Religious Freedom

[Dale_M]

The Vatican does not require you to be opposed to same-sex marriage nor does it require you to believe that a transwoman is not a woman, that is just current teaching.

Hmmm… you are making an interesting claim about the teaching about opposition to same sex marriage. Certainly Cardinal Ratzinger, as head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, wrote that Catholics must oppose same-sex marriage, and that a vote in favor of it is gravely immoral.

Is Cardinal Ratzinger’s interpretation, signed by Pope John Paul II, binding?

I’m pretty sure you’re wrong at least about same-sex marriage. You absolutely HAVE to be opposed to it, it is an infallible teaching.

Would you be willing to explain why you think this is an infallible teaching?

Okay… now that I have asked my questions about same-sex marriage, I would like to back up to Maria’s earlier quote.

The Vatican does not require you to be opposed to same-sex marriage nor does it require you to believe that a transwoman is not a woman, that is just current teaching.

Maria, I am not sure that what you said is Catholic doctrine. Certainly it is a common interpretation of the Catechism, but I am not aware of any Church documents which actually make that claim. Granted, back in 2003 there was a news leak about a secret document which did not recognize transsexualism. However, that document has never been made available, and no Catholic official has talked about it during the past seven years.

 

[St_Francis]

… There are many different ways into Heaven or into the Spirit World and all should be cherished and respected.

Christ said, “I am the Way, the Truth, and the Light.” Singular. There is only one way to Heaven and that is through the Body of Christ, the Catholic Church.

I believe what is required of the Catholic faith, nothing more. Catholics do not have to believe most Church teaching, they just have to believe the fundamental values of the Church. …

A statement/teaching can only be infallible if it is, directly, referring to Dogmatic teaching. Dogma never condemns same-sex marriage.

Infallibility refers to faith *and *[morals](http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Councils/ecum20.htm#Chapter 4. On the infallible teaching authority of the Roman pontiff). (See paragraph 9)

Catholics are required to believe many things which have not been infallibly proclaimed. The reason that things are proclaimed is that there is a dispute or other need for clarification of a truth which already exists. There has never before existed a reason to proclaim the very clear truth that sexual activity outside of marriage is mortally sinful, and that homosexual activity falls outside of marriage. It is a truth that God created humanity in such a way that marriage can occur only between men and women, and Catholics are indeed required to assent to these truths.

 

[kimmielittle]

I wonder if she knows what a strawman argument is?

Seems to have many misconceptions as to what Catholicism is AND isnt

 

[kimmielittle]

I believe what is required of the Catholic faith, nothing more. Catholics do not have to believe most Church teaching, they just have to believe the fundamental values of the Church. For example: The Vatican does not require you to be opposed to same-sex marriage nor does it require you to believe that a transwoman is not a woman, that is just current teaching. I can support same-sex marriage and I can know, in my heart, that I am and always will be a woman. Just because current teaching does not agree with this does not mean that I have to believe what they teach. I believe in the fundamentals of the Catholic Church, nothing more, nothing less.

BUT if your statement is true as said above, You can not believe in the goddess that you have claimed to believe in…THAT is not for debate.

You do know, don’t you… That Many Lesbian writers who have fallen away from Christianity claim a goddess… BUT you are Catholic

 

[Dale_M]

BUT if your statement is true as said above, You can not believe in the goddess that you have claimed to believe in…THAT is not for debate.

It certainly is outside of mainstream Catholic thought. However, the theologian, Rosemary Radford Ruether, seems open to the idea.

God/ess is Ruether’s neologism which signifies that we as yet have no adequate name for the divine, yet “Intimations of Her/His name will appear as we emerge from false naming of God/ess modeled on patriarchal alienation”

people.bu.edu/wwildman/WeirdWildWeb/courses/mwt/dictionary/mwt_themes_908_ruether.htm

Then again, she is an advocate for female ordination, and a supporter of Catholics for Choice.

You do know, don’t you… That Many Lesbian writers who have fallen away from Christianity claim a goddess… BUT you are Catholic

This may be true, but I am not sure one has to be lesbian to support the idea of Goddess. Some variants of neo-Paganism refer to the Goddess, and there are feminist theologians (Christian, but non-Catholic) who also embrace the idea of Goddess, in some form.

And, of course, many lesbians reject the idea of Goddess. So I don’t think Goddess is necessary a lesbian idea.

But I don’t think it is a very Catholic idea, though.

 

[Marc_Anthony]

Would you be willing to explain why you think this is an infallible teaching?

I’ve always heard to it referred to as such.

I’m afraid I have little else to go on but that. I have no copy of the Catechism with me to refer to. But I’m still pretty sure that the Catholic Church has infallibly defined marriage as between a man and a woman. I’ve never heard of it referred to otherwise.

 

[St_Francis]

It certainly is outside of mainstream Catholic thought. However, the theologian, Rosemary Radford Ruether, seems open to the idea.

people.bu.edu/wwildman/WeirdWildWeb/courses/mwt/dictionary/mwt_themes_908_ruether.htm

Then again, she is an advocate for female ordination, and a supporter of Catholics for Choice.

Why would you post this? She doesn’t hold ideas which are “outside mainstream Catholic thought,” she holds ideas which are *not Catholi,. *y’know, heresy.

An she was a board member of the group, not just a supporter.

But I don’t think it is a very Catholic idea, though.

Basically, it is totally *not Catholic. *Fathers cannot be female. Christ’s Mother, and ours, is Mary.

 

[Dale_M]

But I’m still pretty sure that the Catholic Church has infallibly defined marriage as between a man and a woman. I’ve never heard of it referred to otherwise.

Oh, gosh, I apologize. I misunderstood you. Yes, the Church does define marriage as only between a man and a woman. This idea is integral with much Catholic doctrine. I’m sorry for the mistake.

I thought you were saying that the idea of Catholics being obligated to politically oppose same-sex was an infallible teaching. Of that, I am uncertain. Which isn’t to say that the claim is wrong. It just means I don’t understand its status in the Church.

 

[Dale_M]

Why would you post this? She doesn’t hold ideas which are “outside mainstream Catholic thought,” she holds ideas which are *not Catholi,. *y’know, heresy.

An she was a board member of the group, not just a supporter.

Oh, I agree her views are kind of out there. But she is Catholic, and a theologian. I don’t think the Church has ever identified her as a heretic.

I mentioned her because she is not lesbian. Your earlier post seemed to say (and perhaps I misunderstood you) that the idea of Goddess was a lesbian thing. I mentioned her simply as an example of a non-lesbian theologian who is open to the idea.

 

[Corki]

I believe what is required of the Catholic faith, nothing more. Catholics do not have to believe most Church teaching, they just have to believe the fundamental values of the Church. For example: The Vatican does not require you to be opposed to same-sex marriage nor does it require you to believe that a transwoman is not a woman, that is just current teaching. I can support same-sex marriage and I can know, in my heart, that I am and always will be a woman. Just because current teaching does not agree with this does not mean that I have to believe what they teach. I believe in the fundamentals of the Catholic Church, nothing more, nothing less.

The Vatican doesn’t require anything. The Church, which encompasses the Vatican but is much broader, requires that you give all that she teaches as matters of faith or morals ‘assent of faith’. You don’t have to understand it or even agree with it but you are required to assent to it.

If your recent posts are any indication, you express belief in quite a bit less than the “fundamentals” of the Church. For example, the teaching that the Church alone has the fullness of truth is a fundamental teaching. The teaching that God is our Father is a fundamental teaching. The teaching that the BVM was concieved of the Holy Spirit is a fundamental teaching (as opposed to a goddess).

I believe, simply, that the Goddess came down from heaven and infused the Virgin Mother with her spirit so that she could give birth to Jesus.

A statement/teaching can only be infallible if it is, directly, referring to Dogmatic teaching. Dogma never condemns same-sex marriage.

The Church has very few Dogmas. But dogma isn’t the only kind of infallible teaching.

 

[kimmielittle]

It certainly is outside of mainstream Catholic thought. However, the theologian, Rosemary Radford Ruether, seems open to the idea.

people.bu.edu/wwildman/WeirdWildWeb/courses/mwt/dictionary/mwt_themes_908_ruether.htm

God/ess is Ruether’s neologism which signifies that we as yet have no adequate name for the divine, yet “Intimations of Her/His name will appear as we emerge from false naming of God/ess modeled on patriarchal alienation”

AND

Ruether’s method can thus be variously described as social criticism, cultural criticism or ideology critique. Speaking of her systematic treatment of the Christian symbols in Sexism and God-Talk, she indicates that she seeks to “recapitulate from a feminist, critical perspective [the] journey of Western consciousness” (SGT, 45).

Personally, I think Ms. Ruether’s ideas are a bit more simple. I believe, it’s her attempt to justify her feminist ideas and oppose Patriarchal Christian Symbols.

We seem to need to justify ourselves.
Such as " How can I be a true feminist and believe God is a Patriarch identity’?

Then again, she is an advocate for female ordination, and a supporter of Catholics for Choice.

My understanding that support for these are heresy.

This may be true, but I am not sure one has to be lesbian to support the idea of Goddess. Some variants of neo-Paganism refer to the Goddess, and there are feminist theologians (Christian, but non-Catholic) who also embrace the idea of Goddess, in some form.

And, of course, many lesbians reject the idea of Goddess. So I don’t think Goddess is necessary a lesbian idea.

But I don’t think it is a very Catholic idea, though.

Yeppers!!!

 

[JohnCS]

Oh, gosh, I apologize. I misunderstood you. Yes, the Church does define marriage as only between a man and a woman. This idea is integral with much Catholic doctrine. I’m sorry for the mistake.

I thought you were saying that the idea of Catholics being obligated to politically oppose same-sex was an infallible teaching. Of that, I am uncertain. Which isn’t to say that the claim is wrong. It just means I don’t understand its status in the Church.

Hi Dale,

The one thing that I love about the Catholic faith is that we need common sense and logic. It is the thinking persons religion. If the Church or Catechism had to list every single possible thing that we, as good Catholics, need to be opposed to, the CCC would be 40 billion pages long. They don’t have to come out and say that politically supporting gay marriage is sinful because it should be inferred. We are obligated to live and spread the truth. We know that homosexual acts are disordered and sinful. We know that any sexual acts should be reserved for a married couple only. We know that marriage is for a man and a woman. We know that we are obligated to “love the sinner”, but hate and oppose the sin. Now take all of these things that we know and using some common sense and logic, combine them. It doesn’t take much to see that it is wrong to politically support gay marraige, or any other sinful act.

God bless****

 

[MariaTS]

BUT if your statement is true as said above, You can not believe in the goddess that you have claimed to believe in…THAT is not for debate.

You do know, don’t you… That Many Feminist writers who have fallen away from Christianity claim a goddess… BUT you are Catholic

I believe in the same God you do, I just refer to Her differently than you do. I am a Catholic, but I do not have to believe that God is male.

 

[MariaTS]

The one thing that I love about the Catholic faith is that we need common sense and logic…
…We know that homosexual acts are disordered and sinful. We know that any sexual acts should be reserved for a married couple only. We know that marriage is for a man and a woman.

Believing what you do about same-sex marriage is illogical.

 

[kimmielittle]

I believe in the same God you do,

I believe in The Father The Son and The Holy Spirit.

I just refer to Her differently than you do

Why?

I am a Catholic,

Is this a new age thing?

 

[kimmielittle]

Believing what you do about same-sex marriage is illogical.

No, that is what homosexuals try to sell us kids, " That marriage between a man and woman is illogical"…

 

[MariaTS]

No, that is what homosexuals try to sell us kids, " That marriage between a man and woman is illogical"…

No, that’s not what I said. I never said “marriage between a man and woman is illogical”, I said “being opposed to same-sex marriage is illogical” Also, I have never heard a homosexual say, at any point in my life, “marriage between a man and woman is illogical”. That is just a right wing lie.

 

[MariaTS]

I believe in The Father The Son and The Holy Spirit.

Why?

Is this a new age thing?

I never disagreed with the Trinity, I just believe that She is the Mother. There is really no difference.

I believe that She is female because that seems to be the most logical explanation.

No, this is not a “new age thing”, it is based on a much older Catholic belief.

 

[adstrinity]

I never disagreed with the Trinity, I just believe that She is the Mother. There is really no difference.

Might I direct you to Jesus’ teaching as found in Matthew 6:9–13 and Luke 11:2–4, when He, GOD HIMSELF, teaches us to pray the Our FATHER? He also, if one is to believe Jesus is God, which one is required to do if one is Catholic, refers to God as “your Heavenly Father”.

I believe in the same God you do, I just refer to Her differently than you do. I am a Catholic, but I do not have to believe that God is male.

D. Para. 238: Many religions invoke God as “Father.” The deity is often considered the “father of gods and of men.” In Israel, God is called “Father” inasmuch as he is Creator of the world (Cf. Deut 32:6; Mal 2:10). Even more, God is Father because of the covenant and the gift of the law to Israel, “his first-born son” (Ex 4:22). God is also called the Father of the king of Israel. Most especially he is “the Father of the poor,” of the orphaned and the widowed, who are under his loving protection (Cf. 2 Sam 7:14; Ps 68:6). Para. 240: Jesus revealed that God is Father in an unheard of sense; he is Father not only in being Creator; he is eternally Father by his relationship to his only Son who, reciprocally, is Son only in relation to his Father.
usccb.org/catechism/quizzes/trinity9.shtml

I believe what is required of the Catholic faith, nothing more. Catholics do not have to believe most Church teaching…

Catholics must believe and adhere to ALL Church teaching.

 

[adstrinity]

Many think Catholicism should be the national religion of the USA.

Source? Statistical source?

Also, me believing that the Christian God is female is no different than you believing that the Christian God is male.

Perhaps this is why you are so confused about transsexuality. Male is different from female. Please refer to your Catechism.