U
untruestory
Guest
If a homily were said that explained Paul’s advice that wives should be submissive to their husbands as being irrelevant today and that it just as reasonably said that husbands be submissive to thier wives and that the purpose of that scripture was to explain that we should love as Christ loved would that be a fair representation of Catholic interpretation?
Wouldn’t it be negligent for a priest to say privately to a parishioner that as a church we’re behind in the times in our understanding of sexuality? And what if in the same conversation he said we shouldn’t take everything in theology of the body seriously?
He’s a generally good guy and a very caring and helpful person. Maybe I’m jumping to conclusions but it seems these statements are a little outside of orthodoxy or at least too edgy to be coming from a priest. Am I wrong? If not what references in the catechism or official church teaching that would be helpful to reference or how might I be lovingly persuasive?
Wouldn’t it be negligent for a priest to say privately to a parishioner that as a church we’re behind in the times in our understanding of sexuality? And what if in the same conversation he said we shouldn’t take everything in theology of the body seriously?
He’s a generally good guy and a very caring and helpful person. Maybe I’m jumping to conclusions but it seems these statements are a little outside of orthodoxy or at least too edgy to be coming from a priest. Am I wrong? If not what references in the catechism or official church teaching that would be helpful to reference or how might I be lovingly persuasive?
