Question For Protestants (if any are here)

[JonNC]

No, but it’s just quiet obvious. Sex and sexual abuse are the two main reasons people leave. It’s so outdated. If the Church took proper responsibility for their past failings and became more progressive in all the right ways then more people would stay.

I think the Catholic Church has done well recently in taking responsibility for the sexual abuse scandal. As for being “progressive in the right ways”, I’m usually hard pressed to find any part of progressivism being in the right way, but I’ll ask anyway: what are the right ways you are referring to?

 

[SuperDarkMan12]

Supporting gay rights, trans rights, contraceptive, and just sexual liberation in general. Having a less harsh stance on abortion, and maybeeee lessening it’s stance on euthansasia a bit. I don’t think the church has done enough especially under Francis. Did you know the former Archbishop of the Diocese of Boston who allowed much of the sexual abuse in his diocese to keep going one was actively promoted within the Church? That’s some gosh darn bullcrap I do say so myself. He just recently died.

 

[guanophore]

Do these rules actually affect which church people go to?

Definitely! I think most Catholics leave over issues that originate below the waist.

My brother tells people that he converted to Catholicism so he could drink all of the beer he wanted without any guilt. (Our childhood church denomination doesn’t forbid alcohol, but it isn’t socially acceptable by our church or family.)

Yes, it is true that Catholicism does not preclude the use of alcohol, though drunkenness is considered a sin. I guess whether or not this is a sin for him depends upon how much is “all the beer he wanted”. If it is not enough to create drunkenness, it is not necessarily a problem.

He and his wife use contraception, but go to Mass every week.

I think this is the case for the majority of American Catholics. Except most of them engage in mortal sin and don’t go to Mass at all! Those that do, rationalize to themselves that what they are doing is not a mortal sin, then commit sacrilege by receiving communion without being in a state of grace.

But really I think very few people change denominations because of the moral decisions they choose for their lives.

What do you think are the motives?

The faith is a seamless garment, as the one Christ wore. Tearing it at any part will disintegrate the whole. Once one part of the One Faith is unravelled, such as the Eucharist, the rest begins to shred.

The UUC is what I call religion salad.

I don’t see that they can possibly qualify as Christian…

It kinda is. It started out as a traditional Christian denomination but it branched out in the 60s. Its really everything im looking for except one thing.

And what might that be?

 

[JonNC]

Supporting gay rights, trans rights, contraceptive, and just sexual liberation in general.

I don’t intend to speak for the Catholic Church since I’m continuing Anglican, but I don’t see the Church standing in the way of individual rights. Gays and “trans” already have the same rights as others. OTOH, they do not get to have more rights.
Contraception is opposed by the Catholic Church on religious grounds, not on the basis of rights. To expect them to compromise on issues of faith lacks common sense.
You complained about sexual abuse earlier, yet one of its causes is the sexual liberation movement since the 60’s. This seems a contradiction.

Having a less harsh stance on abortion

So, you think the Church should take a less harsh stance on the killing of soon-to-be-born human beings?

I don’t think the church has done enough especially under Francis. Did you know the former Archbishop of the Diocese of Boston who allowed much of the sexual abuse in his diocese to keep going one was actively promoted within the Church?

Fine. But don’t promote one of the underlying causes of sexual abuse.

 

[SuperDarkMan12]

My guess it was because of the various social movements going on in America. Like the gay, women, and civil rights movements.

 

[SuperDarkMan12]

Sorry, didn’t see the rest of your response. For one, the sexual abuse within the Catholic Church started happening close to ten years before the sexual liberation movements even started to happen. The Catholic Church has payed globs of money in a multitude of countrys to inhibit gay people from having the same rights as straight. They payed lobbyists throughout many Countries like the US and more recently Australia. And I know contraception is condemned based on religious grounds but I think it’s time for them to get with the times.

Also, killing is sometimes justified.

 

[guanophore]

If the Church …became more progressive in all the right ways then more people would stay.

I am curious about what sort of “progressive in all the right ways” might be? I think this would include, as a minimum, contraception, and perhaps gay “marriage”?

The Church founded by Christ is not a democracy, and it does not depend on human culture and social norms to be “right ways”. It is founded by Christ, and is based on His norms of “right ways”, even if they are unpopular with the masses. If people leave the Church because they reject the teaching of Christ, their blood is upon their own heads.

 

[SuperDarkMan12]

You go the right ways right on the nose. What I hate about some of the members of the Catholic Church is that they’re progressive in the wrong ways. There for open borders, they hate Donald Trump, and they’re supporting all these young stupid kids marching against gun rights which is just a political move by the Democratic party to gain more supporters. Those are a few things that I don’t like.

The Church has changed it opinion on things all throughout the years mate. Organized Banking was wrong, now its right. Too much gambling and dancing were immoral and now no one gives two craps. The Church changes all the time and God has never said anything about homosexual unions.

 

[deMontfort]

God has never said anything about homosexual unions.

You might want to reread the Bible: There’s plenty of injunctions from God against homosexuality.

 

[SuperDarkMan12]

That’s not what I said. Sexual immorality is different from loving lasting homosexual unions.

 

[deMontfort]

Homosexuality itself is condemned. You can’t have a “homosexual union” without homosexuality.

 

[SuperDarkMan12]

No it’s not. Plain and simple.

 

[deMontfort]

No it’s not. Plain and simple.

Yes it is plain and simple.

 

[SuperDarkMan12]

Give me a verse and I’ll explain it away. It’s all about interpretation.

 

[deMontfort]

You can TRY to explain it away…and you would be very incorrect.

At this point it looks like you’re arguing solely for the sake of being a jerk.

 

[SuperDarkMan12]

Nah mate, I’m not trying to do that. I just know that it’s not condemned. I’m sorry if I’m being aa bit too blunt.

 

[JonNC]

No it’s not. Plain and simple.

There are no examples of homosexuality being approved in scripture. There is simply no example of an approved homosexual “marriage “. Christ’s words in Mark 10 are explicit:

But from the beginning of the creation, God ‘made them male and female.’[a] 7 ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, 8 and the two shall become one flesh’; so then they are no longer two, but one flesh. 9 Therefore what God has joined together, let not man separate.”

No mention of alternatives.

 

[JonNC]

At this point it looks like you’re arguing solely for the sake of being a jerk.

I don’t see how this in any way contributes in a positive way to the point thst you and I share on the issue

 

[guanophore]

For one, the sexual abuse within the Catholic Church started happening close to ten years before the sexual liberation movements even started to happen.

Actually, I think that sexual abuse has occurred in human cultures since the beginning of time. There are no few examples in the Bible. Are you equating the Churchs’ position on traditional marriage with “sexual abuse”?

The Catholic Church has payed globs of money in a multitude of countrys to inhibit gay people from having the same rights as straight.

I am not familiar with these 'gobs", but I do know that the Church does not consider it a “human right” to violate God’s laws.

And I know contraception is condemned based on religious grounds but I think it’s time for them to get with the times.

Yes, this is the constant voice of modernism. In every age, there are voices that flagellate the CC to “get with the times”. Fortunately, the Church resists these calls, as what is "with the times’ often turns out to be unhealthy, unsustainable, and contrary to God’s plan for humankind. When I was younger I was one of those voices, and I used to be frustrated that the Church moved so slowly to respond to modern pressures, but now that I am older, I appreciate the deliberation and caution.

Also, killing is sometimes justified.

Can you elaborate?

What I hate about some of the members of the Catholic Church is that they’re progressive in the wrong ways.

I find it odd that you would fault an entire religion because you did not agree with the political views of certain persons who adhere to it.

There for open borders, they hate Donald Trump,

I have not found any Catholics who are for “open borders”, even those who oppose “the Wall”. I have also not met any Catholics who “hate Donald Trump”. This would be a decidedly uncatholic position, since we need to love even our enemies, and pray for those who persecute us. Objecting to a persons deportment does not equate to “hatred”.

they’re supporting all these young stupid kids marching against gun rights which is just a political move by the Democratic party to gain more supporters. Those are a few things that I don’t like.

This is absurd. How can one find fault with the cc because they don’t agree with the political activities of certain members?

 

[guanophore]

The Church has changed it opinion on things all throughout the years mate. Organized Banking was wrong, now its right.

The Church is responsible to instruct the faithful in matters of consequence in society. If organized banking is immoral, it will be opposed. If it is not immoral, it will not be.

Too much gambling and dancing were immoral and now no one gives two craps.

I am interested to see some documents produced by Church authorities that can support this “no one gives two craps” position!

The Church changes all the time

I find it ironic that half the time you are complaining that the Church needs to “get with the times” and yet, that the changes are not the right kind?

God has never said anything about homosexual unions

On the contrary, God began addressing human sexuality in the Garden of Eden!

I think it is true that no one in Jewish culture or early Christian culture could have anticipated the present day pressure to accept homosexual “marriage” (union). One reason that Jesus and the Apostles did not spend much time addressing this is because it had already been addressed in the Jewish faith, and salvation is of the Jews.

But perhaps you are not saying that the OT is inspired by God, or that Jesus is not God, or that the Apostles were not moved by the Holy Spirit to speak from God?