O
OraLabora
Guest
Listen, let me explain why: in my case, it involves a very sensitive family matter. That’s why. The article I posted should give a clue. It’s as far as I’ll go.
Last edited:
Pope Emeritus Benedict - The Church and the Scandal of Sexual Abuse
- Status
C
CatholicSooner
Guest
So about that article…
Yes it is tough, but the author is again making the mistake of placing someone’s value on their sexual identity.
The Church teaches that every person deserves respect. Even transgenders. There is no hate in their teaching.
As a parent, our jobs are to lead them to Heaven. It won’t always be hard and I’ve often put myself in these types of situations in my mind with my children. It is hard to even think about. But you have to find a way to make the child realize what they truly are…a child of God. Their orientation, gender,etc does not define them.
With that being said, emotion has to be taken out of it. emotion runs the risk of distorting truth.
We were made male or female. Some people (a VERY small percentage) FEEL the opposite of their natural sex. That doesn’t change what they are. They are still called to follow GODS’ commandments. We as fellow Christians should be there for them to help them, but we shouldn’t enable anything that could lead them to sin.
I’m sorry for anyone struggling with this situation and will pray for them,
Yes it is tough, but the author is again making the mistake of placing someone’s value on their sexual identity.
The Church teaches that every person deserves respect. Even transgenders. There is no hate in their teaching.
As a parent, our jobs are to lead them to Heaven. It won’t always be hard and I’ve often put myself in these types of situations in my mind with my children. It is hard to even think about. But you have to find a way to make the child realize what they truly are…a child of God. Their orientation, gender,etc does not define them.
With that being said, emotion has to be taken out of it. emotion runs the risk of distorting truth.
We were made male or female. Some people (a VERY small percentage) FEEL the opposite of their natural sex. That doesn’t change what they are. They are still called to follow GODS’ commandments. We as fellow Christians should be there for them to help them, but we shouldn’t enable anything that could lead them to sin.
I’m sorry for anyone struggling with this situation and will pray for them,
C
CatholicSooner
Guest
having said all of that…I still don’t see what the issue is with the CHurch’s teaching. LIke specifically. Do you think the Church should allow sex changes? Gay marriages? If it is the attitude of PEOPLE in the church…that may not ever change.
What do you think Jesus would say to a transgender?
What do you think Jesus would say to a transgender?
O
OraLabora
Guest
Yes, in cases where it is the best treatment option available.
There can be no such thing as a sacramental same-sex marriage. However given that many states have now made it the only way to assure succession rights in a same-sex couple, I think that the Church should not penalize a gay couple from contracting a civil marriage in order to assure the care of a survivor in a long-term relationship. I was not in favour of the state taking this route, but it is what it is. I would have preferred the state to have made a category of “co-dependant” relationships to protect succession rights in cases like that of my mother and her sister, who lived together after my father’s death, for economic reasons. It would have ensure transferrable pension rights for instance, avoiding potential hardship on the survivor. I would not have made a sexual relationship a prerequisite for such a co-dependent category, only a close family relationship (i.e. siblings like my mother and aunt) or an established and proved long-term (platonic or otherwise) friendship under the same roof.
It would be presumptuous of me to try to say what Jesus would say to a transgender. The context of His time was completely different, and it was not possible to undergo sex changes then. He could very well have simply made the transgender the object of one of His healing miracles!
Last edited:
1
13pollitos
Guest
maybe it is the definition of teaching that may be the hurdle preventing understanding between us. Teaching is my profession. I think of it more as leading by example, not simply a stating of fact. I do not expect my students to follow what I say if I am unwilling or unable to do so myself, and a certainly don’t hold them to higher standards than I do myself. My problem doesn’t lie with sexual issues or political issues or any other “issue” or group of issues.
Now, I realize you most likely view this as hypocrisy rather than teachings. Perhaps that is more accurate. I have tried to overcome this through prayer and historical readings from the Church throughout history. Unfortunately it has only made me struggle more. Being raised in Catholic schools that the nuns taught us that Truth is unchangeable. What was wrong 1,000 years ago will still be wrong 2,000 years from now but finding many instances where things have in fact changed makes me wonder. Being told that Truth is unchangeable yet it evolves over time makes it worse.
I am thankful for your prayers. I need them and I will pray for everyone here as well. Please try not to become frustrated because I truly do desire a return of my faith. I defend the Church in real life and attempt to lead a life that is rooted in Church teachings. I want to be a Light for Christ to draw others toward draw others towards Him. My hope is to one day find understanding, and I beg God daily to hold my children near to Him so they never experience this themselves.
Now, I realize you most likely view this as hypocrisy rather than teachings. Perhaps that is more accurate. I have tried to overcome this through prayer and historical readings from the Church throughout history. Unfortunately it has only made me struggle more. Being raised in Catholic schools that the nuns taught us that Truth is unchangeable. What was wrong 1,000 years ago will still be wrong 2,000 years from now but finding many instances where things have in fact changed makes me wonder. Being told that Truth is unchangeable yet it evolves over time makes it worse.
I am thankful for your prayers. I need them and I will pray for everyone here as well. Please try not to become frustrated because I truly do desire a return of my faith. I defend the Church in real life and attempt to lead a life that is rooted in Church teachings. I want to be a Light for Christ to draw others toward draw others towards Him. My hope is to one day find understanding, and I beg God daily to hold my children near to Him so they never experience this themselves.
O
otrrl
Guest
The sexual revolution of the 1960’s is self-evident, in both Europe and in the United States. Benedict provides his word as to the existence of homosexual clubs in the seminaries, and there seems to be a lot of circumstantial evidence for that. If you have been on a desert island for the last year, I recommend you do some searching on “Archbishop Vigano” and read the book “Good bye, good men.” On the avemariaradio.net website, there is a page for information about the sexual abuse crisis.
An argument from silence usually is not considered persuasive, but the history of former Cardinal Theodore McCarrick is a good case study of predation in seminaries. Withing the last 12 months, also, I think Cardinal O’Malley had to swing back to Boston to deal with seminary problems that have come to light. $4 billion of payoffs with signed non-disclosure agreements gives evidence of widespread sexual abuse in the US.
And, the part about the bishop, formerly a rector of a seminary, who was showing pornographic films to seminarians was none other than the man who became the bishop of Saginaw Michigan back around 1979 or so. It’s not so clear how the Vatican managed to let him be ordained a bishop, but the pornographic film business was spoken of in popular media of that time. That point is surely not “garbage” nor the rest of Benedict’s letter.
I cannot cite the reference from memory, but there were guidelines from Pope St. John XXIII in 1962 or 1963 about dismissing men from the seminary who exhibited homosexual tendencies and conduct.
I think it’s plainly obvious that priests and other hierarchs who have sinned against the 6th commandment knew what they were doing and they fell through any sort of net that was supposed to weed them out of the priesthood.
In the letter Benedict strongly shatters the half-truths and lies that homosexuality had nothing to do with the sex abuse crisis, and he pointedly shows that the obsession with distinction about the age of the victims is baloney – priests, etc. should be totally chaste as part of the very essence of their priestly vocation.
I agree that JPII and B16 should have done more about the growing crisis. I’m 69 and I’ve heard about priests misbehaving all my conscious life. B16 points out that Canon Law needs to be strengthened to deal with these problems. Sure, that’s too little too late. PF has inherited this mess and I think he could whip up even some interim discipline to “clean out the rot” and why he does not is history being played out before our eyes. Maybe he thinks we are not aware of his failure to act. After all, HE’S the one who says the crisis needs CONCRETE action. Sure. Where is it?
And, once again, suspicion is aroused that he has not traveled back to his home country, Argentina. It does no good to speculate, although my mind floods with possible reasons why he has not gone there.
Benedict’s letter is not exhaustive, but it is not garbage, either.
O
ontheway1
Guest
Sorry. I am late to the debate and have read only about 2/3 of the posts. What is striking is how the debate turned from the contents of Benedict’s letter (not one of the posters here has actually read it) to a discussion about which of the popes is responsible for the sexual abuse.
Absent from the discussion here is the question of the homosexual mafia in the church and its responsibility for the crimes and the cover-ups.
The big difference between the statement released by Francis after his February summit and Benedict letter is that the Francis finds fault with clericalism (what exactly is that?) and Benedict points to the lavender mafia.
My suggestion is that both documents should be read and analyzed by the participants in this discussion.
Or, perhaps, we should just continue to spout whatever google tells us.
Apologies to all who are triggered by this.
Absent from the discussion here is the question of the homosexual mafia in the church and its responsibility for the crimes and the cover-ups.
The big difference between the statement released by Francis after his February summit and Benedict letter is that the Francis finds fault with clericalism (what exactly is that?) and Benedict points to the lavender mafia.
My suggestion is that both documents should be read and analyzed by the participants in this discussion.
Or, perhaps, we should just continue to spout whatever google tells us.
Apologies to all who are triggered by this.
Last edited:
O
OraLabora
Guest
Actually I have.
T
TMC
Guest
I have also. I am not sure why there would be an assumption that no one has read the letter.
C
CatholicSooner
Guest
as have i…ontheway1:
Actually I have.
1
13pollitos
Guest
Why would you think no one has actually read it?
R
RobertAdams
Guest
You’re right, the term garbage was unnecessary. I did read the letter first, though. I didn’t think I denied the sexual revolution took place, but perhaps my communication skills could use improvement!
Last edited:
O
ontheway1
Guest
OK. So, as I stated earlier. I did not read all of the posts but the ones I did read clearly indicated gaps in the knowledge and certainly the context. The letter has to be read in the context of the report from the February sex scandal summit.
I have since learned that Benedict wrote his letter last fall, (one source only, so take this news with a grain of salt) with the intention of having it read during the said summit. It seems that it was not accepted or included, and thus was released as a letter to German bishops only now.
I have since learned that Benedict wrote his letter last fall, (one source only, so take this news with a grain of salt) with the intention of having it read during the said summit. It seems that it was not accepted or included, and thus was released as a letter to German bishops only now.
O
otrrl
Guest
believe it or not, I try to always keep an open mind, as long as I can. Or, if I form an opinion, I am open to revising it when the facts dictate that I should, or if an alternative seems more likely.
Yes, I do take that news with a grain of salt, because there was a lot of time leading up to the february 2019 synod and PEB could have written a more substantial document. To me, it reads like a relatively short refutation of the conclusions of the synod AND sort of as a “shot” at PF to say what the synod was not willing to say and to take action of nearly the highest order, not merely a one-shot papal directive, but a more substantial revision of the Code of Canon Laws.
PF said before the synod that he thought people had expectations that were too high. In response to that, I think PEB was saying, look, take all the time you need and fix the problem with all the hindsight that is now visible to the world. In any event, I support what PEB said and he was not as vague and mysterious as PF is. PEB certainly didn’t play word games with legalese wording about “minors” (underage persons) – Benedict said protect everybody. Priests should have faith and be holy and chaste. See? That’s not that hard to say. And, PEB said it.
Yes, I do take that news with a grain of salt, because there was a lot of time leading up to the february 2019 synod and PEB could have written a more substantial document. To me, it reads like a relatively short refutation of the conclusions of the synod AND sort of as a “shot” at PF to say what the synod was not willing to say and to take action of nearly the highest order, not merely a one-shot papal directive, but a more substantial revision of the Code of Canon Laws.
PF said before the synod that he thought people had expectations that were too high. In response to that, I think PEB was saying, look, take all the time you need and fix the problem with all the hindsight that is now visible to the world. In any event, I support what PEB said and he was not as vague and mysterious as PF is. PEB certainly didn’t play word games with legalese wording about “minors” (underage persons) – Benedict said protect everybody. Priests should have faith and be holy and chaste. See? That’s not that hard to say. And, PEB said it.
O
ontheway1
Guest
This business with “minors” seems like an attempt at obfuscation. It is clear from other sources that much of the “activity” involved seminarians, young priests etc. In focusing on the minors Francis seems to be trying to minimize the scope of the problem or avoid the homosexual issue which is brought forth in Benedict’s letter.
Having just finished reading (yesterday - it took of all of Lent to complete the task) Benedict’s Jesus of Nazareth, I find myself less inclined to exercise the kind of patience required to follow the logic used by Francis to explain the problem.
Having just finished reading (yesterday - it took of all of Lent to complete the task) Benedict’s Jesus of Nazareth, I find myself less inclined to exercise the kind of patience required to follow the logic used by Francis to explain the problem.
V
Victoria33
Guest
On April 12th, the Washington Post published this, is the writer, David Von Drehle basically saying the can was kicked down the road? The buck was passed? If we read some of these sources, Lifesitenews and so on… I think we should read the other side. I haven’t followed this enough in depth and I would plead ignorance but this article does not seem too bad as a criticism to me. I feel a bit uncomfortable here, posting anything that might be inappropriate. That’s largely, why I don’t comment on these threads.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...d4c456-5d49-11e9-a00e-050dc7b82693_story.html
I think it is a good article rather than almost playing the blame game. Just like anything else, all we can do is go forward. Sure, correct whatever past errors are possible to correct.
More articles,
www.catholicnewsagency.com
NPR:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...d4c456-5d49-11e9-a00e-050dc7b82693_story.html
I think it is a good article rather than almost playing the blame game. Just like anything else, all we can do is go forward. Sure, correct whatever past errors are possible to correct.
More articles,
Benedict XVI and the martyrdom of being misunderstood
The Church is made of martyrs, visible testimonies of the gospel. There is not only the martyrdom of blood. Cardinal Agostino Casaroli spoke about a “martyrdom of patience” referring to his diplomatic work: he was Vatican secretary of State from 1979 to 1990 and before the Vatican “minister...
www.catholicnewsagency.com
NPR:
Last edited:
C
CatholicSooner
Guest
where did you hear this?
O
ontheway1
Guest
The Italian daily Corriere della Sera reported that an essay by Benedict XVI, published a few days ago about the crisis in the Church and its causes, was prepared a few months ago. According to journalist Massimo Franco, the pope-pensioner began working on the article as early as September last year, just after Francis announced that the summit on pedophilia in the Church would be held.
www.corriere.it
Ratzinger, il testo sulla pedofilia ha sconvolto l'equilibrio tra i due Papi | Massimo Franco
I nostalgici di Ratzinger e chi sostiene Francesco si confrontano sul testo pubblicato dal pontefice emerito usandolo in una logica da resa dei conti
Last edited:
O
otrrl
Guest
more perspective on the story
www.theamericanconservative.com
Further Reflections On BXVI’s Essay
The world is corrupt, and so is the visible Church. Small communities of really believing Christians are necessary to keep our eyes on God
www.theamericanconservative.com
- Status