C
CMatt25
Guest
Well calling another human being “dirty and low down” is certainly charitable.
On that note, I’m leaving the thread for now.
Pelosi Says Her Catholic Faith ‘Compels’ Her To Support Gay Marriage
- Status
On that note, I’m leaving the thread for now.
E
Elizabeth502
Guest
No, only you are going around in circles. Ms. Pelosi’s Church affiliation has nothing to do with the accuracy and legitimacy of her statements about Church teaching. The Roman Church, despite how it defines Catholic identity for the individual person, has never said that every identifiable Catholic represents the teachings of the Church accurately, by virtue of his or her baptism. In fact, the modern Roman Church is well aware of the -]gulf/-] chasm between essential theological knowledge of the average baptized Catholic and the essential theological knowledge of any effective representative of the Church on earth.
J
JimG
Guest
The point is, for her to say that ‘her Catholic faith compels her to support gay marriage’ is simply wrong. There is no way that it can be true. It is like saying ‘my Catholic faith compels me to support atheism.’ It is not only wrong, it is schizophrenic.:yawn: St Francis, we are going in circles. Yes she does because she is a Catholic according to Church teaching. I don’t know. Maybe the Church should redefine who She believes is a Catholic and that would solve it.
D
Dymphna82
Guest
Aye, if someone said, “As a Catholic, I believe Jesus was a prophet, not the Son of God,” that would not be right either.
Yes, as a revert Catholic, I have seen an experienced many things. As someone who has spent half of their life in occult beliefs and practices, I have seen just how much humanity likes to think for itself, and how much contempt there is towards anyone putting their full faith in an entity they cannot see. It is so much easier to put faith in the words of authors, celebrities and politicians. It is so easy to follow a “live and let live” philosophy and believe as Aleister Crowley taught, that every person is a star. To believe that every person is a god or goddess. It becomes easy to believe it when influential people say that Jesus was a magician or a prophet, instead of the Son of God. It becomes easy to believe that it’s okay to worship the Holy Trinity alongside other gods, as if they’re an inclusive, interfaith pantheon.
So many things become easy to believe, because it is so easy to idolize many people, instead of God. It is easy to believe that the life of unborn children are not as important as their mother’s, because their mothers have a voice. It is easy to support gay marriage because it makes ya feel like less of a jerk to try and make everyone happy, instead of making God happy. And I have the minister’s license, in my dresser drawer, to show for my absolute sincerity in thinking one day I could marry off gays and revolutionary change the world “for the better.”
But then I felt the gods abandon me for a bit, so I searched and searched. And I got to the point where I asked everyone, of all faiths, to pray for me to find my answers. I eventually found my answers in God.
So then, with God, I had a Baptist boyfriend, a brotherly Jehovah’s Witness bestfriend, and others who seem to think I should agree with their interpretation of the Bible. Obviously they have different views on what God wants.
Then I turn on the TV, and people like Pelosi have the nerve to spew this kind of garbage, things that most Christians know is not in their belief system.
This is all dangerous. If it’s not from God, if it’s not his Truth, it is from the Lord of Confusion, Satan, as far as I’m concerned. If I cannot accept the Church as the authority on God’s word, then who/what am I supposed to believe? I see nothing but deception and distraction.
So, I would have to ask, do you believe in the church’s interpretation? If not, whose do you believe in and why? What makes their interpretation worth the risk of being wrong?
C
CMatt25
Guest
Elizabeth can you please try harder to refrain from putting words into my mouth or inferring I said something which I did not. Thanks. I’d greatly appreciate it. I never said Representative Pelosi’s affiliation has a thing to do with the accuracy, nor for that matter the inaccuracy, of her statements. What I said was Representative Pelosi is a Catholic according to the Catholic Church if she was baptized in a Catholic Church, becoming a member of the Catholic Church at that point in which she received the Sacrament of Baptism. Yet Catholic Boy said, and I agree he might quite likely be correct, that “she couldn’t identify as such if she were here”. However the true Catholic answer is Representative Pelosi is a Catholic according to the Church and this would include wherever it might be Representative Pelosi is expressing her views and beliefs. If there is such worry about her spreading scandal now and yet everyone seems to be saying she is a Catholic, it should make no difference if she was saying the same things elsewhere. She should still be able to call herself a Catholic even if for instance she was saying the same things here as I’m assuming faithful Catholics here want to follow Church teaching and express true answers and not mislead people as to who the Church defines as a Catholic. I can not make what I said any clearer for you so I hope this helps you understand what I said.
S
St_Francis
Guest
Quisling is not a word that is used very much, and I wanted to make sure that it was clear what is involved in being a quisling; that’s why I added the adjectives. You should have been much more upset that I called people who are trying to undermine their Faith from within quislings.Well calling another human being “dirty and low down” is certainly charitable.
S
St_Francis
Guest
Oh, CMatt, you should have been much more upset by my use of the word quisling; dirty and lowdown barely describe what quislings are. I only added them because the word quisling is not used much anymore, so I thought, correctly as it turns out, that it might not carry the impact that it should.Well calling another human being “dirty and low down” is certainly charitable.
C
Cider
Guest
The operative word in her statement is HER. Her faith. Not the Churches faith. Her faith.
C
CMatt25
Guest
Hi Dymphna, I saw you asked me something so I also wanted to come back now and reply to your question. I’m on my lifelong journey as to my walk of faith and belief. I recognize there is a difference between knowing with 100% absolute certainty and believing with faith that we know. But I think your asking about the risk of being wrong is exactly why some Catholics like Nancy Pelosi might try to hang on to some degree. They were indoctrinated but as time went by perhaps became less certain of Catholic beliefs. And maybe they still hang on because they are not certain the Church is wrong. The Sacrament of Reconciliation is always available to them. As is God’s mercy for each of us up until the very moment we take our last breaths. God’s infinite understanding of our hearts and minds surely surpasses our finite minds. And I see no point in alienating people further, possibly risking drivng them further away from where you want them to be. I’m not saying you do this. But why anyone who believes all the Catholic Church espouses would want to risk this and then have to answer as to why they drove someone further away is just beyond me I guess. In any case again God bless you and peace be with you.
C
CMatt25
Guest
Whew well I’m glad to know it isn’t used much. Someone might have implied I’m too ignorant or lack their intelligence. But I didn’t think it was used much anymore so I looked it up.
E
Elizabeth502
Guest
I never have.
Most people here have not disagreed with that technical definition of Catholicity.
The bolded part is absolutely incorrect. Just as it is incorrect that Catholic women who state that women should be ordained to the priesthood are expressing “views and beliefs” which can be considered Catholic “according to the Church.”
It is in error to state that membership predicts accuracy in statements about whatever one is a member of (secular or religious). As I said earlier, individuals can claim membership in Buddhist beliefs, but misrepresent Buddhism right and left. That has also been a subject on another subforum on CAF. Because one owns a membership does not mean that one owns or projects accuracy. So no, it is not true that,
As someone else said, if “her” views and beliefs do not align with those of the Catholic Church, then she is not expressing Catholic views. Period. She is expressing personal views, and in the recent discussion, personal views which contradict Catholic views.
And the point is, if you really did understand that distinction, and accepted that objective distinction, you would not continually argue with people about Pelosi’s Catholic identity. Her Catholic identity is not the subject of this thread. The Catholicity of her statement is the subject of this thread. In her case, two wildly different realities.
And the possibility that she has become skeptical of beliefs she once had neither makes her current statements genuinely Catholic nor would it particularly inspire faith in the accuracy of those statements. Skepticism about key elements of the Catholic faith is evidence of a need to work on the theological virtue of faith. It is not evidence of credibility regarding Catholic doctrine. It may be evidence of realism (for some people), but then the response is nevertheless to resolve the internal conflicts, rather than inventing a supposedly more evolved version of an unchanged doctrine.
C
CMatt25
Guest
CMatt25: "However the true Catholic answer is Representative Pelosi is a Catholic according to the Church****.
No Elizabeth, you are absolutely wrong if you think where Representative Pelosi is makes a difference as to whether she is a Catholic or not. That was the statement you bolded as incorrect.
J
Jeanne_S
Guest
With all due respect,are you intentionally not getting the point,because you know your stance is weak,or do you really not get it?No Elizabeth, you are absolutely wrong if you think where Representative Pelosi is makes a difference as to whether she is a Catholic or not. That was the statement you bolded as incorrect.
O
onenow1
Guest
A catholic that invokes there religion must pronounce the truth it teaches, not there view of its teaching, Nancy has made herself one of the tares and sits in the pews of the catholic church. She will answer to God and thats the bottom line, unless she sees the light of Jesus and His Church.
God Bless
onenow1
D
Dymphna82
Guest
I had to look the wod up. Made me think of Quiznos. Got hungry.
Alas, no sandwiches.
C
CMatt25
Guest
No I get the point all of you just want to talk about the degree of her “Catholicity”. That ignores my point though relative to, as Catholic Boy said, not being a Catholic if she were here for example. But carry one.With all due respect,are you intentionally not getting the point,because you know your stance is weak,or do you really not get it?
C
ComputerGeek25
Guest
J
Jeanne_S
Guest
Only as it applies to her speaking out of turn in regards to her “claim” that her positions are guided by her faith. I think we are beating a dead horse as far as this issue goes.
D
Dymphna82
Guest
The excommunication can be lifted. It is up to that person whether they want to reconcile with the church. No one should be worried about Pelosi’s wounded pride.
C
CMatt25
Guest
Me too
- Status