Has the church infallibly claimed that gay marriage and ABC are sinful and wrong?

[nickybr38]

I don’t understand infallibility in the context of Santa Teresa:
Let nothing disturb you
Do not be frightened
All things must pass
God never changes

If in future the Church was to decide that its understanding had been in error on something, could it change its teaching?

I mean no matter how unlikely, and not necessarily anything to do with gay marriage or ABC, but just as a general principle.

My understanding is that no… it cannot change its teaching. Anything that is in the deposit faith has always been there, sometimes the Church doesn’t completely understand but that teaching has always been there. Much like when a child says the Our Father prayer without understanding its greater meaning… they say the prayer anyway without engaging their heart but later in life they understand it more fully and pray it more fully.

The thing is the foundation of the Churchs teachings were taught by the apostles who passed it on to their apostles who passed it on to their apostles, until it reached the Church. Who taught the apostles? Jesus Himself… so how could we say to Jesus; You’re wrong. Sorry.

Not possible.

Edited to Add; When I say teaching I mean the fundamental truths of the faith. Sorry, thought I’d better clarify.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

Yes, and the Church changes her teaching all the time. Not everything the Church teaches falls under the mantle of even ordinary infallibility,. All disciplinary teachings, for example, can be changed to reflect the current needs of the Church. It’s not a matter of realizing an error, more a matter of changing what can be changed to best serve the Church while defending what cannot be changed.

Right. Of course, women’s ordination and gay marriage etc. are not disciplinary teachings which could be subject to change.

And it is not even ‘change’ but development. Change would presuppose that the Church had done something (let’s say, for example, that the Church had taught that homosexual actions were sinful) and ‘change’ would be that the Church would decide that they were NOT sinful. That is a true change.

Now, development would be something on the order of understanding that homosexual actions are sinful but that a person might have an ‘inclination’ (not the actions themselves) and that the inclination might not be sinful. Earlier, without the understanding of psychological development and cultural conditioning, a person might not have had the information to be able to differentiate between ‘action’ and ‘inclination’ and might have thought them both equally wrong. The development through knowledge that was not available before shows why the one can be (objectively) not wrong. But it doesn’t change the teaching that the actions are still wrong.

 

[casey_zia]

I haven’t been to a latin mass recently.

Has the essence of the Mass changed? The Eucharist (and all the sacraments) have remained with the Church throughout all of history. The doctrines of the Church to not change. Disciplines of the church can and do.

 

[bingbang]

Right. Of course, women’s ordination and gay marriage etc. are not disciplinary teachings which could be subject to change.

And it is not even ‘change’ but development. Change would presuppose that the Church had done something (let’s say, for example, that the Church had taught that homosexual actions were sinful) and ‘change’ would be that the Church would decide that they were NOT sinful. That is a true change.

Now, development would be something on the order of understanding that homosexual actions are sinful but that a person might have an ‘inclination’ (not the actions themselves) and that the inclination might not be sinful. Earlier, without the understanding of psychological development and cultural conditioning, a person might not have had the information to be able to differentiate between ‘action’ and ‘inclination’ and might have thought them both equally wrong. The development through knowledge that was not available before shows why the one can be (objectively) not wrong. But it doesn’t change the teaching that the actions are still wrong.

I personally think that saying the inclination is not sinful is a modern concession by the church based on secular society. I don’t think that it has to do with psychology at all. I also find it funny that church leaders are so quick to be against gay marriage but don’t really talk about divorce and remarriage when the people that do that are guilty of the same exact sin…sex outside of marriage. And in fact the people that get divorced and remarried are even guilty of adultery as well, so you could argue it is an even bigger sin. But the church has stopped actively speaking out against it because so many people get divorced and remarried now that they don’t want to lose their followers. This is what is going to happen with gay marriage. I think in due time the church won’t perform gay marriages but they will come to accept it and not actively speak against it.

 

[1ke]

But the church has stopped actively speaking out against it because so many people get divorced and remarried

What planet do you live on? The Church corporately, and priests individually, certainly do speak out against divorce and remarriage.

now that they don’t want to lose their followers.

Oh, yes, the Church is always so worried about what other people will think, and about disenchanting followers. Nothing but compromise left and right by the Catholic Church in order to be popular.

Again, maybe on planet Xenon, but not here on Earth.

 

[edwest2]

I personally think that saying the inclination is not sinful is a modern concession by the church based on secular society. I don’t think that it has to do with psychology at all. I also find it funny that church leaders are so quick to be against gay marriage but don’t really talk about divorce and remarriage when the people that do that are guilty of the same exact sin…sex outside of marriage. And in fact the people that get divorced and remarried are even guilty of adultery as well, so you could argue it is an even bigger sin. But the church has stopped actively speaking out against it because so many people get divorced and remarried now that they don’t want to lose their followers. This is what is going to happen with gay marriage. I think in due time the church won’t perform gay marriages but they will come to accept it and not actively speak against it.

That is so very sad.

Starting in 1968 when Pope Paul VI had Humanae Vitae published, I heard a lot of: “We’re responsible adults! Leave us alone!” And I heard: “All you Catholics do is listen to the Pope. Why don’t you do some thinking on your own?”

Disrespect your parents.
Disrespect the Church.
Tell Catholics they are sexually repressed for not having sex with their girlfriends outside of marriage.
Who opened all the Adult Bookstores in the 1970s? Catholics?
And when we complained, what did the Adult Bookstore owners say? “We have the First Amendment right. And we have highly paid lawyers to defend ourselves from you Puritans who advcocate CENSORSHIP!”

Then over a 40 year period, Hollywood reduced love and marriage to just sex. Were Catholics behind that?

Every time we complained, the legal threats were made. The First Amendment was invoked. There were cries of Censorship. And just plain, Nobody is going to tell US what to do.

The Catholic Church is in no way concerned about losing members as if it were some private secular club. The Church is a hospital for sinners.

On a forum I moderate, someone wrote: “We don’t want to feel guilty or ashamed or sinful ever again.” Just like an atheist billboard in England that reads: “Stop worrying [about God] and just enjoy life.” Just eat, drink and be merry. Who cares what gods/God/belief systems think?

It took 40 years of constant, non-stop, showing a little skin, then a little and then a little more.

The poison was dripped into our veins slowly while the secular world chanted tolerance – for anything. Now you can turn on the TV and watch the story of a man who works in a police crime lab by day and cuts up people at night.

The Culture of Death and the Culture of Perpetual Indulgence will lead to spiritual death for some. Their eyes are blind, their ears are trained to hear evil and they are quick to act.

The Church speaks daily, just pick up a good Catholic newspaper. And she speaks to all about the gross sexual sins of all - but even those with ears refuse to hear. What? Do you expect to see this in the New York Times or your local newspaper? They have been affected to a degree as well.

The Church will continue to speak the truth to anyone with ears to hear.

God bless,
Ed

 

[budgie2]

As in there is no possible way that they could go back on those beliefs in the future. Are these teachings infallible?

The Polyamory society in the US is campaigning for gay marriage rights and the gays that I know are polyamorists and pagans.

I don’t think this website has bugs but it’s your choice to click.
polyamorysociety.org/

 

[GuitarPlayer]

Yes the church has ruled infallibly against gay marriage.

As for ABC, yes the church approves of the alphabet (with infallibility)

 

[bingbang]

The Polyamory society in the US is campaigning for gay marriage rights and the gays that I know are polyamorists and pagans.

I don’t think this website has bugs but it’s your choice to click.
polyamorysociety.org/

I don’t understand what this has to do with the question that you quoted.