Is the Church intolerant for not Accepting Homosexual Behavior?

[Denise_Shae]

God revealed, through Sacred Scripture (see below) that those who commit Grave or Mortal Sin without Repentense <sp?> and Absolution (through Sacramental Confession), will not enter Heaven.
The CC didn’t make this up. It’s in the Bible (the inerrant Word of God), and the Bible doesn’t tolerate sinful acts. So why should the CC or its followers?
The CC does not have the authority to rewrite Scripture, therefore it cannot change its teachings on this issue.
If the Church even tried to teach something contrary to the revealed Word of God in Sacred Scripture, it would be Anathema.
It would cease to be the Church Jesus Christ founded 2,000 years ago.

Why do people insist on blaming the CC for adhering to and upholding the revelations of God as taught in Sacred Scripture?

I’m not trying to be sarcastic, here, but if you want to place blame, blame the Source, not the messanger.

God Bless.

Romans 1: 22-27 22 For professing themselves to be wise, they became fools. 23 And they changed the glory of the incorruptible God into the likeness of the image of a corruptible man, and of birds, and of fourfooted beasts, and of creeping things. 24 Wherefore God gave them up to the desires of their heart, unto uncleanness, to dishonour their own bodies among themselves. 25 Who changed the truth of God into a lie; and worshipped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.
26 For this cause God delivered them up to shameful affections. For their women have changed the natural use into that use which is against nature. 27 And, in like manner, the men also, leaving the natural use of the women, have burned in their lusts one towards another, men with men working that which is filthy, and receiving in themselves the recompense which was due to their error.

**1 Corinthians 6: 9-10
**9 Know you not that the unjust shall not possess the kingdom of God? Do not err: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, 10 Nor the effeminate, nor liers with mankind, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor railers, nor extortioners, shall possess the kingdom of God.

1 Timothy 1: 9-10
9 Knowing this, that the law is not made for the just man, but for the unjust and disobedient, for the ungodly, and for sinners, for the wicked and defiled, for murderers of fathers, and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, 10 For fornicators, for them who defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and whatever other thing is contrary to sound doctrine

 

[Denise_Shae]

Anyways…If you believe in God’s love, and heaven, does anyone really think that a person who is part of a homosexual relationship will not be able to attain heaven?

elg…

elg, as to your above question, let’s do this to make it less personal: substitude the word/s “homosexual” and/or “relationship” with some other sins that are considered Mortal or “Sins unto Death”, according to the Bible.

• “If you believe in God’s love, and heaven, does anyone really think that a person who is part of an adulterous relationship will not be able to get to heaven?”
• “If you believe in God’s love, and heaven, does anyone really think that a person who is part of raping someone will not be able to get to heaven?”
• “If you believe in God’s love, and heaven, does anyone really think that a person who is part of a pre-marital sexual relationship (fornication) will not be able to get to heaven?”
• “If you believe in God’s love, and heaven, does anyone really think that a person who is part of armed robbery (stealing) will not be able to get to heaven?”
• “If you believe in God’s love, and heaven, does anyone really think that a person who is part of idol worship will not be able to get to heaven?”
• “If you believe in God’s love, and heaven, does anyone really think that a person who is part of bearing false witness against ones neighbor will not be able to get to heaven?”
• “If you believe in God’s love, and heaven, does anyone really think that a person who is part of murder will not be able to get to heaven?”

To all of the above I answer, Yes. I believe the person will not attain Heaven.
Now those were just a few examples. But my point is this: believing in God’s love and Heaven doesn’t give a person permission to purposely, and with full consent of the will, commit sin. It doesn’t absolve a person from guilt. And it doesn’t automatically get a person into Heaven.

God doesn’t turn away from us; we turn away from Him.

Whenever you have: Grave Matter, Sufficient Reflection and Full Consent of the Will, it’s a Mortal Sin – a “Sin unto Death”. And God forbid, a person should die in such a state, he cannot enter the Kingdom of God.

Is trying to do God’s Will always easy? No way. In fact, sometimes it seems nearly impossible. We struggle, every day, to overcome our sinfulness and our vices, because we “believe in God’s love and in Heaven”. And because we aspire to love Him, above all things (especially ourselves), with all our hearts, minds and strength. Just as Jesus commanded us.

Good luck and God Bless!

 

[Gnosis]

…from the Church’s point of view, obviously it is not being intolerant. It’s truly incapable of thinking otherwise because to do so would tear the thread that causes the entire tapestry to fall apart. In one sense, an outsider can not blame the Church for her adamancy in this regard.

From someone now on the outside of the Church…its doctrinal rigidity in this respect is nothing short of intolerant, apathetic, selfish, cold and destructive. A first hand experience of this has caused me and my family to leave the Catholic Church for good, which no doubt will please many here who want a smaller, “pure” Church.

I say this because the Church paints morality with such a broad brush, what to most in the Church is a matter of theory plays out rather differently in the lives of those actually involved. For example, the relationship I have with the guy I fell in love with is condemned completely apart from how this relationship has actually played out in my life; that is, it is condemned apart from all the good and transformative power that it has yielded. So long as the consequences of this relationship are to be found only in some metaphysical realm, so long as I never actually experience them and only have the assurance of doing simply because “it’s just wrong”, one can not reasonably expect me to change my mind. We judge the nature of something by its fruit…by its effect. A bad tree gives bad fruit. My homosexuality has brought nothing of the darkness or evil that the Church warns of. What reason then, do I have to believe it?
…oh, yes…faith. Faith that surrendering this life to Her misery will guarantee me His glory. The Church has made it clear that experience and personal circumstances have no validity here…and many Catholics, out of what I can only see as a kind of addiction to authority, refuse to examine the moral issue according to each individual circumstance. The sin is inherent in the act, and thus, all these relationships whether they do good or bad, can be condemned in a single sweep of Peter’s staff.
I’m not as naive as to think this would change any Catholic’s mind about homosexuality…in fact if you are a good Catholic by the Church’s own standards, it won’t. I only intend for you to see why the Church’s doctrine is so ill received. To those in flourishing homosexual relationships, everything the Church says is against their own experience of it, against every instinct, emotional, spiritual and otherwise. It is as though you are eating a delicious red apple and someone is telling you it tastes like a sour lemon. This imagery is not in appeal to the sensual aspect of the sexuality, but of the relationship itself, encompassing the entire thing.

Humankind was not made for sexuality, but sexuality was made for humankind. When the letter of the law comes to be such a source of misery and unhappiness in order to restrain something that is not so clearly poisonous to the human person, it would appear, to me anyways, that something of the essence of the gospel message has been lost.

 

[rlg94086]

I think my teenager who had his first sexual experience at age 14 probably would have some sympathy for your views…certainly he found nothing but enjoyment from the experience. He also has found nothing but pleasure in the relationship with his girlfriends.

Perhaps, he will come to the same conclusion you did and decide that monogamy and marriage, as taught by the Church, is just “doctrinal rigidity.” Who knows? He may find that multiple partners may be the way to go. I hope not. I hope as he matures that he will understand the reason we submit to the authority of Christ and His Church.

In regards to homosexual relations, Peter didn’t “swing his staff.” The belief that it is a sin to have relations with those of the same sex has been consistently taught…even before Christ.

I will pray for you to overcome your sinful desires, and I ask for others to pray for me and my son, as well. It should be noted that people being seduced by the sweet flavor of the apple has also occurred for a very, very long time.

God bless,

Robert

…from the Church’s point of view, obviously it is not being intolerant. It’s truly incapable of thinking otherwise because to do so would tear the thread that causes the entire tapestry to fall apart. In one sense, an outsider can not blame the Church for her adamancy in this regard.

From someone now on the outside of the Church…its doctrinal rigidity in this respect is nothing short of intolerant, apathetic, selfish, cold and destructive. A first hand experience of this has caused me and my family to leave the Catholic Church for good, which no doubt will please many here who want a smaller, “pure” Church.

I say this because the Church paints morality with such a broad brush, what to most in the Church is a matter of theory plays out rather differently in the lives of those actually involved. For example, the relationship I have with the guy I fell in love with is condemned completely apart from how this relationship has actually played out in my life; that is, it is condemned apart from all the good and transformative power that it has yielded. So long as the consequences of this relationship are to be found only in some metaphysical realm, so long as I never actually experience them and only have the assurance of doing simply because “it’s just wrong”, one can not reasonably expect me to change my mind. We judge the nature of something by its fruit…by its effect. A bad tree gives bad fruit. My homosexuality has brought nothing of the darkness or evil that the Church warns of. What reason then, do I have to believe it?
…oh, yes…faith. Faith that surrendering this life to Her misery will guarantee me His glory. The Church has made it clear that experience and personal circumstances have no validity here…and many Catholics, out of what I can only see as a kind of addiction to authority, refuse to examine the moral issue according to each individual circumstance. The sin is inherent in the act, and thus, all these relationships whether they do good or bad, can be condemned in a single sweep of Peter’s staff.
I’m not as naive as to think this would change any Catholic’s mind about homosexuality…in fact if you are a good Catholic by the Church’s own standards, it won’t. I only intend for you to see why the Church’s doctrine is so ill received. To those in flourishing homosexual relationships, everything the Church says is against their own experience of it, against every instinct, emotional, spiritual and otherwise. It is as though you are eating a delicious red apple and someone is telling you it tastes like a sour lemon. This imagery is not in appeal to the sensual aspect of the sexuality, but of the relationship itself, encompassing the entire thing.

Humankind was not made for sexuality, but sexuality was made for humankind. When the letter of the law comes to be such a source of misery and unhappiness in order to restrain something that is not so clearly poisonous to the human person, it would appear, to me anyways, that something of the essence of the gospel message has been lost.

 

[deborahssong]

Greetings in the Lord! I must admitt I am amazed at this question. Let me explain. The word of God is so clear about the sin of homosexuality. I do not beleive it could get any clearer about those who practice such acts and where their fate lies. If we accept it, then we are saying that God in His infinite wisdom allows all sin. If we say that it is acceptable then WE are defining the word and changing the rules. According to Gods word, we do not have that privelage.
I have done much study of this issure and I am quite sure most christians do not want to discuss this. However it doesnt change the truth. Now that being said I do believe that we should receive them in the manner which Jesus describes, in His gospels. with love and mercy. Still being able to tell them the truth. I have done some research and have some grave stats, that most wouild like to deny. The fact is that homosexualtiy is produced most of the time from a troubled youth of some sort. Example, a survey was doen of several hundreds of homosexual men and women. In 85% of the cases, there was either a sexual molestation that had occured, an over bearing parent, or lack of parent or parenting. Instead of hearing these stats and searching out the other we are quick to beleive the worlds stats. The bible is clear about loving the world. In the book of 1st john, the word says that those who love the world do not love God. The love of God is not in them. Not my words, the word of Gods words. We as christians have to make a decision in our walk, whom do we beleive? Christianity isnt so unless we put the standards to practice. Christ likeness that is what christianity means. Read His gospels and you will get the answers. If we accept homosexuality as being ok then we have to accept the rest, incest, pedophillia, and beastility. These are all abnormal sexual functions. Sorry I speak them as I see them with my heart and spiritual eyes. Jesus said "you will know “MY children by the fruit they bear.” Homosexualtiy is bearing bad fruit, not Christlikeness. Tolerate absolutely not. Love them yes and lead them to truth. Just what Jesus did. He did go to the sinner in the street…for a divine purpose. To bring them the truth so they could receive what God desired for them. Hope I have made sense. Dennis Jernigan is a father of six and married of course. Serves the Lord and had a homosexual past. Go to his website and read his testimony. God is so awesome! and is still in the business of deliverance.

 

[Denise_Shae]

Greetings in the Lord! I must admitt I am amazed at this question. Let me explain. The word of God is so clear about the sin of homosexuality. I do not beleive it could get any clearer about those who practice such acts and where their fate lies. If we accept it, then we are saying that God in His infinite wisdom allows all sin. If we say that it is acceptable then WE are defining the word and changing the rules. According to Gods word, we do not have that privelage.
I have done much study of this issure and I am quite sure most christians do not want to discuss this. However it doesnt change the truth. Now that being said I do believe that we should receive them in the manner which Jesus describes, in His gospels. with love and mercy. Still being able to tell them the truth. I have done some research and have some grave stats, that most wouild like to deny. The fact is that homosexualtiy is produced most of the time from a troubled youth of some sort. Example, a survey was doen of several hundreds of homosexual men and women. In 85% of the cases, there was either a sexual molestation that had occured, an over bearing parent, or lack of parent or parenting. Instead of hearing these stats and searching out the other we are quick to beleive the worlds stats. The bible is clear about loving the world. In the book of 1st john, the word says that those who love the world do not love God. The love of God is not in them. Not my words, the word of Gods words. We as christians have to make a decision in our walk, whom do we beleive? Christianity isnt so unless we put the standards to practice. Christ likeness that is what christianity means. Read His gospels and you will get the answers. If we accept homosexuality as being ok then we have to accept the rest, incest, pedophillia, and beastility. These are all abnormal sexual functions. Sorry I speak them as I see them with my heart and spiritual eyes. Jesus said "you will know “MY children by the fruit they bear.” Homosexualtiy is bearing bad fruit, not Christlikeness. Tolerate absolutely not. Love them yes and lead them to truth. Just what Jesus did. He did go to the sinner in the street…for a divine purpose. To bring them the truth so they could receive what God desired for them. Hope I have made sense. Dennis Jernigan is a father of six and married of course. Serves the Lord and had a homosexual past. Go to his website and read his testimony. God is so awesome! and is still in the business of deliverance.

What you say is true. However, to those who reject religion or do not accept or believe in Sacred Scripture, God’s Truth, then falls on deaf ears I’m afraid.
And they will continue to condemn the CC for upholding Sacred Scripture.
Truth is, since they can’t argue w/the Bible, they’ll bad mouth the CC, Who proclaims Sacred Scripture. :nope:
All we can do is pray for these poor souls. They’re in grave danger of being lost for all eternity.

Thanks for your post.

God Bless!

 

[Other_Eric]

In answering questions about same-sex attractions, the acts involved with them and the people subject to them, it is often necessary to tread very carefully to avoid any confusion. Of course we are called to love everyone and respect his or her God-given human dignity. The thing most people fail to understand is that when love is expressed in practical terms, it is going to look very different when it is directed to one who has same-sex attractions versus one who does not. We all must remember that sometimes love needs to be expressed in a harsh rebuke and, if necessary, to upset people’s mode of doing business and drive them far from it with a whip.

 

[Gnosis]

I think my teenager who had his first sexual experience at age 14 probably would have some sympathy for your views…certainly he found nothing but enjoyment from the experience. He also has found nothing but pleasure in the relationship with his girlfriends.

Perhaps, he will come to the same conclusion you did and decide that monogamy and marriage, as taught by the Church, is just “doctrinal rigidity.” Who knows? He may find that multiple partners may be the way to go. I hope not. I hope as he matures that he will understand the reason we submit to the authority of Christ and His Church.

This is one of the problems that I’m talking about. Most Catholics I encounter seem incapable of seeing a homosexual relationship as anything other than an adolsecent style pursuit of pleasure.

What I am speaking about is actual flourishing and nurturing relationships…people in love. Personally, my experience of falling in love has been a transformative experience that in all honesty, has brought me closer to God. It has been one of those unique relationships where God is the center, and together, faith is nurtured and enhanced. I see life differently because of it.

Are a homosexual couple not capable of being anything but two people engaged in lust-driven indulgence reinforced by empty fantasies of “being in love”?
This is the fundamental problem. You are saying that this is what I am experiencing, this shallow and ultimately empty experience. You make this conclusion based on a moral theory, what scriptures and the Church tell you. You make your decision irrespective of MY actual experience of this. Essentially, you’re trying to dictate my experience according to your belifs.

 

[boppaid]

God revealed, through Sacred Scripture (see below) that those who commit Grave or Mortal Sin without Repentense <sp?> and Absolution (through Sacramental Confession), will not enter Heaven.
The CC didn’t make this up. It’s in the Bible (the inerrant Word of God),

Where is it in the bible? (That is, “Grave Sin” or “Mortal Sin” and “Absolution through sacramental confesstion”, etc.) I sometimes go to a Baptist Church for their children’s activities, and I was discussing this with a Baptish friend of mine, and she asked me where that was in the Bible. I couldn’t find it. Thanks!

 

[vern_humphrey]

Where is it in the bible? (That is, “Grave Sin” or “Mortal Sin” and “Absolution through sacramental confesstion”, etc.) I sometimes go to a Baptist Church for their children’s activities, and I was discussing this with a Baptish friend of mine, and she asked me where that was in the Bible. I couldn’t find it. Thanks!

Let’s start with the ending of the Gospel of John:

24 It is this disciple who testifies to these things and has written them, 14 and we know that his testimony is true.

25 There are also many other things that Jesus did, but if these were to be described individually, I do not think the whole world would contain the books that would be written.

Jesus Himself left us nothing in writing. He taught by word of mouth and precept. The Apostles taught the same way. It was a generation before anything was written down, and the New Testament as we know it only emerged in about 382 AD.

So for about 350 years, Christianity was taught by word of mouth, aided by some written documents, but not based on them. In fact, when the Canon of the New Testament was finally established, many “candidate” documents were found to be spurious or badly edited.

The Church continues to cherish and teach the spoken tradition along with the Bible – and very clearly the earliest Christians taught that things like homosexual acts, abortion, exposing children and so on were sinful.

 

[rlg94086]

I’m not questioning your deep, nurturing relationship - I am merely comparing your inability to accept the authority of the Church to that of a teenager. I could have easily compared you to other adults who act the same way - our Church and the rest of the world are full of such examples. There are people who reject the Church’s teaching on birth control, divorce, fornication, etc. It’s a long list.

We don’t have the luxury of deciding what is a sin and what is not. The granddaddy sin of them all is pride - believing that you know better than Christ and the Church. You believe that your experience trumps God’s laws.

It is much easier to be pious, if you make all the rules.

This is one of the problems that I’m talking about. Most Catholics I encounter seem incapable of seeing a homosexual relationship as anything other than an adolsecent style pursuit of pleasure.

What I am speaking about is actual flourishing and nurturing relationships…people in love. Personally, my experience of falling in love has been a transformative experience that in all honesty, has brought me closer to God. It has been one of those unique relationships where God is the center, and together, faith is nurtured and enhanced. I see life differently because of it.

Are a homosexual couple not capable of being anything but two people engaged in lust-driven indulgence reinforced by empty fantasies of “being in love”?
This is the fundamental problem. You are saying that this is what I am experiencing, this shallow and ultimately empty experience. You make this conclusion based on a moral theory, what scriptures and the Church tell you. You make your decision irrespective of MY actual experience of this. Essentially, you’re trying to dictate my experience according to your belifs.

 

[Mommyof02green]

Where is it in the bible? (That is, “Grave Sin” or “Mortal Sin” and “Absolution through sacramental confesstion”, etc.) I sometimes go to a Baptist Church for their children’s activities, and I was discussing this with a Baptish friend of mine, and she asked me where that was in the Bible. I couldn’t find it. Thanks!

Q: Why do Catholics confess their sins to a priest, rather than going directly to God?
click here for the answer

This also might be helpful The Sacraments & The Bible (Baptism, Confession, & The Eucharist)

This also might be helpful The sarcraments

The CCC on the topic of confession:
THE SACRAMENT OF PENANCE AND RECONCILIATION

1 John 5:13-21 talks about sin, this might be helpful, also read the CCC re: sin

This bit of info might be helpful too.
John John Martignoni:

Protestants believe that we should go by the Bible alone in determining what is and is not authentic Christian teaching. Furthermore, they believe that each person has the right to read and interpret the Bible for themselves to determine what is and is not authentic Christian teaching.

What I do is give them my interpretation of these passages, and, if they try to tell me that my interpretation is wrong, I simply ask them if, according to their theology, I have the right to read and interpret Scripture for myself so as to determine what God is saying to me through Scripture. And they say, “Of course you do.” Then I tell them, “That is MY interpretation!” They can disagree with my interpretation if they want to, but, by their own theology, I have a RIGHT to my interpretation. Therefore, they cannot say my interpretation is wrong…the best they can do is disagree with it.

This is a very important point to remember…they, by their own theology, cannot tell me my interpretation is wrong, unless they wish to be hypocrites. They can disagree with my interpretation, but they cannot say it is wrong…not if they believe in the right of each individual to read and interpret Scripture on their own so as to determine true and false teaching. And, remember, you can use this strategy every time you discuss the Bible with a non-Catholic, regardless of the particular doctrine or dogma you are talking about.

For more from Apologetics for the Masses click here

 

[deborahssong]

Denise, you are absolutely correct. Jesus said it Himself. My paraphrase,; when you go into a city and share the gospel of the Kingdom, if they reject what you say, then turn leave and shake the dust from your feet and move on. I beleive He is saying just what you said. To those who do not know, and refuse the teaching of Gods holy word, they will perish. I am a bible teacher and have been for some time. I am forever amazed at the reasoning behind much belief. We are warned by Jesus Himself to be careful of man;s doctrine. It has cost Him His children.
Shame on the one who causes his brother to stumble. This is why it is so important for each one of us to pursue Jesus with a personal passion. To study His word and show ourselves approved. I grew up in the era where we were not allowed to study scripture. advised against it. Only the priest could do that and tell us what it meant. As i researched church history I have been amazed at the length of corruption in the church all to keep people from the truth! Gods Holy word. If His word wasnt attainable for all then He would be a respecter of persons and He isnt.
By the way corruption has been around a long long time. In the protestant history as well. To my knowledge the first gentile churches all have the appearance of being catholic, universal, united in Christ. Much later is when the pagan ideas came into play. that were then made laws of the church. It is so important to know why we believe what we beleive. We are told in 1st Peter to test the spirits ourselves. another words find out what the person is saying and where they are getting it! Amen.
I so understand my pioneer spirit. I am a direct descendant of one of the first catholic families to settle kentucky. My great grandfather x four, fincanced most of the trip from Maryland to Kentucky. Basil hayden sr. My history of the church is rich. The settled area is called the Holy lands of kentucky. Churches still there and are beautiful. Though at this time (and that could change per Gods dierction) I do not worship in the catholic church, my heart is full of love for the history I now know and understand. i am a student of the word. yes studied many versions and mens doctrine as well. (future will be pursuing a degree) There is grave misunderstanding about the catholic church however there is much misundertsanding about much of Gods word. Most believers havent pursued God themselves. they have accepted what somebody told them. I started a journey 22 years ago and its been an awesome one! Loving God with all my being and pursuing His word and His plan for me. I pray that all will realize this is His gift to all and He paid such a price for us to have it!!! Jesus!!! Thanks again and God bless.

In His Love,
Deborah

 

[blessedtoo]

This is one of the problems that I’m talking about. Most Catholics I encounter seem incapable of seeing a homosexual relationship as anything other than an adolsecent style pursuit of pleasure.

Dear friend, I see by your profile that you are quite young. I don’t mean that to sound condescending, but you speak with the wily romanticism of youth. Apart from any religious argument, relationships that oppose natural order (continuation of the species) are in pursuit of something other than what they are intended for. It may be pleasure, or a misdirected feeling of love, or kicks or whatever.

What I am speaking about is actual flourishing and nurturing relationships…people in love. Personally, my experience of falling in love has been a transformative experience that in all honesty, has brought me closer to God. It has been one of those unique relationships where God is the center, and together, faith is nurtured and enhanced. I see life differently because of it.

I suppose I would ask what God is at the center of a relationship that can not fulfill the natural objective of sexual union? And if we do factor in the religious argument, then how is it possible to have God as the center of your relationship when every monotheistic religion agrees that God has condemned homosexual behavior?

This is the fundamental problem. You are saying that this is what I am experiencing, this shallow and ultimately empty experience. You make this conclusion based on a moral theory, what scriptures and the Church tell you. You make your decision irrespective of MY actual experience of this. Essentially, you’re trying to dictate my experience according to your belifs.

No one is judging the experience you have in your relationship. The conclusions are based on a combination of natural law as well as moral law. I would suggest that without a firm understanding of the nature and purpose of human sexuality and marriage, as well as natural and moral law, it would be quite easy to believe that a homosexual relationship is “nurturing” and “God centered”. It is not up to the Church or natural law to conform itself to your indivual experience, but rather, the other way around. You are arguing a case for relativism. The Church is about Truth, in accordance with natural law. She does not dictate, nor do we on these forums. However it is our responsibility to provide an adequate explanation and defense for what the Church teaches and why.

 

[MikeinSD]

Gnosis:
There are many other faith traditions that accept you and yr partner as the loving men who you are.

Do you really need to listen to folks who say:
" We all must remember that sometimes love needs to be expressed in a harsh rebuke and, if necessary, to upset people’s mode of doing business and drive them far from it with a whip."

It’s a big universe. Don’t worry about what small people say.

 

[elg26]

After reading all the different responses, it seems that the answer is yes, the church is intolerant.

It is intolerant of things that it sees as a sin, or sinful behavior.

vern humphrey wrote:
*Jesus Himself left us nothing in writing. He taught by word of mouth and precept. The Apostles taught the same way. It was a generation before anything was written down, and the New Testament as we know it only emerged in about 382 AD.

So for about 350 years, Christianity was taught by word of mouth, aided by some written documents, but not based on them. In fact, when the Canon of the New Testament was finally established, many “candidate” documents were found to be spurious or badly edited.

The Church continues to cherish and teach the spoken tradition along with the Bible – and very clearly the earliest Christians taught that things like homosexual acts, abortion, exposing children and so on were sinful.*

If you whisper a story to the first person in a line of 25 people, the story you get from the 25th person will be changed from how it was originally told.

It seems that a lot of the thinking about homosexuality might be changed from how it was originally percieved, since nothing was written down at the beginning, as was told and retold for many years before being committed to paper.

Understanding that the Church believes what it teaches as it’s truth, and that if you want to be a member you must believe it as well, the image portrayed is of intolerance to homosexuality.

Even though the church’s actual opinion is that it is trying to help the person by trying to show the church’s belief of the way to achieve heaven.

I don’t think that the church is trying to be hateful at all in it’s position on homosexuality, but it certainly can be percieved by a non-Catholic as intolerant.

Seems like the answer to this question is YES…or NO…
depending on your point of view…

…as with all subject that we discuss!!!

 

[vern_humphrey]

After reading all the different responses, it seems that the answer is yes, the church is intolerant.

It is intolerant of things that it sees as a sin, or sinful behavior.

It isn’t what the Church sees as sinful behavior, it’s what is sinful behavior. The Church cannot declare it to be not sinful, you know!

If you whisper a story to the first person in a line of 25 people, the story you get from the 25th person will be changed from how it was originally told.

Which is where the Holy Spirit comes in.

Much of the Bible was composed that way – that’s why we have two different accounts of the Creation, two of the Flood, and three of Abraham claiming Sarah was his sister.

It seems that a lot of the thinking about homosexuality might be changed from how it was originally percieved, since nothing was written down at the beginning, as was told and retold for many years before being committed to paper.

And you know that, how?

It’s pretty plain that homosexual acts were considered sinful in the Old Testament long before the time of Christ.

Understanding that the Church believes what it teaches as it’s truth, and that if you want to be a member you must believe it as well, the image portrayed is of intolerance to homosexuality.

Political correctness is no guide to morality. The Church has stood firm for 2,000 years and it must continue to stand firm to the end of time.

 

[elg26]

It isn’t what the Church sees as sinful behavior, it’s what is sinful behavior. The Church cannot declare it to be not sinful, you know!.

It’s what your belief is of what is sinful…or what your church has taught you that they believe is sinful…

Different religions have different views of what the word sin means.

Which is where the Holy Spirit comes in.

Much of the Bible was composed that way – that’s why we have two different accounts of the Creation, two of the Flood, and three of Abraham claiming Sarah was his sister.

The holy spirit? Since I’m not Catholic, can you expand on this ?
I’m not sure what you mean by this.

More than one account of different stories lends credence to what I said…that no one knows for sure WHAT exactly happened…

And you know that, how?

Your quote:
So for about 350 years, Christianity was taught by word of mouth, aided by some written documents, but not based on them. In fact, when the Canon of the New Testament was finally established, many “candidate” documents were found to be spurious or badly edited.

It’s pretty plain that homosexual acts were considered sinful in the Old Testament long before the time of Christ.

It was also acceptable to own slaves back then. But, that old, outdated thinking has been changed and outlawed.

Just because someone thought an act or deed was *bad or good *centuries ago, it does NOT mean that they were right…or wrong.

Political correctness is no guide to morality. The Church has stood firm for 2,000 years and it must continue to stand firm to the end of time.

I’m not saying that one needs to be politically correct. And, there are some things that should never change.

But, there are also many examples of predjudicial and intolerant behavior in human history that has been proven wrong with time.

Again, as it pertains to the PERCEPTION of the church as intolerant…it does make the church seem intolerant.

Even though there may be valid reasons in the beliefs of the religion for Catholics to stand fast with considering homosexuality sinful.

Personally…I am not condemning homosexuality, nor supporting it.

I do not believe that sexual preference has a place in political or religious issues. I don’t really care what a person’s sexual bent is, as long as it does NOT include being a pedophile.

Vern, let me know about your comment on the holy spirit as it pertains to your thoughts on the multiple versions of teachings in the Bible.

I appreciate your (name removed by moderator)ut, and helping me to gain an insight.

Thanks,

Elg

 

[vern_humphrey]

It’s what your belief is of what is sinful…or what your church has taught you that they believe is sinful…

Different religions have different views of what the word sin means.

But only one religion claims to have Christ’s commission. And that religion defines homosexual acts as they have always been defined in Judeo-Christian tradition.

The holy spirit? Since I’m not Catholic, can you expand on this ?
I’m not sure what you mean by this.

The Bible is different from other books because it was written or composed by inspired writers. Those writers were inspired by the Holy Spirit.

Vern, let me know about your comment on the holy spirit as it pertains to your thoughts on the multiple versions of teachings in the Bible.

Read Genesis – just the first two chapters (which contain the two accounts of creation.) Then do a book report on it. Remember, the first sentence of a book report is, "The theme of this book is . . . "

You will see that while there are slight differences in the two accounts, the theme is unchanged – and infact reinforced by the two versions.

The inspired writer or composer’s intent comes through very clearly.

 

[elg26]

But only one religion claims to have Christ’s commission. And that religion defines homosexual acts as they have always been defined in Judeo-Christian tradition.

Yes, I agree…one religion CLAIMS to be the first and only true religion.

I would venture to guess that religion did exist before Christ’s time, and it would have been diffficult for any of them to get his commission…but they did exist, nonetheless.

The Bible is different from other books because it was written or composed by inspired writers. Those writers were inspired by the Holy Spirit.

Why is it that the only inspired writers that the churtch wants one to believe lived between 16-18 centuries ago, and in the time after the death of Christ? Why not before? Why not now?

Why CAN’T there be *inspired writers *TODAY that can bring some (not all) of the questionable or outdated things into modern perspective?

Read Genesis – just the first two chapters (which contain the two accounts of creation.) Then do a book report on it. Remember, the first sentence of a book report is, "The theme of this book is . . . "

You will see that while there are slight differences in the two accounts, the theme is unchanged – and infact reinforced by the two versions.

The inspired writer or composer’s intent comes through very clearly.

errr…what kind of book report? Like from school days? Being an old guy, I’m kinda rusty on that concept!

But…you mention two accounts in Genesis…from two sources, I presume…with “slight differences”, but the theme the same.

My point exactly.

Find 25 accounts of Genesis…and 25 stories with those “slight differences” you mention, with the theme the same…

…and you can see where the POTENTIAL for misinterpretation later on can occur.

Thanks for your thoughts!

Elg…