P
Prodigal_Son
Guest
This would be another instance of your habit of using Catholic theology as a sort of “grab bag”, from which you can take whatever you like and ignore the rest.
- Status
P
Peter_Plato
Guest
Perish the thought…
A reminder…You’ve implied that the CCC gives the logic but it doesn’t. In fact it sides with me …
You may want me to believe you are speaking for the Church but I don’t believe you are …
Regarding verse mining Romans, please see my conversation with others on this thread.
It would be cool if you could make a rational argument at least once in a while rather than just throwing out flippant remarks.
If you have a substantive point on the OP then fine, otherwise I feel we’re going in circles.
Suppose inocente has developed a new theory of ethics based upon the the principle of “live and let live.” If he wants to test this new theory before publishing to make sure it doesn’t give laughable results, he will not ask it various moral questions to check that it doesn’t give answers which his intended audience would think are weird and immoral, instead he ‘quote mines’ - completely out of context - the Pope’s “secrets to happiness” and parades them as defining moral principles even though they do give laughable results when shown that the first ‘secret,’ “live and let live,” dressed up as a moral principle, cannot be applied to moral behaviour in any way that even approaches a highly tenuous manner of speaking.
Now I suppose it would be "cool if [he] … could make a rational argument at least once in a while rather than just throwing out flippant remarks.
But alas…
Glee4
L
Linusthe2nd
Guest
To repeat for the benefit of " certain " persons.
From Part III, Article 6 if the Catechism of the Catholic Church
I. “Male and Female He Created Them . . .”
2331 "God is love and in himself he lives a mystery of personal loving communion. Creating the human race in his own image . . … God inscribed in the humanity of man and woman the vocation, and thus the capacity and responsibility, of love and communion."114
“God created man in his own image . . . male and female he created them”;115 He blessed them and said, “Be fruitful and multiply”;116 "When God created man, he made him in the likeness of God. Male and female he created them, and he blessed them and named them Man when they were created."117
2332 Sexuality affects all aspects of the human person in the unity of his body and soul. It especially concerns affectivity, the capacity to love and to procreate, and in a more general way the aptitude for forming bonds of communion with others.
2333 Everyone, man and woman, should acknowledge and accept his sexual identity. Physical, moral, and spiritual difference and complementarity are oriented toward the goods of marriage and the flourishing of family life. the harmony of the couple and of society depends in part on the way in which the complementarity, needs, and mutual support between the sexes are lived out.
2334 "In creating men ‘male and female,’ God gives man and woman an equal personal dignity."118 "Man is a person, man and woman equally so, since both were created in the image and likeness of the personal God."119
2335 Each of the two sexes is an image of the power and tenderness of God, with equal dignity though in a different way. the union of man and woman in marriage is a way of imitating in the flesh the Creator’s generosity and fecundity: "Therefore a man leaves his father and his mother and cleaves to his wife, and they become one flesh."120 All human generations proceed from this union.121
2336 Jesus came to restore creation to the purity of its origins. In the Sermon on the Mount, he interprets God’s plan strictly: "You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ But I say to you that every one who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart."122 What God has joined together, let not man put asunder.123
The tradition of the Church has understood the sixth commandment as encompassing the whole of human sexuality.
114 FC 11.
115 ⇒ Gen 1:27.
116 ⇒ Gen 1:28.
117 ⇒ Gen 5:1-2.
118 FC 22; Cf. GS 49 # 2.
119 MD 6.
120 ⇒ Gen 2:24.
121 Cf. ⇒ Gen 4:1-2, ⇒ 25-26; ⇒ 5:1.
122 ⇒ Mt 5:27-28.
123 Cf. ⇒ Mt 19:6.
Offenses against chastity
2351 Lust is disordered desire for or inordinate enjoyment of sexual pleasure. Sexual pleasure is morally disordered when sought for itself, isolated from its procreative and unitive purposes.
Chastity and homosexuality
2357 Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex. It has taken a great variety of forms through the centuries and in different cultures. Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained. Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity,140 tradition has always declared that "homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered."141 They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.
2358 The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God’s will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord’s Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.
2359 Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection.
‘’ God gave us Ten Commandments, he did not give us Ten Suggestions. " Ted Kopple
God did not ask us to take a vote. He gaves us a brain to observe that his Natural Law, as expressed by the Ten Commandments, fulfilled the Law of Love, which is the greatest Commandment of all. We cannot claim to be obeying the Law of Love and at the same time violate the Natural Law written in our hearts and seconded by the Ten Commandments and the commands of the Sermon on the Mount.
End of story for reasonable people.
Linus2nd
From Part III, Article 6 if the Catechism of the Catholic Church
I. “Male and Female He Created Them . . .”
2331 "God is love and in himself he lives a mystery of personal loving communion. Creating the human race in his own image . . … God inscribed in the humanity of man and woman the vocation, and thus the capacity and responsibility, of love and communion."114
“God created man in his own image . . . male and female he created them”;115 He blessed them and said, “Be fruitful and multiply”;116 "When God created man, he made him in the likeness of God. Male and female he created them, and he blessed them and named them Man when they were created."117
2332 Sexuality affects all aspects of the human person in the unity of his body and soul. It especially concerns affectivity, the capacity to love and to procreate, and in a more general way the aptitude for forming bonds of communion with others.
2333 Everyone, man and woman, should acknowledge and accept his sexual identity. Physical, moral, and spiritual difference and complementarity are oriented toward the goods of marriage and the flourishing of family life. the harmony of the couple and of society depends in part on the way in which the complementarity, needs, and mutual support between the sexes are lived out.
2334 "In creating men ‘male and female,’ God gives man and woman an equal personal dignity."118 "Man is a person, man and woman equally so, since both were created in the image and likeness of the personal God."119
2335 Each of the two sexes is an image of the power and tenderness of God, with equal dignity though in a different way. the union of man and woman in marriage is a way of imitating in the flesh the Creator’s generosity and fecundity: "Therefore a man leaves his father and his mother and cleaves to his wife, and they become one flesh."120 All human generations proceed from this union.121
2336 Jesus came to restore creation to the purity of its origins. In the Sermon on the Mount, he interprets God’s plan strictly: "You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ But I say to you that every one who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart."122 What God has joined together, let not man put asunder.123
The tradition of the Church has understood the sixth commandment as encompassing the whole of human sexuality.
114 FC 11.
115 ⇒ Gen 1:27.
116 ⇒ Gen 1:28.
117 ⇒ Gen 5:1-2.
118 FC 22; Cf. GS 49 # 2.
119 MD 6.
120 ⇒ Gen 2:24.
121 Cf. ⇒ Gen 4:1-2, ⇒ 25-26; ⇒ 5:1.
122 ⇒ Mt 5:27-28.
123 Cf. ⇒ Mt 19:6.
Offenses against chastity
2351 Lust is disordered desire for or inordinate enjoyment of sexual pleasure. Sexual pleasure is morally disordered when sought for itself, isolated from its procreative and unitive purposes.
Chastity and homosexuality
2357 Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex. It has taken a great variety of forms through the centuries and in different cultures. Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained. Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity,140 tradition has always declared that "homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered."141 They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.
2358 The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God’s will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord’s Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.
2359 Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection.
‘’ God gave us Ten Commandments, he did not give us Ten Suggestions. " Ted Kopple
God did not ask us to take a vote. He gaves us a brain to observe that his Natural Law, as expressed by the Ten Commandments, fulfilled the Law of Love, which is the greatest Commandment of all. We cannot claim to be obeying the Law of Love and at the same time violate the Natural Law written in our hearts and seconded by the Ten Commandments and the commands of the Sermon on the Mount.
End of story for reasonable people.
Linus2nd
I
inocente
Guest
Another personal remark. Come on, you are capable of better. Others not necessarily, but you yes. At least try to hide it by wrapping it up in a semblance of an argument.
As Pope Francis says
:‘8. Stop being negative. “Needing to talk badly about others indicates low self-esteem. That means, ‘I feel so low that instead of picking myself up I have to cut others down,’” the pope said. “Letting go of negative things quickly is healthy.”’
But your point confuses Catholic theology with the Pope’s personal top ten tips for a happier life. Another poster even tried denying that the Pope had said them (post #307), so I suggest you first need to agree with other Catholics before calling them theology.
If I read you correctly, you also appear to be conflating the CCC with your own multiple choice question. (Some posters equate their personal opinion with Catholic theology by dint of nothing more than them being Catholic so hey presto. But their opinions usually disagree and so cancel out.)
I
inocente
Guest
‘1. “Live and let live.” Everyone should be guided by this principle, he said, which has a similar expression in Rome with the saying, “Move forward and let others do the same.”’ - catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/1403144.htm
Live and let live is very much a moral principle (= a fundamental proposition of right and wrong that is accepted by an individual or a social group). It is very Christian to admit that Christ is the shepherd, and it isn’t our place to tell other sheep how they should live - it is their journey to make for themselves.
I wouldn’t see it as the only moral principle, since by itself it could be somewhat anarchic. Ethics based on a single principle, such as Bentham or Kant, tend to give contrived answers in some situations anyway. But live and let live is a good maxim to counter ideologies. Whether those ideologies are Mao Tse-tung’s red book, the Soviets, Taliban, Puritans, rules-is-rules, more-than-my-job’s-worth, I-know-God’s-mind, …
Pope Francis appears to lean towards putting people before ideologies. He said atheists can go to heaven (catholic.org/news/hf/faith/story.php?id=51077), he has spoken of the need for humanist policies (news.va/en/news/pope-francis-my-advice-is-always-dialogue-dialogue), and his top ten tips even includes 9. Don’t proselytize; respect others’ beliefs.
People once believed in the divine right of kings. There is nothing wrong with a morality based on the needs of people as opposed to a pyramid of logic which excludes them.
I noticed yesterday that there’s a rainbow slogan based on live and let live.
Live and let love
I
inocente
Guest
You will hear some Americans, even more British, giving louder and louder English commands to waiters here, as if repetition might overcome the fact that they couldn’t be bothered to learn any Spanish. Then when the waiter has gone, or even to her face, they’ll complain loudly that a Spanish waiter, in Spain, is at fault for speaking Spanish.
I believe you might be one of those people.
This is a very ideological position, based entirely on your opinion of what God wants but dressed up as if it were written out by God in a sign on the Moon. In English of course.
You puritans might think you can dictate what is written on other peoples’ hearts. You can’t.
I’ve said rather a lot for someone who said I had nothing left to say.
P
Prodigal_Son
Guest
No, actually, it doesn’t matter whether the CCC agrees with my multiple choice question. It is based on rationally sound premises. You have not explained why any of my premises are false; you have not criticized my logic; you have not picked which of the two options you believe in.
You said there was a third option, but I showed that this third option contradicted the very notion of divine omnipotenence. I did give you an “out”, however, if you admit that homosexual attraction is a defect. But you haven’t taken that out, either.
L
Linusthe2nd
Guest
Just a reminder for " certain " people. God writes the same Law on every heart. But not every heart listens.You will hear some Americans, even more British, giving louder and louder English commands to waiters here, as if repetition might overcome the fact that they couldn’t be bothered to learn any Spanish. Then when the waiter has gone, or even to her face, they’ll complain loudly that a Spanish waiter, in Spain, is at fault for speaking Spanish.
I believe you might be one of those people.
This is a very ideological position, based entirely on your opinion of what God wants but dressed up as if it were written out by God in a sign on the Moon. In English of course.
You puritans might think you can dictate what is written on other peoples’ hearts. You can’t.
I’ve said rather a lot for someone who said I had nothing left to say.
Linus2nd
I
inocente
Guest
I said it plain enough. Your premise “God clearly made homosexual love fruitless” is false since God didn’t invent sex, just as God didn’t invent the iPad. How many times must I say it?No, actually, it doesn’t matter whether the CCC agrees with my multiple choice question. It is based on rationally sound premises. You have not explained why any of my premises are false; you have not criticized my logic; you have not picked which of the two options you believe in.
You said there was a third option, but I showed that this third option contradicted the very notion of divine omnipotenence. I did give you an “out”, however, if you admit that homosexual attraction is a defect. But you haven’t taken that out, either.
And that’s even before we get to my main criticism of any and all moralities which place pretty rules and pristine logic before the needs of people. God is love, not a logical argument. People are human beings, not machines.
Anyway, I was pleased, gleeful, yesterday to see the Pope not sharing the cold idealism and arrogant distain shown by some posters on this thread, but really, your argument is not even remotely fabulous.
So, for the third or forth time, answer my criticism. Let’s try putting it the other way around, since you are the one making the assertion. Prove to me that God made homosexuality and then prove to me that God made homosexual love.
P
Prodigal_Son
Guest
God made everything, and God made many things subject to defect. It is atheism to say that God did not invent sex, since it implies either that God is not omnipotent or that God does not care about human beings. Hence either God created homosexuality (as a good thing) or allowed homosexuality (as a defect).
I
inocente
Guest
That’s the Taliban argument - you have the ear of God and I must follow you. Or else what? You bully me? You consign me to hell?Just a reminder for " certain " people. God writes the same Law on every heart. But not every heart listens.
As I think I told you before, you are not the Shepherd, you are just another sheep.
Your head does not get to dictate what is written on other peoples’ hearts. That’s the whole point of God giving each of us a conscience. Or is that theology too simple for one so sophisticated as your good self?
Live And Let Live Rides Again. Volume #2.
I
inocente
Guest
Yikes! Your best shot is we must agree with you or we’re thrown out of the country club? I better not write anymore.
But yikes!
P
Prodigal_Son
Guest
I have no idea what you mean.
P
Peter_Plato
Guest
Et tu, Brute?Another personal remark. Come on, you are capable of better. Others not necessarily, but you yes. At least try to hide it by wrapping it up in a semblance of an argument.
As Pope Francis says
‘8. Stop being negative. “Needing to talk badly about others indicates low self-esteem. That means, ‘I feel so low that instead of picking myself up I have to cut others down,’” the pope said. “Letting go of negative things quickly is healthy.”’
I believe you might be one of those people.
L
Linusthe2nd
Guest
The Scriptures are pretty clear, God has written his Law on every heart. I don’t think that is what the Taliban teachThat’s the Taliban argument - you have the ear of God and I must follow you. Or else what? You bully me? You consign me to hell?
As I think I told you before, you are not the Shepherd, you are just another sheep.
Your head does not get to dictate what is written on other peoples’ hearts. That’s the whole point of God giving each of us a conscience. Or is that theology too simple for one so sophisticated as your good self?
Live And Let Live Rides Again. Volume #2.
. And of course God believes in " Live and Let Live " also. He forces no one, neither do I, neither does the Church. So, though every heart knows the truth ( or can learn it ), not every heart responds.Linus2nd
P
Peter_Plato
Guest
The problem with ambiguous statements is that they can be trivially true but when the terms are spelled out clearly their truth value is severely curtailed.That’s the Taliban argument - you have the ear of God and I must follow you. Or else what? You bully me? You consign me to hell?
As I think I told you before, you are not the Shepherd, you are just another sheep.
Your head does not get to dictate what is written on other peoples’ hearts. That’s the whole point of God giving each of us a conscience. Or is that theology too simple for one so sophisticated as your good self?
Live And Let Live Rides Again. Volume #2.
The injunction (if taken as such) to “live” in “Live and let live,” must mean, if it is to mean anything, something like, “Live a fully human life.” That would assume that since humans are rational and moral agents, “live…” entails living a rational and moral existence. In which case, the statement can be taken roughly to mean: ”Live a rational and morally good human life and let others do the same."
The non-trivial implications begin to raise their ugly heads when “Live…” is taken to mean whatever the hearer wants it to mean. Thus, to some, the injunction "live…” could mean, “live whatever kind of existence - human, inhuman or otherwise - that you want and allow others to do the same.”
To a Viking marauder, your “moral principle” version of the injunction essentially gives him the freedom to rape and pillage and allow his fellow compatriots (and everyone else) to do everything and anything up to and including raping and pillaging. He is following “live and let live” to the letter precisely because his definition of “live” entails a certain kind of existence - the life of a Viking warrior.
Again the problem with such an ambiguous and open-ended statement taken as a moral principle is that it will endorse every kind of life and standard of behaviour engaged in by human beings. As a moral principle, at best, it is totally unhelpful because it will endorse every lifestyle, at worst it is downright pernicious because it will endorse every lifestyle.
In short, if you wish to use a principle that sanctions murder, raping and all kinds of abuse as the principle upon which to base approval of a gay lifestyle, be my guest, but be prepared because you have, ipso facto, endorsed any and every other lifestyle imaginable by human beings.
If you wish to ride the “Live and Let Live” bus again (pardon me while I get off at this stop) I am letting you know it has no brakes and will end up in a tangled fiery heap at the bottom of the first steep hill it attempts to maneuver. Keep in mind that I did try to warn you. From here on it is at your own risk that you “ride again.”
I sincerely doubt that the Pope will be joining you, but I leave that up to him (and not you) to decide for himself.
P
Peter_Plato
Guest
The problem with your premise concerning “God giving each of us a conscience,” is that you assume God also formed, whether properly or improperly, every conscience.
So “your head does not get to dictate what is written on other people’s hearts” means YOU don’t get to dictate to the Taliban what is on their hearts. Their hearts - according to your “God gives each of us a conscience” - are as right and good as your heart. God, then, endorses the Taliban’s actions as much as he endorses yours. So, “live and let the Taliban live” and stop trying to dictate to them “what is written on their hearts.”
Yup. I am glad I got off at the last stop. Do you now see the wreck that is coming for your “live and let live” “God giving each of us our conscience” excursion down Blindguide Hill?
P
Peter_Plato
Guest
Read my post #307 and explain precisely where I denied the Pope “had said them.”
I did claim the NCR took the list and “ran with it.” That does not amount to a denial that the Pope compiled in some form a kind of list, but I would concede that the commentary by NCR about the list was not necessarily what the Pope intended or meant.
If you read the first part of my first statement, “The fact that the NCR took this ‘list’…,” there is nothing to suggest that the list did not exist, nor that the list was deniably a list formulated by the Pope. I accepted the existence of the “list,” which is why I observed that NCR took it and “ran with it.”
I also claimed that even if the list were part of the Pope’s general view of happiness, that does not mean he intended it as having the force of a moral principle or that it should take the place of all moral principles. This was your take on the first item on the list.
The fact that you can read my post as equivalent to a denial that the Pope said anything at all on the subject or that I was claiming NCR “made it all up” is quite telling about the liberties you are willing to take when “interpreting” what others say or write, whether that interpretation is regarding posts on this forum or words of the Pope as filtered through the media.
Of course, I don’t expect an apology, nor do I anticipate one will be coming.
O
oldcelt
Guest
Homosexuality may be in complete harmony with nature. Since such unions cannot reproduce, it could one of nature’s failsafe components against overpopulation. Much like a deer reabsorbing its fetus in low food years, natural disasters, infertility, pandemics, etc.
I have no concern as a straight male that gay people will throw something out of balance anymore than heterosexual people.
I have no concern as a straight male that gay people will throw something out of balance anymore than heterosexual people.
P
Prodigal_Son
Guest
Oh, I certainly agree that homosexuality could be in complete harmony with nature. But that is a very different thing from saying that gay people prosper *by *having sex with each other.
I think it is very good for societies to have people who aren’t fundamentally oriented toward marriage and childbirth. Hence “some are born eunuchs”, in the Gospel.
- Status