Earth? If not, then why not?

 

[Lochias]

Watch you tone.

You propose on one hand that the church cannot address science, and on the other hand proclaim that the church can override scientific discovery by proclaiming moral authority. Which is it?

Scientific discovery has no authority in the moral way in which we live our lives. This is where your disconnect lies. Science can, at best, help us further elucidate what we already know to be true. Take the example of suicide and how we now know that many people do not take their lives of their own true, free will.

Science only explains HOW the world works. Religion explains the WHY.