Pope shocked by same-sex adoptions legislation

[Bubba_Switzler]

What concerns me is that the Pope is surprised by this.

When are we going to stop being “surprised” and not be caught off-guard so much?

You put it much more diplomatically than I would have.

When? When people start facing reality instead of hiding from it or, worse, disguising it behind euphamism and Orwelian doublethink.

 

[Cojuanco]

What concerns me is that the Pope is surprised by this.

When are we going to stop being “surprised” and not be caught off-guard so much?

When God said the worldly ways were evil, He wasn’t kidding…

He is shocked that it would happen in a country like Malta.

 

[Bubba_Switzler]

He is shocked that it would happen in a country like Malta.

Why? Why is it shocking given what has transpired in nominally Catholic countries like his home Argentina? Nobody paying attention to the modern mood should be surprised.

 

[Pulvis]

No no no no no

If one studies the history of human sexuality, one will see that the Church isnt going to crumble.

In both the ancient Greek and Roman empires, homosexuality was far from unusual…

And their societies collapsed. Leson learned.

"[16] For I am not ashamed of the gospel. For it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth, to the Jew first, and to the Greek. [17] For the justice of God is revealed therein, from faith unto faith, as it is written: The just man liveth by faith. [18] For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and injustice of those men that detain the truth of God in injustice: [19] Because that which is known of God is manifest in them. For God hath manifested it unto them. [20] For the invisible things of him, from the creation of the world, are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made; his eternal power also, and divinity: so that they are inexcusable.

[21] Because that, when they knew God, they have not glorified him as God, or given thanks; but became vain in their thoughts, and their foolish heart was darkened. [22] For professing themselves to be wise, they became fools. [23] And they changed the glory of the incorruptible God into the likeness of the image of a corruptible man, and of birds, and of fourfooted beasts, and of creeping things. [24] Wherefore God gave them up to the desires of their heart, unto uncleanness, to dishonour their own bodies among themselves. [25] Who changed the truth of God into a lie; and worshipped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.

[26] For this cause God delivered them up to shameful affections. For their women have changed the natural use into that use which is against nature. [27] And, in like manner, the men also, leaving the natural use of the women, have burned in their lusts one towards another, men with men working that which is filthy, and receiving in themselves the recompense which was due to their error. [28] And as they liked not to have God in their knowledge, God delivered them up to a reprobate sense, to do those things which are not convenient; [29] Being filled with all iniquity, malice, fornication, avarice, wickedness, full of envy, murder, contention, deceit, malignity, whisperers, [30] Detractors, hateful to God, contumelious, proud, haughty, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,

[26] God delivered them up: Not by being author of their sins, but by withdrawing his grace, and so permitting them, in punishment of their pride, to fall into those shameful sins.

[31] Foolish, dissolute, without affection, without fidelity, without mercy. [32] Who, having known the justice of God, did not understand that they who do such things, are worthy of death; and not only they that do them, but they also that consent to them that do them" drbo.org/chapter/52001.htm

 

[PTL]

Glad to read that Francis encouraged Mgr. Scicluna to speak out on this. I hope Francis himself will speak out as well.

I got a feeling that we are looking for any possible clue to reassure ourselves that the Holy Father is conservative.

 

[poker10]

And their societies collapsed. Leson learned.

Of course their societies collapsed. So has EVERY society. And EVERY society will collapse. Did you really think the 1950s idealized America would last forever?

 

[Darryl1958]

It doesn’t matter that the pope is not conservative. It is enough that he is Catholic.

As long as he is a Catholic in good standing with the teachings of the Church, we Catholics have got him right where we want him.

 

[Pulvis]

Pulvis;11555113:

And their societies collapsed. Leson learned.

Of course their societies collapsed. So has EVERY society. And EVERY society will collapse. Did you really think the 1950s idealized America would last forever?

Of course not. America was founded by men who were influenced by modernist rainisance idologues, calvanists and masons. Now we are being led by secular pagans. It is only a matter of time before the union disintergrates into regional confederacies. And Godless pagans will have destoyed yet another earthly kingdom.

 

[McCall1981]

Here is an article with a little more info on the Pope’s comments to Bp. Scicluna:

ncregister.com/blog/edward-pentin/pope-repeats-that-same-sex-marriage-is-anthropological-regression

The article adds that Pope Francis repeated that same sex “marriage” is an “anthropological regression”, something he has said before, including in his book “On Heaven and Earth”.

He “also said he was “saddened” by legislative proposals in Malta to extend equality legislation to homosexual couples, particularly those who wish to adopt.”

 

[Darryl1958]

Here is an article with a little more info on the Pope’s comments to Bp. Scicluna:

ncregister.com/blog/edward-pentin/pope-repeats-that-same-sex-marriage-is-anthropological-regression

The article adds that Pope Francis repeated that same sex “marriage” is an “anthropological regression”, something he has said before, including in his book “On Heaven and Earth”.

He “also said he was “saddened” by legislative proposals in Malta to extend equality legislation to homosexual couples, particularly those who wish to adopt.”

“Anthropological regression” sounds the correct dismissive tone.
However I am at a loss as to how this would be a regression. To regress is to imply that this is a state of affairs that existed in more primitive times.

I am skeptical that even if we were to trace our history back to the times of the missing links and beyond, we would never find a time in our histories or or genetic makeup in which SSM existed.
This is a thoroughly modern state of affairs ushered in by our own generation which considers itself wiser than all the religious leaders, and all the emperors and kings and administrators of all the civilizations and nations and tribes that have preceded us.

SSM is the product of our own age, and era which rabbi Dennis Prager has quite accurately named the “Age of Stupidity”.

 

[McCall1981]

“Anthropological regression” sounds the correct dismissive tone.
However I am at a loss as to how this would be a regression. To regress is to imply that this is a state of affairs that existed in more primitive times.

I am skeptical that even if we were to trace our history back to the times of the missing links and beyond, we would never find a time in our histories or or genetic makeup in which SSM existed.
This is a thoroughly modern state of affairs ushered in by our own generation which considers itself wiser than all the religious leaders, and all the emperors and kings and administrators of all the civilizations and nations and tribes that have preceded us.

SSM is the product of our own age, and era which rabbi Dennis Prager has quite accurately named the “Age of Stupidity”.

I’ve read that the reason he says “anthropological regression” (rather than “immoral” or something like that) is because he wants to make the point that its wrong for more than just religious reasons. So SSM would be wrong for anthropological and biological reasons, not just because of Christian moral teaching. I think the point is to say that atheists and all people should be against it, not just religious people.

 

[Darryl1958]

I’ve read that the reason he says “anthropological regression” (rather than “immoral” or something like that) is because he wants to make the point that its wrong for more than just religious reasons. So SSM would be wrong for anthropological and biological reasons, not just because of Christian moral teaching. I think the point is to say that atheists and all people should be against it, not just religious people.

Yes, most certainly. I question the syntax of the pope’s argument only. The semantics behind the point he is making comes through loud and clear.

Just on the level of common sense the argument that there are no difference between men and women when it comes to coitus is an unbelievably preposterous one. Indeed the only way that anyone has been able to argue for such a proposition is to make an ad hominem attack against anyone who disagrees as being a religious bigot.

 

[SuperLuigi]

In both the ancient Greek and Roman empires, homosexuality was far from unusual…

A lot of the progressive arguments rely on things being “new”. The fact is, when it comes to homosexual acts or even so-called “gay marriage”, there’s really nothing terribly new at the core.