S
SonSearcher
Guest
It isn’t a “right.”
- Status
R
RevDon
Guest
What would you say marriage is?
C
Charlemagne_II
Guest
RevDon
**
The topic is actually “Marriage”**
No, the topic is “Homosexuality and marriage.”
If you want to know what I think of unbridled sex-gay or straight- I’m against it.
So as a Catholic priest you are for bridled gay sex?
**I am for legalization (and, by the way, sacramentalization) of relationships that help bring people to holiness, and I’m convinced that marriage does this. **
That’s exactly the point. The marriage of sodomites is not the path to holiness. It is the path to hell. And if you are teaching your parishioners otherwise, you are teaching them not to read their Bible or believe anything in it.
Read St. Paul.
**
The topic is actually “Marriage”**
No, the topic is “Homosexuality and marriage.”
If you want to know what I think of unbridled sex-gay or straight- I’m against it.
So as a Catholic priest you are for bridled gay sex?
**I am for legalization (and, by the way, sacramentalization) of relationships that help bring people to holiness, and I’m convinced that marriage does this. **
That’s exactly the point. The marriage of sodomites is not the path to holiness. It is the path to hell. And if you are teaching your parishioners otherwise, you are teaching them not to read their Bible or believe anything in it.
Read St. Paul.
D
dandingo
Guest
But you just stated you don’t support all heterosexual or homosexual marriages.
M
Mgray82
Guest
Debatable. We agree on some things though.
However, poverty is not always an issue in the case of a dead beat or runaway dad.
I cringe at the thought of scenarios like these with same sex couples…
S
saintjoe
Guest
A. Yes, I do assume that same-sex couples in a committed relationship have sex. Isn’t that a sin, even if it is just 1 time?
B. Didn’t Jesus say he would protect His Church from teaching error?
C. There are many interpretations of scripture, and not all are correct. That is why Jesus gave us His Church.
D. I know plenty of people.- We all struggle with different temptations and vices. Sure, it would be easier to live a life doing whatever we want. It is hard to be Catholic in a world that promotes relativism.
- No person I know would question the goodness of individuals in a same-sex relationship - still doesn’t make the relationship right. You see the presence of God working in their lives, but that does not mean God approves of everything they are doing.
S
SonSearcher
Guest
I am Catholic so I look to the Church for my definition.
From the Catechism
1601 “The matrimonial covenant, by which a man and a woman establish between themselves a partnership of the whole of life, is by its nature ordered toward the good of the spouses and the procreation and education of offspring; this covenant between baptized persons has been raised by Christ the Lord to the dignity of a sacrament.”
1602 Sacred Scripture begins with the creation of man and woman in the image and likeness of God and concludes with a vision of “the wedding-feast of the Lamb.” Scripture speaks throughout of marriage and its “mystery,” its institution and the meaning God has given it, its origin and its end, its various realizations throughout the history of salvation, the difficulties arising from sin and its renewal “in the Lord” in the New Covenant of Christ and the Church.
1605 Holy Scripture affirms that man and woman were created for one another: "It is not good that the man should be alone."92 The woman, “flesh of his flesh,” his equal, his nearest in all things, is given to him by God as a “helpmate”; she thus represents God from whom comes our help.93 "Therefore a man leaves his father and his mother and cleaves to his wife, and they become one flesh."94 The Lord himself shows that this signifies an **unbreakable union of their two lives by recalling what the plan of the Creator had been **“in the beginning”: "So they are no longer two, but one flesh."95
R
RevDon
Guest
No, by saying “always” I must agree with you, but inadequate financial support is a major issue.
Could you clarify what it is you cringe at?
A
aprilfloyd
Guest
It is in our country. I recommend that you make it so, in yours
E
edwest2
Guest
Gay marriage advocates view Civil Unions as being less than marriage, making gays in civil unions “second class” citizens.
“Cobbled together as both the state and the nation were just beginning to engage in a conversation about the inherent unfairness of legal discrimination in marriage, civil unions have since proven to be ineffective, a separate but unequal status (pdf) that often heightens the need for access to both the tangible and intangible protections that only marriage can afford. The protections and responsibilities do not extend beyond the border of the states in which the civil union was entered, offer murky access to separation laws, and no federal protections are included with a civil union.”
Peace,
Ed
R
RevDon
Guest
*Yes, the creation story concludes that it is not good for the man to be alone (so let’s not force celibacy on people to whom it has not been divinely gifted). The story also goes on to have god create all kinds of animals to see if any of them could satisfy the man’s need for a partner (does that suggest God first proposed bestiality? The cleaving of husband to wife is what the scripture suggests represents the relationship between Christ and the Church. It is an act of self-giving (certainly not suggesting that Christ and the Church are sexually joined)
So the Catechism when applying a spiritual meaning to marriage seems not to describe anything that is not present in the committed relationship of two persons of the same sex.*
R
RevDon
Guest
And not gay sex techniques.
If bridled means within marriage, yes.
I would gladly teach my people HOW to read the Bible and use it as a guide for the decisions of their lives. It’s clear to me that you have no idea of what was being condemned in Sodom.
Do you want me to read all of St. Paul, or do you have specific passages in mind?
If you are referring to the so-called “clobber” passages, be sure you understand the context, meaning and application Paul had in mind before you try to use them to denigrate someone else.
R
RevDon
Guest
A. I would consider it no more sinful than sex for a heterosexual married couple.
B. The track record is spotty. Need some examples?
C. And lately, some portions of the Church are not listening to other portions of the Church
D. Are they same-sex married people?
Didn’t Jesus say by their fruits you will know them? If we see generosity and kindness, piety and love, and if it is clear that these traits are the result of the relationship, how can we say that this couple does not have God as the center of their life? Just for a moment, let your imagination expand what you visualize as the kingdom of God. Maybe that bigger vision is God’s vision.
Even Jesus had to be jolted into understanding that the expanse of his mission was bigger than he thought it was. Perhaps this is God’s time to show us a bigger Kingdom, and in so doing, help us to focus more on the things of heaven than we previously did. Jesus said sex really doesn’t matter in heaven.
C
Charlemagne_II
Guest
RevDon
**Do you want me to read all of St. Paul, or do you have specific passages in mind?
If you are referring to the so-called “clobber” passages, be sure you understand the context, meaning and application Paul had in mind before you try to use them to denigrate someone else. **
I never use Paul or anyone else to denigrate anybody. Sodomites do a good enough job denigrating themselves.
Romans 1:18-32:
“The wrath of God is indeed being revealed from heaven against every impiety and wickedness of those who suppress the truth by their wickedness. For what can be known about God is evident to them, because God made it evident to them. Ever since the creation of the world, his invisible attributes of eternal power and divinity have been able to be understood and perceived in what he has made. As a result, they have no excuse; for although they knew God they did not accord him glory as God or give him thanks. Instead, they became vain in their reasoning, and their senseless minds were darkened. While claiming to be wise, they became fools and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for the likeness of an image of mortal man or of birds or of four-legged animals or of snakes. Therefore, God handed them over to impurity through the lusts of their hearts for the mutual degradation of their bodies. They exchanged the truth of God for a lie and revered and worshiped the creature rather than the creator, who is blessed forever. Amen. Therefore, God handed them over to degrading passions. Their females exchanged natural relations for unnatural, and the males likewise gave up natural relations with females and burned with lust for one another. Males did shameful things with males and thus received in their own persons the due penalty for their perversity. And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God handed them over to their undiscerning mind to do what is improper. They are filled with every form of wickedness, evil, greed, and malice; full of envy, murder, rivalry, treachery, and spite. They are gossips and scandalmongers and they hate God. They are insolent, haughty, boastful, ingenious in their wickedness, and rebellious toward their parents. They are senseless, faithless, heartless, ruthless. Although they know the just decree of God that all who practice such things deserve death, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them.”
I Corinthians 6:9-10 “Do you not know that the unjust will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators nor idolaters nor adulterers nor boy prostitutes nor sodomites nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor robbers will inherit the kingdom of God.”
Jude: 5-7
“I wish to remind you, although you know all things, that [the] Lord who once saved a people from the land of Egypt later destroyed those who did not believe. The angels too, who did not keep to their own domain but deserted their proper dwelling, he has kept in eternal chains, in gloom, for the judgment of the great day. Likewise, Sodom, Gomorrah, and the surrounding towns, which, in the same manner as they, indulged in sexual promiscuity and practiced unnatural vice, serve as an example by undergoing a punishment of eternal fire.”
And you, a Catholic priest, want to see these sodomites married so they can be saved?
I would be interested in any other preachings of Paul you repudiate.
**Do you want me to read all of St. Paul, or do you have specific passages in mind?
If you are referring to the so-called “clobber” passages, be sure you understand the context, meaning and application Paul had in mind before you try to use them to denigrate someone else. **
I never use Paul or anyone else to denigrate anybody. Sodomites do a good enough job denigrating themselves.
Romans 1:18-32:
“The wrath of God is indeed being revealed from heaven against every impiety and wickedness of those who suppress the truth by their wickedness. For what can be known about God is evident to them, because God made it evident to them. Ever since the creation of the world, his invisible attributes of eternal power and divinity have been able to be understood and perceived in what he has made. As a result, they have no excuse; for although they knew God they did not accord him glory as God or give him thanks. Instead, they became vain in their reasoning, and their senseless minds were darkened. While claiming to be wise, they became fools and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for the likeness of an image of mortal man or of birds or of four-legged animals or of snakes. Therefore, God handed them over to impurity through the lusts of their hearts for the mutual degradation of their bodies. They exchanged the truth of God for a lie and revered and worshiped the creature rather than the creator, who is blessed forever. Amen. Therefore, God handed them over to degrading passions. Their females exchanged natural relations for unnatural, and the males likewise gave up natural relations with females and burned with lust for one another. Males did shameful things with males and thus received in their own persons the due penalty for their perversity. And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God handed them over to their undiscerning mind to do what is improper. They are filled with every form of wickedness, evil, greed, and malice; full of envy, murder, rivalry, treachery, and spite. They are gossips and scandalmongers and they hate God. They are insolent, haughty, boastful, ingenious in their wickedness, and rebellious toward their parents. They are senseless, faithless, heartless, ruthless. Although they know the just decree of God that all who practice such things deserve death, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them.”
I Corinthians 6:9-10 “Do you not know that the unjust will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators nor idolaters nor adulterers nor boy prostitutes nor sodomites nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor robbers will inherit the kingdom of God.”
Jude: 5-7
“I wish to remind you, although you know all things, that [the] Lord who once saved a people from the land of Egypt later destroyed those who did not believe. The angels too, who did not keep to their own domain but deserted their proper dwelling, he has kept in eternal chains, in gloom, for the judgment of the great day. Likewise, Sodom, Gomorrah, and the surrounding towns, which, in the same manner as they, indulged in sexual promiscuity and practiced unnatural vice, serve as an example by undergoing a punishment of eternal fire.”
And you, a Catholic priest, want to see these sodomites married so they can be saved?
I would be interested in any other preachings of Paul you repudiate.
M
Mgray82
Guest
The utter confusion the child would suffer…
For one, neglecting a child the right to a mom and dad.
In the scenario where a same sex couple has a child, then divorce. If neither of the child’s parents are biological…what would the child make of its parents? Whats the difference between 2 moms (or dads) and/or 2 step moms/dads? Thats essentially 4 parents with the chances of none of them being biological. Who is the child going to desire more? The presence of its real parent or its other same sex parent? What are we to make if the other parents re-marry or even go “straight” again?
These are just a few examples of the utter confusion and disorder of it all.
No the world is not perfect. However, it’s our duty to prevent an evil like this. That’s why we are so aggressive on the whole abortion debate.
I find it hard to believe I have to argue this with someone claiming to be a priest…
R
RevDon
Guest
The evil in the situation you cite is divorce, not parenthood. I can find no evil in an adult giving a home and nurture to a child.
Perhaps the greater evil is whatever caused the child’s biological parents to give up the child in the first place.
Do you think that such children should not be adopted?
Do you think it’s better for them to be raised in orphanages or the foster care system?
I admitted that it is probably best for children to be raised by their biological parents, but what id one or both of them is abusive or neglectful? What if they are addicts? What if they are promiscuous?
As one who was raised by parents who were not biological, I thank God every day for the love I received.
As I said, in a perfect world, things would be different. Families would stay together. Parents would be capable and loving. Children would have a stable environment to grow up in. This isn’t that perfect world, and if a child can have a home where the child is loved and nurtured and provided for, I believe that’s better than the contrary. What more would you like from me?
R
RevDon
Guest
C
Charlemagne_II
Guest
RevDon
**
A common error in circumstances like this discussion is proof texting. That’s why I said that you must know the context, language and intent of a passage before you apply it as a guide to other situations. Clearly, not only do you not know those things, but you are also using a Bible that places presuppositions above good scholarship in its translation.
The attitude that the Bible says what it says grew out of the Protestant Reformation. To counter that error, for generations the Catholic Church did not promote good approaches to the reading of scripture by laity. But since about WWI, Catholic Bible scholarship has advanced by leaps and bounds, and resources that can help laity read the Bible have been published. I would suggest for you the Little Rock series as an inexpensive but competent resource. Of course, you won’t get it all, but it’s a great place to start.**
I see you are a historical revisionist, like so many other Catholic priests in the Church today. You will not triumph over Christ. His word is clear and transparent … except to people who want to make black white and white black.
I have no more use for you. Good bye! I will pray for your immortal soul.
**
A common error in circumstances like this discussion is proof texting. That’s why I said that you must know the context, language and intent of a passage before you apply it as a guide to other situations. Clearly, not only do you not know those things, but you are also using a Bible that places presuppositions above good scholarship in its translation.
The attitude that the Bible says what it says grew out of the Protestant Reformation. To counter that error, for generations the Catholic Church did not promote good approaches to the reading of scripture by laity. But since about WWI, Catholic Bible scholarship has advanced by leaps and bounds, and resources that can help laity read the Bible have been published. I would suggest for you the Little Rock series as an inexpensive but competent resource. Of course, you won’t get it all, but it’s a great place to start.**
I see you are a historical revisionist, like so many other Catholic priests in the Church today. You will not triumph over Christ. His word is clear and transparent … except to people who want to make black white and white black.
I have no more use for you. Good bye! I will pray for your immortal soul.
M
Mgray82
Guest
I’m just wondering if our Church Fathers would have supported the idea of homosexuals being married. Or perhaps one of the apostles…
…they weren’t.
This is nothing more than stubborn human worldly agenda’s being purchased straight from the evil one himself. We’re all sinners and need to repent and turn from our wicked actions. Including the support for “marriage” between two homosexuals.
…they weren’t.
This is nothing more than stubborn human worldly agenda’s being purchased straight from the evil one himself. We’re all sinners and need to repent and turn from our wicked actions. Including the support for “marriage” between two homosexuals.
R
RevDon
Guest
I appreciate the prayers.RevDon
**
A common error in circumstances like this discussion is proof texting. That’s why I said that you must know the context, language and intent of a passage before you apply it as a guide to other situations. Clearly, not only do you not know those things, but you are also using a Bible that places presuppositions above good scholarship in its translation.
The attitude that the Bible says what it says grew out of the Protestant Reformation. To counter that error, for generations the Catholic Church did not promote good approaches to the reading of scripture by laity. But since about WWI, Catholic Bible scholarship has advanced by leaps and bounds, and resources that can help laity read the Bible have been published. I would suggest for you the Little Rock series as an inexpensive but competent resource. Of course, you won’t get it all, but it’s a great place to start.**
I see you are a historical revisionist, like so many other Catholic priests in the Church today. You will not triumph over Christ. His word is clear and transparent … except to people who want to make black white and white black.
I have no more use for you. Good bye! I will pray for your immortal soul.
I found this definition for historical revisionism:
“Historical revisionism” (also but less often in English called “negationism”) is a phrase that describes the process that attempts to rewrite history by minimizing, denying or simply ignoring essential facts. It is, in other words, a breaking of the ninth commandment
It seems to me that my method of scriptural interpretation seeks to take into account all those facts, and that you are the one attempting to supply a meaning ton texts that the texts did not originally have.
- Status