B
brockmac
Guest
New Ulm,
It is clear that we are approaching our understanding of God and His Church from different perspectives. I try very hard to pay heed to God’s Word (The Scriptures) and the historical teachings and practices (Tradition) of His Church.
It appears to me that you believe that one is open to changing personal interpretation depending on the public concensus of the time and the other is prone to error. In other words, there is no authority except the general public concensus. The Bible and the historical Tradition of the Church mean nothing.
If in fact, homosexual acts (not the inclination, but the acts) are inherently sinful, the Church would be derelict in her responsibility to teach were she not to point this out. If a man is happily rowing down stream towards the waterfall, is it compassionate to allow him to enjoy his “happiness” and continue towards the waterfall or is it compassionate to tell him that he is approaching the waterfall and help him get out of the river before he goes over?
Now, you may disagree that homosexual acts are intrinsically sinful, in which case the Church is wrong on this and if she is wrong on this she can be wrong on anything else, so there is no point in having a church at all. I mean, if the Church can be wrong, maybe there is no God, maybe Jesus is a myth. If the Church is subject to teaching error, nothing that is taught by the Church can be trusted, not even the scriptures, because it is the Church that established the Canon of the Scriptures.
For my part, I tend to accept that Christ established His Church on Peter and the Apostles and that they taught what they learned from him and the Holy Spirit and that those teachings have been faithfully handed down through the ages.
In addition to this errant priest and his flock, I will also pray for you, that you will humbly submit not to the Church established by our Lord, Jesus Christ.
It is clear that we are approaching our understanding of God and His Church from different perspectives. I try very hard to pay heed to God’s Word (The Scriptures) and the historical teachings and practices (Tradition) of His Church.
It appears to me that you believe that one is open to changing personal interpretation depending on the public concensus of the time and the other is prone to error. In other words, there is no authority except the general public concensus. The Bible and the historical Tradition of the Church mean nothing.
If in fact, homosexual acts (not the inclination, but the acts) are inherently sinful, the Church would be derelict in her responsibility to teach were she not to point this out. If a man is happily rowing down stream towards the waterfall, is it compassionate to allow him to enjoy his “happiness” and continue towards the waterfall or is it compassionate to tell him that he is approaching the waterfall and help him get out of the river before he goes over?
Now, you may disagree that homosexual acts are intrinsically sinful, in which case the Church is wrong on this and if she is wrong on this she can be wrong on anything else, so there is no point in having a church at all. I mean, if the Church can be wrong, maybe there is no God, maybe Jesus is a myth. If the Church is subject to teaching error, nothing that is taught by the Church can be trusted, not even the scriptures, because it is the Church that established the Canon of the Scriptures.
For my part, I tend to accept that Christ established His Church on Peter and the Apostles and that they taught what they learned from him and the Holy Spirit and that those teachings have been faithfully handed down through the ages.
In addition to this errant priest and his flock, I will also pray for you, that you will humbly submit not to the Church established by our Lord, Jesus Christ.