Good article: Prominent gay rights magazine honors pope on 77th birthday

[malachi_johnson]

For anyone else who thinks this is all fine and great, please turn to your Catechism section which describes scandal.

**2284** Scandal is an attitude or behavior which leads another to do evil. The person who gives scandal becomes his neighbor’s tempter. He damages virtue and integrity; he may even draw his brother into spiritual death. Scandal is a grave offense if by deed or omission another is deliberately led into a grave offense.

**2285** Scandal takes on a particular gravity by reason of the authority of those who cause it or the weakness of those who are scandalized. It prompted our Lord to utter this curse: “Whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a great millstone fastened round his neck and to be drowned in the depth of the sea.” Scandal is grave when given by those who by nature or office are obliged to teach and educate others. Jesus reproaches the scribes and Pharisees on this account: he likens them to wolves in sheep’s clothing.87

**2286** Scandal can be provoked by … fashion or opinion. … This is also true of … manipulators of public opinion who turn it away from moral values.

**2287** Anyone who uses the power at his disposal in such a way that it leads others to do wrong becomes guilty of scandal and responsible for the evil that he has directly or indirectly encouraged. “Temptations to sin are sure to come; but woe to him by whom they come!”

Now let me quote the Advocate article for you
**
“The remaining holdouts for LGBT acceptance in religion, the ones who block progress in the work left to do [What does the LGBT community consider as work left to do? Acceptance of LGBT activity as normal around the world of course], will more likely be persuaded [You hear that?] by a figure they know. In the same way that President Obama transformed politics with his evolution on LGBT civil rights [Even the LGBT community gets it but Catholics seem to just be blind to it], a change from the pope could have a lasting effect on religion.[No kidding].”**

What is the cause of this glorious hope for a shift to occur?
**
“The most influential person of 2013 doesn’t come from our ongoing legal conflict but instead from our spiritual one — successes from which are harder to define. There has not been any vote cast or ruling issued, and still a significant and unprecedented shift took place this year in how LGBT people are considered by one of the world’s largest faith communities.[An unprecedented shift you say?]”**
**
“Still, LGBT Catholics who remain in the church now have more reason to hope that change is coming. Listen to the reaction to the pope’s “Who am I to judge?” comment.” [Basically tells people to continue in their ways of sin because CHANGE IS A COMING]**

All of this by using the Vicar of Christ as their tool to encourage the LGBT community to keep doing what they are doing (which only differs from straight people in their homosexual activity which is a sin).

If anyone thinks that none of this is scandalizing and that the Advocate is not guilty of causing scandal to the Catholic community, I think there is something terribly wrong about ones level of prudence.

 

[CrossofChrist]

Further down in the article a “shift in emphasis” is mentioned.

His “shift in emphasis” seems nonexistent. It’s remarkably consistent with our previous two Popes. It’s just now the world is actually choosing to listen to the message.

 

[McCall1981]

His “shift in emphasis” seems nonexistent. It’s remarkably consistent with our previous two Popes. It’s just now the world is actually choosing to listen to the message.

But this is exactly the point, the world is not listening to him.

According to the world, the Pope/Church is in the process of “changing” it’s thinking, and they are happy about it. Most of us here think that the Pope is saying essentially the same things as JP II and Benedict did, and if we are right, then he is most definitely not changing anything. That means, by definition, that the world is not listening to him. They are willfully, or mistakenly, getting the message wrong, and either way means they are not listening.

The only other possible option is that they are right, that he is changing things, a premise that we all (I think) reject.

There is no debate about whether the world has misunderstood his message (or at least that the Advocate in this instance), it has, as the above quotes from the article show. The only thing that can possibly be debated is whether the world’s misunderstanding of his message is genuine misunderstanding, or intentional distortion. We could debate that, but not whether or not the message is misunderstood.

 

[Prodigal_Son]

According to the world, the Pope/Church is in the process of “changing” it’s thinking, and they are happy about it. Most of us here think that the Pope is saying essentially the same things as JP II and Benedict did, and if we are right, then he is most definitely not changing anything. That means, by definition, that the world is not listening to him. They are willfully, or mistakenly, getting the message wrong, and either way means they are not listening.

No, there’s another logical alternative: that the world wasn’t listening to JPII and Benedict, but that they ARE listening to Francis.

 

[McCall1981]

No, there’s another logical alternative: that the world wasn’t listening to JPII and Benedict, but that they ARE listening to Francis.

No, let me re-phrase.

The world, or at least the Advocate in this case, is asserting that Francis is in process of changing the Church’s teaching. Given the quotes below, I don’t think it’s possible to argue that they are saying so:

“The remaining holdouts for LGBT acceptance in religion, the ones who block progress in the work left to do, will more likely be persuaded by a figure they know. In the same way that President Obama transformed politics with his evolution on LGBT civil rights, a change from the pope could have a lasting effect on religion.”

and

“Still, LGBT Catholics who remain in the church now have more reason to hope that change is coming. Listen to the reaction to the pope’s “Who am I to judge?” comment.”

We here in Catholicland say, “the Pope is not changing anything, he is saying the same things Popes have said before”.

Thus, the Advocate says he is changing something, we Catholics say he is not, we cannot both be right because these two options logically exclude each other.

If you, (and I, and the rest of us) are right in thinking that he is not changing anything, it means, by definition, that the Advocate is incorrect. If Francis is, indeed, not changing anything, the Advocate is incorrect in how they are understanding his message. As I said, they are either intentionally distorting it, or genuinely misunderstanding it.

If the Pope says, “My favorite ice cream flavor is Chocolate”, then the Addvocate says “The Pope’s favorite ice cream flavor is vanilla” they have not gotten the message, the have not listened. They have genuinely misunderstood, or they have intentionally distorted, but they have not listened to what he said.

They cannot be “listening to him” and have his message wrong at the same time.

 

[livingwordunity]

Even granting that the major sin of Sodom was homosexual activity the fact is obvious that the activity was rape.

The angels were there because of the sins of the city (homosexual behavior). The attempted rape didn’t happen until after the two angels had arrived. The argument that the bible isn’t against homosexual behavior isn’t even believed by the “gay” activists or they would not have come out with their own bible which omits all of the verses that they know are against it.

 

[ReConverted]

If you just try to make people feel loved despite their sins, you have already strayed down a dangerous path. )

WHAT?!?!?!? Tell that to our LORD who hung out with tax collectors and sinners. They ARE loved by God despite their sins. That’s why our LORD became flesh and dwelt among us, and we’re to emulate our LORD in loving them. This is in no way condoning sin. You’ve gotta CATCH a fish before ya clean it…

 

[malachi_johnson]

WHAT?!?!?!? Tell that to our LORD who hung out with tax collectors and sinners. They ARE loved by God, and we’re to emulate our LORD in loving them. This is in no way condoning sin. You’ve gotta CATCH a fish before ya clean it…

Lord loves the devil too. Lord loves everyone who has gone to hell as well. Lord also loves everyone who will go to hell as well.

Do you know how Lord can send someone to hell even while he loves them? If you understand that, then you will know that Love is not opposed to telling the truth i.e. that an action of a person is sinful. In fact, if you love someone, that is probably the most loving thing you can do.

Christianity is not a bait and catch. Christianity is for those who REALIZE THEY ARE SICK!!! Let me repeat that again, it is for THOSE WHO REALIZE THEY ARE SICK. The Churches duty, in the modern world, is to communicate that truth to sinners (THAT THEY ARE SICK AND HERE IS THE CURE) so that they can come to her and receive the Graces God has made available through her.

Instead, she is portrayed as some woman who wants to hug all people without telling them they are sick. In fact, they are told to continue in their sin. That is not right. That is what the Advocate article does. They make the Pope a champion of their own agenda or make him look as someone who is “getting it” and encourages the LGBT to continue in their sinful lives and work to promote it “knowing that the Pope is on their side”. THAT IS SICK!!! Scandalizing and despicable!

 

[ReConverted]

On the matter of being able to help the poor and it being criminal, you are again forgetting the concept of some sins being intrinsically evil regardless of circumstances.

Choosing not to help the poor either through private giving or thru taxes is pretty grave in the eyes of God. And if you’re so inclined, don’t even bother with nonsense like "Jesus never siad anything about helping the poor through the Gov’t! because that’s nothing more than an argument from silence.)

Matthew 7:21-23: “Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven. 22 Many will say to Me in that day, ‘Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?’ 23 And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!’

**Matthew 25:31-46: “When the Son of Man comes in His glory, and all the holy angels with Him, then He will sit on the throne of His glory. All the nations will be gathered before Him, and He will separate them one from another, as a shepherd divides his sheep from the goats. And He will set the sheep on His right hand, but the goats on the left. Then the King will say to those on His right hand, ‘Come, you blessed of My Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world: for I was hungry and you gave Me food; I was thirsty and you gave Me drink; I was a stranger and you took Me in; I was naked and you clothed Me; I was sick and you visited Me; I was in prison and you came to Me.’

“Then the righteous will answer Him, saying, ‘Lord, when did we see You hungry and feed You, or thirsty and give You drink? When did we see You a stranger and take You in, or naked and clothe You? Or when did we see You sick, or in prison, and come to You?’ And the King will answer and say to them, ‘Assuredly, I say to you, inasmuch as you did it to one of the least of these My brethren, you did it to Me.’

“Then He will also say to those on the left hand, ‘Depart from Me, you cursed, into the everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels: for I was hungry and you gave Me no food; I was thirsty and you gave Me no drink; I was a stranger and you did not take Me in, naked and you did not clothe Me, sick and in prison and you did not visit Me.’

“Then they also will answer Him, saying, ‘Lord, when did we see You hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison, and did not minister to You?’ Then He will answer them, saying, ‘Assuredly, I say to you, inasmuch as you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to Me.’ And these will go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.”
**

 

[malachi_johnson]

No, there’s another logical alternative: that the world wasn’t listening to JPII and Benedict, but that they ARE listening to Francis.

As McCall said, the world is not listening. The world is finding it easier to hear their own echo through Pope Francis. For better or for worse, the words of Pope Francis seems to be easy to see as an echo of their own sinful desires.

So all they are saying is “Hey look, here is a man who is different. He has no problem in us continuing in our sin. He is speaking of being in a relationship with God without bothering about ones sins. This is the man we have been waiting for.”

In other words, the Catholic Church went from the most hated institution on the planet to the most beloved religion because it seems to say “do whatever you want as long as you do it thinking its the right thing to do”. The responsibility to find out if its right or wrong, the responsibility to refrain from sin, the possibility of damnation if one continues in sin and in error is not mentioned.

Is this a victory? NO! This is a loss for the media has well and truly spun the message of the Vicar of Christ to be a championing voice of their own right to remain in iniquity. It is as if Mary Magdalene spun the words of Jesus to remain happily as a prostitute and others to engage in such activity for Jesus is trying to get the Pharisees to support them. What should really happen is that a man must realize the gravity of their sin and come crawling to Christ asking for forgiveness.

 

[ReConverted]

Lord loves the devil too. Lord loves everyone who has gone to hell as well. Lord also loves everyone who will go to hell as well.

Do you know how Lord can send someone to hell even while he loves them? If you understand that, then you will know that Love is not opposed to telling the truth i.e. that an action of a person is sinful. In fact, if you love someone, that is probably the most loving thing you can do.

Christianity is not a bait and catch. Christianity is for those who REALIZE THEY ARE SICK!!! Let me repeat that again, it is for THOSE WHO REALIZE THEY ARE SICK. The Churches duty, in the modern world, is to communicate that truth to sinners (THAT THEY ARE SICK AND HERE IS THE CURE) so that they can come to her and receive the Graces God has made available through her.

Instead, she is portrayed as some woman who wants to hug all people without telling them they are sick. In fact, they are told to continue in their sin. That is not right. That is what the Advocate article does. They make the Pope a champion of their own agenda or make him look as someone who is “getting it” and encourages the LGBT to continue in their sinful lives and work to promote it “knowing that the Pope is on their side”. THAT IS SICK!!! Scandalizing and despicable!

In no way did I say “Bait and catch”. What a silly assertion. After all, scripture is clear that one must “COUNT THE COST” of following him. If a gay person wishes to join the Church, they will do so knowing the Church’s teaching on that.

Always be honest, AND remember, you catch more flies with honey than vinegar.

The LORD loves Satan? In the immortal words of Johnny Cash: “I doubt that”.

 

[malachi_johnson]

Choosing not to help the poor either through private giving or thru taxes is pretty grave in the eyes of God. And if you’re so inclined, don’t even bother with nonsense like "Jesus never siad anything about helping the poor through the Gov’t! because that’s nothing more than an argument from silence.)

Matthew 7:21-23: “Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven. 22 Many will say to Me in that day, ‘Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?’ 23 And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!’

**Matthew 25:31-46: “When the Son of Man comes in His glory, and all the holy angels with Him, then He will sit on the throne of His glory. All the nations will be gathered before Him, and He will separate them one from another, as a shepherd divides his sheep from the goats. And He will set the sheep on His right hand, but the goats on the left. Then the King will say to those on His right hand, ‘Come, you blessed of My Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world: for I was hungry and you gave Me food; I was thirsty and you gave Me drink; I was a stranger and you took Me in; I was naked and you clothed Me; I was sick and you visited Me; I was in prison and you came to Me.’

“Then the righteous will answer Him, saying, ‘Lord, when did we see You hungry and feed You, or thirsty and give You drink? When did we see You a stranger and take You in, or naked and clothe You? Or when did we see You sick, or in prison, and come to You?’ And the King will answer and say to them, ‘Assuredly, I say to you, inasmuch as you did it to one of the least of these My brethren, you did it to Me.’

“Then He will also say to those on the left hand, ‘Depart from Me, you cursed**, into the everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels: for I was hungry and you gave Me no food; I was thirsty and you gave Me no drink; I was a stranger and you did not take Me in, naked and you did not clothe Me, sick and in prison and you did not visit Me.’

“Then they also will answer Him, saying, ‘Lord, when did we see You hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison, and did not minister to You?’ Then He will answer them, saying, ‘Assuredly, I say to you, inasmuch as you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to Me.’ And these will go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.”

If you are trying to say that not helping a poor person financially is an “intrinsically immoral act”, then you have some theological misunderstandings. There is a difference between the two things.

Furthermore, even among these intrinsically immoral acts, there are categories which are much more greater. Murder, Homosexual acts, Defrauding the poor (which is not the same as not giving some money to a homeless person) etc are sins that cry out to heaven for VENGEANCE.

So I do not think its worth spending time giving the scriptural passages a theological analysis. You can find this information in any good book that discusses Catholic morality.

 

[ReConverted]

If you are trying to say that not helping a poor person financially is an “intrinsically immoral act”, then you have some theological misunderstandings. There is a difference between the two things.

Furthermore, even among these intrinsically immoral acts, there are categories which are much more greater. Murder, Homosexual acts, Defrauding the poor (which is not the same as not giving some money to a homeless person) etc are sins that cry out to heaven for VENGEANCE.

So I do not think its worth spending time giving the scriptural passages a theological analysis. You can find this information in any good book that discusses Catholic morality.

From what I’ve posted, it’s pretty clear. Good luck with your hair splitting on Judgement Day.

 

[ReConverted]

So I do not think its worth spending time giving the scriptural passages a theological analysis. You can find this information in any good book that discusses Catholic morality.

Wow. Just wow. I have no problems with books on Catholic morality, but, but your assertion that I’m giving a mere opinion on this couldn’t be more wrong. In quoting the Sacred Scriptures on this issue, I’m in line with the Church.

Hell is hell. Period.

 

[malachi_johnson]

In no way did I say “Bait and catch”. What a silly assertion. After all, scripture is clear that one must “COUNT THE COST” of following him. If a gay person wishes to join the Church, they will do so knowing the Church’s teaching on that.

Always be honest, AND remember, you catch more flies with honey than vinegar.

The LORD loves Satan? In the immortal words of Johnny Cash: “I doubt that”.

The reason you doubt that God loves Satan is because

1. You have a misunderstanding of God’s love
2. You have a misunderstanding of God’s justice

God does indeed love the Devil, just so you know from now on.

As for the comment on vinegar vs. honey, right now the honey being presented is the opposite of the truth. That is not honey. That is garbage.

You cannot water down the Catholic teaching as the Advocate has done and portray the Pope as a champion for their sinful cause. and call it HONEY. Now you are confusing what honey and vinegar mean.

I can tell the truth violently, and I can tell it kindly. But both must contain the TRUTH. The kind truth cannot be an ambiguous statement that sounds good because it can be interpreted that way. The kind truth is still the complete truth but said in a soft and gentle tone. If the person spits in the face, you just smile and walk away. That is HONEY.

But you have made HONEY to be something else. Your Honey is an ambiguous statement which can be interpreted anyway you like. That is the stuff that give you indigestion before long.

 

[Ben_Quincy]

Francis’s view on how the Catholic Church should approach Abortionist was best explained in his own words during an in-depth interview with America magazine in September. He recalled, “A person once asked me, in a provocative manner, if I approved of Abortionist. I replied with another question: ‘Tell me: when God looks at a Abortionist, does he endorse the existence of this person with love, or reject and condemn this person?’ We must always consider the person.”

See how absurd that sounds? We always CONSIDER THE PERSON. But we cannot NOT consider the ACTIONS done by a person. Such weak statements by the Pope have now been used to make a mockery of him.

You keep telling me that all of this is very positive.

Actually it doesn’t sound absurd at all. In order to convert a person we first need to see them as a person and not just a particular action.

 

[ReConverted]

The reason you doubt that God loves Satan is because

1. You have a misunderstanding of God’s love
2. You have a misunderstanding of God’s justice

God does indeed love the Devil, just so you know from now on.

As for the comment on vinegar vs. honey, right now the honey being presented is the opposite of the truth. That is not honey. That is garbage.

You cannot water down the Catholic teaching as the Advocate has done and portray the Pope as a champion for their sinful cause. and call it HONEY. Now you are confusing what honey and vinegar mean.

I can tell the truth violently, and I can tell it kindly. But both must contain the TRUTH. The kind truth cannot be an ambiguous statement that sounds good because it can be interpreted that way. The kind truth is still the complete truth but said in a soft and gentle tone. If the person spits in the face, you just smile and walk away. That is HONEY.

But you have made HONEY to be something else. Your Honey is an ambiguous statement which can be interpreted anyway you like. That is the stuff that give you indigestion before long.

Nice try. You’ve distorted what I wrote AND what the article says. Any port in a storm, eh? And if they have some hopes, even though they won’t be realized, it’s how they feel. You disagree. Fine.

 

[malachi_johnson]

From what I’ve posted, it’s pretty clear. Good luck with your hair splitting on Judgement Day.

What exactly are you saying? Is it that “not helping the poor person financially” is an intrinsically evil act? How am I suppossed to take that seriously when the Church has never spoken about it that way (for good reasons)?

Let me try and perhaps make this clear.

An intrinsically evil act is an act that is ALWAYS an evil act. So situation, your personal upbringing or anything else is irrelevant to it being evil. Murder, Homosexual acts, Contraception are all in this category.

But not helping the poor, may or may not be an evil act. It is dependent on situation, the nature of the need of that poor person etc. If a poor person wants to buy a BMW, not helping them is not much of an evil. But if a poor person is dying from cancer and needs money for his/her medication that will save them, and you can also afford to buy it for them, then it is an evil act to not do so.

I hope I made it sufficiently clear what the difference is between the intrinsic evil acts and acts such as not helping the poor.

 

[malachi_johnson]

Wow. Just wow. I have no problems with books on Catholic morality, but, but your assertion that I’m giving a mere opinion on this couldn’t be more wrong. **In quoting the Sacred Scriptures on this issue, I’m in line with the Church. **

Hell is hell. Period.

The bolded and underlined part above is not always true. If you must know, all the heretics in the past quoted Scripture extensively as well.

Protestants are also well known for their scripture quoting to defend their errors.

So reading Scripture is very good. Just make sure you read it WITH the Church (which means you must turn to sacred tradition to see how the Church interprets it) rather than by yourself.

 

[malachi_johnson]

Nice try. You’ve distorted what I wrote AND what the article says. Any port in a storm, eh? And if they have some hopes, even though they won’t be realized, it’s how they feel. You disagree. Fine.

Their hopes may not be realized in the sense that the Pope will capitulate entirely to their demands. However, the real danger is that their portrayal of Pope Francis will make many Catholics feel less incline to call homosexual activity for the sin and abhorrent activity that it is. That is a victory for the LGBT that you might not understand the consequences of at the moment.

They do, which is why their think tanks chose to give Pope Francis the award. Do you think they do not know that it is probably better deserved by someone like Windosr? Yes, they do. But they know that they can do more damage this way. **They can for the first time use a Pope as an inspiration for their members to continue in their sinful lifestyle and work to promote it. That is GOLD in their eyes. **

It is equivalent to a Theist or Atheist who likes to find a quote by, lets say Albert Einstein, supporting their own position and make a Meme etc. That is because using the words of a beloved person has influence even when they probably never meant it that way. The LGBT have been people who have been running a psychological battle for decades to normalize their lifestyle in the eyes of the society. They know how valuable this is and they are using that.