Obama- urges court, Gay Marriage ban

  • Thread starter Thread starter GaryTaylor
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
fix said:
Good question. For one thing being a CAF Catholic should mean accepting all the Church teaches including:
Click to expand...
I think that’s just called a Catholic. I’m not sure why some are so desperate to add some type of prefix to “Catholic”.

I wonder why those who pick and choose which Catholic teaching they personally follow would try to make that kind of distinction.
 
CMatt25 said:
You’ll have to get the answer to your question from your Church.
Click to expand...
Well of course that’s non-responsive. “The Church” doesn’t know how or why you are identifying yourself one way “here” and (possibly) another way “elsewhere.” Because in the authentic Roman Catholic Church, we are each one person, not several, nor do we have divided identities.

It’s either “your” Church, too, or you have no relationship to “my” Church. Which is it? (It’s relevant because it frames the nature of your replies.)
 
scipio337 said:
I think that’s just called a Catholic. I’m not sure why some are so desperate to add some type of prefix to “Catholic”.

I wonder why those who pick and choose which Catholic teaching they personally follow would try to make that kind of distinction.
Click to expand...
:hmmm:
 
Elizabeth502 said:
Well of course that’s non-responsive. “The Church” doesn’t know how or why you are identifying yourself one way “here” and (possibly) another way “elsewhere.” Because in the authentic Roman Catholic Church, we are each one person, not several, nor do we have divided identities.

It’s either “your” Church, too, or you have no relationship to “my” Church. Which is it? (It’s relevant because it frames the nature of your replies.)
Click to expand...
Oh well I’ll just assume your Church knows the answer of who She identifies as a Catholic and now the thread should return to the topic. It’s not about Seeker1961 or whether he sees a Catholic spiritual advisor or about me. We’re not the topic.
 
CMatt25 said:
:hmmm:
Click to expand...
Speaking on the newly released Compendium to the Catechism of the Catholic Church Sunday, Pope Benedict XVI stressed the need for Catholics to lovingly embrace the whole of the faith. “Dear brothers and sisters”, he said, “how necessary it is today at the dawn of the third millennium for the entire Catholic community to proclaim, teach and witness to the entire truth of Catholic faith, doctrine and morals in a unanimous and harmonious manner!”…
Click to expand...
catholicnewsagency.com/news/pope_benedict_decries_cafeteria_catholicism/

There’s “Catholic”, and “not Catholic”. We each don’t have our own infallability.
 
CMatt25 said:
Oh well I’ll just assume your Church knows the answer of who She identifies as a Catholic and now the thread should return to the topic. It’s not about Seeker1961 or whether he sees a Catholic spiritual advisor or about me. We’re not the topic.
Click to expand...
I didn’t mention Seeker. You did. Not sure why you’re bringing a different poster into a question asked directly only of you and no one else. Only you say you “are not a Catholic here,” as if there’s a parallel universe somewhere in which you do identify as Catholic.
 
fix said:
You really ought to read the bible. Jesus said specifically that leading another to sin was deadly. There is no way around that.
Click to expand...
That covers a lot of territory. What did Jesus say about homosexuals, specifically?
 
Exordium1003 said:
That covers a lot of territory. What did Jesus say about homosexuals, specifically?
Click to expand...
The Good News was news, not repetition: that is the very nature of kerygma. Jesus not only came to fulfill The Law, he did fulfill the Law. He affirmed Jewish Law regarding morality. Where he differed in emphasis or interpretation of priorities in the Law were recorded orally, and correspondingly later in writing. Jesus’ fulfillment of the Law is a key theological doctrine of Christianity.

Had he overturned the Jewish Law on sexual morality, there would have been no Christianity to survive. He would have had zero credibility in the ancient Mediterranean.

The Gospels proclaimed what was truly different about Jesus when it came to the divine message. Had there been even a hint of departure on His part regarding the Jewish sexual moral code, there would have been arguments about that recorded in the Gospels, just as there were arguments recorded about dietary and Sabbath laws, about which Jesus’ departure from those were published.

The Jewish condemnation of homosexual behavior was absolute. There is no credible Scripture scholar who disputes that. Jewish embraced His own people’s moral code, and in fact intensified and deepened that moral commitment. That is recorded in Chapter 5 of the Gospel of Matthew.
 
Exordium1003 said:
That covers a lot of territory. What did Jesus say about homosexuals, specifically?
Click to expand...
He spoke specifically about fornication, lust, and adultery. Since gays cant marry, they too fall into all of those categories like the rest of us.

His Heavenly Father would not have destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah either if not for these specific sins too.
 
Elizabeth502 said:
The Good News was news, not repetition: that is the very nature of kerygma. Jesus not only came to fulfill The Law, he did fulfill the Law. He affirmed Jewish Law regarding morality. Where he differed in emphasis or interpretation of priorities in the Law were recorded orally, and correspondingly later in writing. Jesus’ fulfillment of the Law is a key theological doctrine of Christianity.

Had he overturned the Jewish Law on sexual morality, there would have been no Christianity to survive. He would have had zero credibility in the ancient Mediterranean.

The Gospels proclaimed what was truly different about Jesus when it came to the divine message. Had there been even a hint of departure on His part regarding the Jewish sexual moral code, there would have been arguments about that recorded in the Gospels, just as there were arguments recorded about dietary and Sabbath laws, about which Jesus’ departure from those were published.

The Jewish condemnation of homosexual behavior was absolute. There is no credible Scripture scholar who disputes that. Jewish embraced His own people’s moral code, and in fact intensified and deepened that moral commitment. That is recorded in Chapter 5 of the Gospel of Matthew.
Click to expand...
Does that go for shellfish and tatoos too?
 
Elizabeth502 said:
I didn’t mention Seeker. You did. Not sure why you’re bringing a different poster into a question asked directly only of you and no one else. Only you say you “are not a Catholic here,” as if there’s a parallel universe somewhere in which you do identify as Catholic.
Click to expand...
Actually Gary Taylor did before me in regard to identities and brought the thread a bit off topic. But I see from a link another poster posted that the Pope acknowledged many Catholics do not adhere to all teachings but he did not say they were not Catholics. And it looks like the thread is back on track.
 
Exordium1003 said:
That covers a lot of territory. What did Jesus say about homosexuals, specifically?
Click to expand...
He upheld the entire moral law including long held proscriptions regarding homosexuality. Do you have evidence He did not? BTW, what did He say about arson, specifically?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top