Homosexual-Serenaded Bishop calls for new Ecumenical, Gay-Friendly "Vatican Council"

  • Thread starter Thread starter Caveman
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
i agree with having a Church council to address homosexuality and other modern issues

aren’t councils in the past called to address heresy? its time to make modern clarifications on why homosexuality, divorce, abortion, etc. are sins. maybe a council would shoot down any misconceptions that homosexuality, divorce, abortion, etc. will ever be accepted in the Church
While I agree with you that having a Church Council address the issues related to human sexual behavior could be a positive thing. That is not what this Bishop was suggesting. He wants a “Legal” surrender of the Church to modern day views on abortion, homosexuality and so forth. You can tell that by the fact that he wants to have folks outside the faith to take part in it
 
i agree with having a Church council to address homosexuality and other modern issues aren’t councils in the past called to address heresy? its time to make modern clarifications on why homosexuality, divorce, abortion, etc. are sins. maybe a council would shoot down any misconceptions that homosexuality, divorce, abortion, etc. will ever be accepted in the Church
I guess I’m not sure why these issues need to be clarified…they seem pretty clear to me. I suspect that if the Church did anything OTHER than to reverse Her teaching on those issues the voices of dissent will still dissent.

M
 
Is it possible that the timing and presentation of Humanae Vitae was flawed? The response to it was negative and the direct opposite of what was intended and, I suppose, anticipated. Paul VI was stunned by the rejection. Was there a misjudgment? I wonder.
The encyclical merely reiterated the moral teaching of the Church. However, you have a point that the release of this document was during the height of rebellion and dissention, perhaps encouraged by John XXIII’s aggiornamento (my opinion only, but it’s been well documented that during this period many unsettling things were allowed to happen.) What I was saying in my previous post was that perhaps the only “misjudgment” was not to stop the rebellion in the beginning and bring the Canadian and American bishops to task for their disobedience. A schism would have been unfortunate, but would it have purified the Church and separated the goats from the sheep? In all fairness, we cannot know the inner chamber of those “deep” recesses of the Vatican or why things were allowed to transpire the way they did. We were warned, however, of the smoke of Satan entering the Church and the one thing we can know for certain is that this is a wholly spiritual battle and our fight is against those principalities of darkness. This period of time has been prophecied over and over again and the Lord has chosen us to live in this era. All we can do is pick up our rosaries and fight along side of Our Lady.
 
i agree with having a Church council to address homosexuality and other modern issues

aren’t councils in the past called to address heresy? its time to make modern clarifications on why homosexuality, divorce, abortion, etc. are sins. maybe a council would shoot down any misconceptions that homosexuality, divorce, abortion, etc. will ever be accepted in the Church
It’s my understanding that Vat II was a different kind of council in that instead of correcting doctrinal error, it was more of an ecumenical type council in which “the windows were opened wide” to allow for more harmony and an updating of doctrine. Unfortunately, we’ve had first hand experience with the resulting damage (for whatever reason.) If another council is called, imho, it should be for the purposes of returning to our orthodox roots and truth, but what are the chances of that happening with the prelate issuing statements such as is shown in the OP?
 
I guess I’m not sure why these issues need to be clarified…they seem pretty clear to me. I suspect that if the Church did anything OTHER than to reverse Her teaching on those issues the voices of dissent will still dissent.

M
we need to bring it into the modern light
one of the misconceptions is that the Church teachings are outdated. a modern council to address the issues in a modern setting would be helpful. if you look in the past, you would think a lot of things should have went without saying, but a council was still called to address issues of growing heresy. despite what the Church teaches today, there is a growing belief in “gay rights” and “pro choice”. while i don’t necessarily think a council is necessary to address the issue, perhaps the weight of such council will be enough to squash any misconception that the Church would change its teaching on such issues
 
we need to bring it into the modern light
one of the misconceptions is that the Church teachings are outdated. a modern council to address the issues in a modern setting would be helpful. if you look in the past, you would think a lot of things should have went without saying, but a council was still called to address issues of growing heresy. despite what the Church teaches today, there is a growing belief in “gay rights” and “pro choice”. while i don’t necessarily think a council is necessary to address the issue, perhaps the weight of such council will be enough to squash any misconception that the Church would change its teaching on such issues
I wonder how many of those people who call the teachings outdated really know them? Or how many of them have taken the time to learn about JP II’s Theology of the Body? Or if TOB is too heady to read West or others who have broken down TOB in to the modern language.

Most all of the people that I know who think the Church is wrong on these issues have never read the documents or the CCC or listened to CDs like Janet Smith’s Contraception Why Not, etc, etc. You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make him drink.

While I appreciate what you’re saying about the weight of a council and all I question if that crowd would listen to a council unless it said what they want to hear. Case in point, Catholic members of the US Congress who ignore the bishops on abortion then ask for the bishops help on immigration.

M
 
I wonder how many of those people who call the teachings outdated really know them? Or how many of them have taken the time to learn about JP II’s Theology of the Body? Or if TOB is too heady to read West or others who have broken down TOB in to the modern language.

Most all of the people that I know who think the Church is wrong on these issues have never read the documents or the CCC or listened to CDs like Janet Smith’s Contraception Why Not, etc, etc. You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make him drink.

While I appreciate what you’re saying about the weight of a council and all I question if that crowd would listen to a council unless it said what they want to hear. Case in point, Catholic members of the US Congress who ignore the bishops on abortion then ask for the bishops help on immigration.

M
good point. but my hope is not to convert most of them because most of them will be to stuck in their ways and beliefs. but perhaps a declaration of the Church that such teachings are unchangable and in the modern language wold get them off our backs from pressing for such changes.
 
On the heels of essentially calling for a “Vatican III” council that would not only include heretics and pagans as active participants, it would also re-examine Catholicisms view of Sodomy.

It’s interesting to note that his call was the precursor to the retired bishop of Sacramento, California, Francis Quinn being serenaded by the Sacramento Gay Men’s Chorus at a gala honoring him.

In reference to a recent interview with the publication Inside East Sacramento, “Pointing to the dramatic changes made within the Catholic Church by Vatican II, Quinn asserts that it is time for a new council, this one dedicated to looking at human sexuality and its intersection with religion.” The notoriously liberal bishop went on to say, “The new council, he says, should involve the entire Catholic community as well as people of other faiths.”

Click here for the rest of the article.
He can call for it all he wants. It won’t be Catholic, and if there is such a Vat III, we will know the end times are upon us.
 
He can call for it all he wants. It won’t be Catholic, and if there is such a Vat III, we will know the end times are upon us.
Vatican III, if ever called, would not include the folks he wants, and would not adopt the views he and the Gay Lobby are pushing on people. The Roman Catholic Church is the last international orginazation to stand in it’s way, and they know it. They will seek to discredit us, push us to change, and failing that, outlaw us. Maybe not in our time, but soon, and yes then the end times may indeed be upon us.
 
Go to EWTN on Youtube and listen to today’s homily, addressing Chavez and the failure of many ‘Catholics’ to defend either the Pope or the Church.

Scary but riveting.
 
i agree with having a Church council to address homosexuality and other modern issues

aren’t councils in the past called to address heresy? its time to make modern clarifications on why homosexuality, divorce, abortion, etc. are sins. maybe a council would shoot down any misconceptions that homosexuality, divorce, abortion, etc. will ever be accepted in the Church
Divorce is not a “sin” as Jesus says in Matthew…Let no one divorce EXCEPT if there be marital unfaithfulness… (ad lib). Also, the Catholic church allows annulments which is pretty much the same thing except recognized by the church. All the other things you mentioned are, of course, sins.
 
Vatican III, if ever called, would not include the folks he wants, and would not adopt the views he and the Gay Lobby are pushing on people. The Roman Catholic Church is the last international orginazation to stand in it’s way, and they know it. They will seek to discredit us, push us to change, and failing that, outlaw us. Maybe not in our time, but soon, and yes then the end times may indeed be upon us.
Yes, and the sad thing is, they don’t know any better. What I mean is, they are deceived into thinking the way they are is “normal”, that God “made them this way”, so they push their agenda because they believe they are right. They believe the enemy’s lies about it. This is so sad which is why we need to pray for these people and all those who support it.

They don’t understand why they feel the way they do, and if you try and tell them, they argue with you about it, saying things like, “I grew up in a loving home, no abuse, nothing that would support your claim of why I feel this way”, or “I’ve felt like this ever since birth, therefore, I am gay and must act on it because it’s just the way I am, God made me like this”, etc. etc. It is really pitiful.

Then again, others who feel this way and are enlightened by the Holy Spirit and believe the Catholic Church’s teaching on the subject, know that even though one feels like this, they do not have to act on it if it goes against what they believe, what scripture says, etc., and they come to an understanding that there is some reason for it, albeit, their sin nature kicking up its heels just like we all have a sin nature that we struggle with in some area…
 
Go to EWTN on Youtube and listen to today’s homily, addressing Chavez and the failure of many ‘Catholics’ to defend either the Pope or the Church.

Scary but riveting.
can you post the video?. i couldnt find it.
 
can you post the video?. i couldnt find it.
They might have it on later in the day—sometimes they wait until evening.

Or you could try to access today’s homily from EWTN itself. OR watch the rebroadcast of the morning Mass—I think it’s on again at noon?
 
They might have it on later in the day—sometimes they wait until evening.

Or you could try to access today’s homily from EWTN itself. OR watch the rebroadcast of the morning Mass—I think it’s on again at noon?
thank you.
 
Is it me? I am not sure what I see wrong with the article to be honest? I mean he is a bishop, put into place by Gods chosen shepherd, do we honestly think we know the full Truth of why God put him into position of influence?
 
Is it me? I am not sure what I see wrong with the article to be honest? I mean he is a bishop, put into place by Gods chosen shepherd, do we honestly think we know the full Truth of why God put him into position of influence?
Oh, GOD put him in a position of influence? Or man with free will did??
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top