I was not speaking about the world’s view, but about those who know their faith and recognize two elements in the institutional Church and therefore, have no problem separating the Divine from the human. The personal sins of the priests in no way touch the fundamental *essence *of the faith nor corrupt it. Yes, many things have harmed the church and she could have possibly been destroyed by the sex scandals if it was not always about the faith.I think we should separate “credibility” and “authority”.
Authority is given from above. Credibility is something we can lose by our actions that run counter to what we profess and believe.
I think one can accept Church teachings while still believing that certain events in the past have harmed how the world views the Church.
RED FLAG HERE! To me this quote, which came from the respondents to the document, typifies an encroaching Marxist attitude, and excuse me, but the spirit of envy seems to be showing. Just exactly what does it mean to practice the faith in a showy manner and not display truth? Since when can anyone judge the condition of another’s heart by externals and who should be concerned about the model of car our neighbor drives? How could it possibly be known if those who can afford luxury cars, bought by the fruit of their own labor, do or do not also write generous checks to charitable causes? This kind of thinking is dangerous and was condemned by Pope Leo in some of his encyclicals.
Sorry if I upset you. I’m not judging what’s in others hearts. I merely made the observation, that those living in obvious excess tend to be less involved in the ministries in my church.RED FLAG HERE! To me this quote, which came from the respondents to the document, typifies an encroaching Marxist attitude, and excuse me, but the spirit of envy seems to be showing among Catholics. Just exactly what does it mean to practice the faith in a showy manner and not display truth? Since when can anyone judge the condition of another’s heart by externals and who should be concerned about the model of car our neighbor drives? How could it possibly be known if those who can afford luxury cars, bought by the fruit of their own labor, do or do not also write generous checks to charitable causes? This kind of thinking is dangerous and was condemned by Pope Leo in some of his encyclicals.
I am not upset, only curious at this point. How do you know they are living in “obvious excess.” Is it the same thing as “showy manner” as you quoted in the article? Maybe the current Church “bias” now does say that Catholics should not be driving BMW’s.Sorry if I upset you. I’m not judging what’s in others hearts. I merely made the observation, that those living in obvious excess tend to be less involved in the ministries in my church.
I think it much more reasonable to conclude that the CC is taking a balanced approach. The only reason that I can think why someone would be against a balanced approach…can’t really think of any. You have any thoughts about it?The point of the article is to say “The Church hated gay people up until Pope Francis, and we’re disappointed that the Church isn’t going to reverse all of it’s sexual morality yet, although we know it will soon because we are enlightened secularists”. That’s the agenda, and this article is dripping with it, IMO.
The Roman Catholic Church must be less judgmental of homosexuals and, while still opposing gay marriage, should welcome children of gay couples into the faith with equal dignity, a Vatican document said on Thursday.
False dilemma. “Disorder” has a valid meaning both in philosophy and medicine, as well as theology. The meanings aren’t identical, but analogous.The word disorder is a philisophical term, not medical.