I didn’t say I disagreed with caning in general. Nor do I necessarily agree. The two men were punished for breaking the law. I take into account that they were caught engaging in an act of evil. And that, to me, makes a difference. They weren’t stealing a load of bread to feed their starving families; they certainly weren’t secretly worshipping Jesus Christ. They were engaged in carnal sin.
So you support the caning of business owners who defraud their workers of wages by making them work off the clock? Or just the gays?
There is no PENAL code under the New Covenant. Like I said before, Jesus got rid of the penal code of Leviticus when he refused to stone the woman taken in adultery.
Um… When did anyone address the sinfulness of homosexual acts in this thread? We were addressing the use of state power to inflict physical torment on individuals.
Not bound to decrees of the Roman Catholic hierarchy, correct. My Anglican jurisdiction does not ordain actively homosexual men, nor do we celebrate same sex “weddings.” We don’t exclude active homosexuals from worshipping with us, but given our firm resistance to the aforementioned innovations, we don’t attract many either. They will probably feel more comfortable in the TEC. where they’ll be told that homosexual activity is normal, healthy, virtuous, even biblical.
You have yet to address my point about there being no penal code in the New Testament. Regardless of what you believe about homosexuality, there is NO PUNISHMENT for it under the New Covenant.
Not all non-Roman Catholic Christians are Protestants. Not all Catholics are Roman Catholic. But surely this isn’t new information. Nor is it news to me that Roman Catholics don’t believe in Sola Scriptura. But-- and you may not know this because it’s a common assumption-many Anglicans don’t subscribe to Sola Scriptura either, certainly not in the fundamentalist sense, the sense in which it’s often used. Many actually hold to the teachings of the Church Fathers. Certainly to all three Creeds. And most of the Church Councils. And to the Book of Common Prayer, in my case the rather Anglo-Catholic 1928.
Um, besides the Orthodox, there are protestants. And a Catholic is a Catholic whether Roman or Eastern. What’s your point?Not all non-Roman Catholic Christians are Protestants. Not all Catholics are Roman Catholic. But surely this isn’t new information.
If you don’t really know what someone’s theology is, best not to make assumptions or pigeonhole. Just sayin’
But no offense taken.
Only Protestants who believe in Tota Scriptura argue that the Old Testament penal codes are still valid. You are arguing that the Old Testament penal codes are still valid. Therefore, you must believe in Tota Scriptura.Not all non-Roman Catholic Christians are Protestants. Not all Catholics are Roman Catholic. But surely this isn’t new information.
If you don’t really know what someone’s theology is, best not to make assumptions or pigeonhole. Just sayin’
But no offense taken.
No further discussion of this side bar is possible between us, then. I was responding to another post, is the point, though. I was also revising while you were responding. Stuff happens.
So you disagree with the Apostle Paul on homsexual activity as well, then?
Regardless of what Paul has to say about homosexuality, he has nothing to say about the corporal punishment of homosexuals. Under the Old Covenant, every infraction had a punishment associated with it. Same with Sharia - chopping off a person’s hands for stealing is prescribed by the Islamic scriptures. In Judaism and Islam both laws and punishments are ordained by God.
And in the eyes of the Church, (ie God) that’s all that marriage can ever be. For Catholics to think it’s OK for it to be between two people (especially men!) of the same sex, it’s distressing and depressing.
If the early Church discovered two men in its ranks committing the act of sodomy, they would have been expected to repent, or if they refused, and insisted on carrying on with their “lifestyle”, they probably would have been given the boot.
In CS Lewis’s day, sodomy was hardly ever spoken of. It’s most certainly not the same now, being condoned and promoted to the high heavens. His words are pretty well spot on when referring to adultery between a man and a woman, but heterosexual adultery is far removed from the acts of depravity perpetrated by two men.
So was lending money for gain, do you want to close the banks etc or is it just sexual morality that concerns you In some Christian counties it was illegal to go to mass. Some Christian societies abolished the celebration of Christmas. This thread is particularly atavistic seems to me it speaks of a personal distaste rather than support for religious doctrine.
You chose an unfortunate thread to put up a first post.
The naive believe in magic dirt theory. Those who know better look forward to the genetic and cultural destruction of the West.