SanFrancisco bishop Thinks Gay Propaganda Film Brokeback Mountain is "Very Powerful"

[irenaeus1]

Libero:

Souls into heaven… That is going to be very hard to acheive after bible bashing snappy comments from an agressive bishop have driven all of the sinners away.

Why is it that if one merely points out the sinfulness of a certain behavior or lifestyle, it is presumed that it will be done in a “bible bashing snappy” way? This is not an either/or scenario. It can be done in a charitable yet firm and uncompromising manner.

That’s not to say that harshness is not sometimes required, and I am not even saying that the bishop needed to be harsh in this case; just clear and unambiguous. I think sometimes we have a confused and sanitized version of what it means to be loving and Christ-like. Who could be more loving and Christ-like than Christ Himself? Yet, He made statements such as “anyone who looks upon a woman with lust has already committed adultery with her in his heart.” Yet, I suspect that if a bishop made such a statement to a staff writer of a pornographic magazine, some would claim that he is acting in a “bible bashing snappy” way.

Jesus made numerous statements that would be considered stern. “For out of the heart of man comes evil thoughts, murder, adultery, sexual immorality, etc.” “Whoever is angry [without cause] with his brother is liable to judgment… is liable to the fire of Gehenna.” “Woe to you, you hypocrites,…you blind guides,… you whitewashed tombs full of dead men’s bones,… you brood of vipers, how will you escape the judgment of hell.” “ It would have been better for that man if he had never been born.” “Unless you repent you will likewise perish.” Gosh! Jesus should not be so snappy.

In Christ,
Irenaeus

 

[UtahMaggie]

GloriaPatri4:

The “softy softy, tolerate anything approach” all because Heaven forbid we might offend someone or scare them away from the church and Oh gosh, if that happens we will lose their tithes is what got us into the mess we are in, in the church and in society. People need to hear the truth even if it does hurt. If we don’t hear the truth about the immoral lifestyle we may be leading how are we expected to change? Isn’t the main goal to get as many souls into heaven as we can?

And, as I have said before, I’m sure the archbishop will address this. We all know that homosexual acts are sinful. I don’t think the archbishop was trying to be politically correct or worried about losing any money.

 

[estesbob]

UtahMaggie:

And, as I have said before, I’m sure the archbishop will address this. We all know that homosexual acts are sinful. I don’t think the archbishop was trying to be politically correct or worried about losing any money.

The people he was talking to dont. And he missed an opportunity to remind them of it. Instead, by his silence and his ambigous comments on a movie focused on homosexualtiy he gave the impression to many that they he was accepting their lifestyle.

I keep heaaring it will come in time. Sowhat about the poor soul engaginghomosexual behavior who dies before the good Bishop gets around to stating the TRUTH, For him time has run out.

 

[fix]

estesbob:

I keep heaaring it will come in time. Sowhat about the poor soul engaginghomosexual behavior who dies before the good Bishop gets around to stating the TRUTH, For him time has run out.

Thank you. I only know what is reported about this bishop, but I think your above thought is very critical. The idea that we need to just wait for some time seems to be uncaring for all souls.

How long does one wait to preach the good news?

 

[cathgal]

This is one Bishop who is not in line with the Church…

“The church cannot “remain on the sidelines in the fight for justice,” said Niederauer, who opposed a 2004 proposition amending Utah’s state constitution to prohibit same-sex marriage,”

…ah well, another bad shepherd…:nope:

 

[GloriaPatri4]

estesbob:

The people he was talking to dont. And he missed an opportunity to remind them of it. Instead, by his silence and his ambigous comments on a movie focused on homosexualtiy he gave the impression to many that they he was accepting their lifestyle.

I keep heaaring it will come in time**. Sowhat about the poor soul engaginghomosexual behavior who dies before the good Bishop gets around to stating the TRUTH, For him time has run out**.

So very true. Think of the many souls that have been lost because they did not hear the truth from our overly tolerant, politically correct bishops and priests.

I’d hate to be the bishop or priest on judgement day that has to answer to God when asked why so many of their sheep were lost under their watch. What will their explanation be? "I didn’t want to hurt anyone’s feelings"

 

[Libero]

So very true. Think of the many souls that have been lost because they did not hear the truth from our overly tolerant, politically correct bishops and priests.

I’d hate to be the bishop or priest on judgement day that has to answer to God when asked why so many of their sheep were lost under their watch. What will their explanation be? “I didn’t want to hurt anyone’s feelings”

I think I have finally gotten why we can’t seem to find any common ground on this matter. I am thinking of God through the loving, forgiving, father figure - as opposed to you who seem to be concentrating on the judgemental king type view - where God quickly decides our fate solely on how well we followed his rules.

There is a fundamental difference in the way that we choose to look at these instances, which is why we have such conflicting opinions.

Note, this is not an attack - it is said all in the most upbeat manner

 

[Brendan]

Libero:

Iwhere God quickly decides our fate solely on how well we followed his rules.

Read Matthew 25, especially the part about what happened to the ‘goats’

 

[Joe_Kelley]

Ezechiel 3:17-21

Son of man, I have made you a watchman for the house of Israel; whenever you hear a word from my mouth, you shall give them warning from me.
18] **If I say to the wicked, `You shall surely die,’ and you give him no warning, nor speak to warn the wicked from his wicked way, in order to save his life, that wicked man shall die in his iniquity; but his blood I will require at your hand.
**19] But if you warn the wicked, and he does not turn from his wickedness, or from his wicked way, he shall die in his iniquity; but you will have saved your life.
20] Again, if a righteous man turns from his righteousness and commits iniquity, and I lay a stumbling block before him, he shall die; because you have not warned him, he shall die for his sin, and his righteous deeds which he has done shall not be remembered; but his blood I will require at your hand.
21] Nevertheless if you warn the righteous man not to sin, and he does not sin, he shall surely live, because he took warning; and you will have saved your life."

 

[estesbob]

Libero:

I think I have finally gotten why we can’t seem to find any common ground on this matter. I am thinking of God through the loving, forgiving, father figure - as opposed to you who seem to be concentrating on the judgemental king type view - where God quickly decides our fate solely on how well we followed his rules.

There is a fundamental difference in the way that we choose to look at these instances, which is why we have such conflicting opinions.

Note, this is not an attack - it is said all in the most upbeat manner

God does not decide our fates. WE decide our fates. The leaders of the Church have an obligation to share the TRUTH with everyone. If a person beleive he can ignore the teachnigs God has passed down through his Church they do so at their own risk.

 

[frommi]

estesbob:

God does not decide our fates. WE decide our fates. The leaders of the Church have an obligation to share the TRUTH with everyone. If a person beleive he can ignore the teachnigs God has passed down through his Church they do so at their own risk.

The truth? or the truth from your personal perspective?

 

[Brendan]

frommi:

The truth? or the truth from your personal perspective?

Truth on Faith and Morals is Objective. It cannot vary by personal perspective.

 

[estesbob]

frommi:

The truth? or the truth from your personal perspective?

The TRUTH as taught by the One True Church. Since i belong to the Chuch Founded by Christ himself and have 2,000 years of teachings and tradition to fall back on i dont have to worry about discerning the TRUTH from my personal perspective.

 

[JSmitty2005]

Brendan:

Truth on Faith and Morals is Objective. It cannot vary by personal perspective.

Not only are they objective, but also they are all unchanging and universal. They are not subject to personal opinion, time in history, or place in the world (culture). In other words, that’s basically the definition of absolutism - the foundation of Christianity, Judaism, and Islam which is being undermined by our modern society.

 

[GloriaPatri4]

Libero:

I think I have finally gotten why we can’t seem to find any common ground on this matter.** I am thinking of God through the loving, forgiving, father figure - as opposed to you who seem to be concentrating on the judgemental king type view - where God quickly decides our fate solely on how well we followed his rules**.

There is a fundamental difference in the way that we choose to look at these instances, which is why we have such conflicting opinions.

Note, this is not an attack - it is said all in the most upbeat manner

God is loving and God is always ready to forgive our sins, no matter how great or how many they are, if we are truly sorry for them.

 

[irenaeus1]

Libero:

I think I have finally gotten why we can’t seem to find any common ground on this matter. I am thinking of God through the loving, forgiving, father figure - as opposed to you who seem to be concentrating on the judgemental king type view - where God quickly decides our fate solely on how well we followed his rules.

There is a fundamental difference in the way that we choose to look at these instances, which is why we have such conflicting opinions.

Note, this is not an attack - it is said all in the most upbeat manner

This is not an attack either, but again, you are using an either/or philosophy. EITHER view it from a loving, forgiving, father figure perspective OR view it from a judgmental king perspective. How about following Jesus’ approach - BOTH/AND. Jesus reveals the Father to us from both perspectives, and that is what we should do also. Remember, one of the spiritual works of mercy is to admonish the sinner.

In Christ,
Irenaeus

 

[GloriaPatri4]

irenaeus1:

This is not an attack either, but again, you are using an either/or philosophy. EITHER view it from a loving, forgiving, father figure perspective OR view it from a judgmental king perspective. How about following Jesus’ approach - BOTH/AND. Jesus reveals the Father to us from both perspectives, and that is what we should do also. Remember, one of the spiritual works of mercy is to admonish the sinner.

In Christ,
Irenaeus

Adomonish the sinner, now that’s something that’s rarely mentioned in church or religion classes these days.

 

[Libero]

The TRUTH as taught by the One True Church. Since i belong to the Chuch Founded by Christ himself and have 2,000 years of teachings and tradition to fall back on i dont have to worry about discerning the TRUTH from my personal perspective.

Hmmm, I think it would be very foolish just to take your word on that matter, I have been doing some research into church history, and influences at the time of the establishment of the church.

In fact one book that I hunted out from a library even states that the church used to marry homosexual missionaries within the first 100 - 200 years of it’s existence. It then goes further to discuss how our church was corrupted by the Roman Empire.

I frequently hear “The Truth that has been unaltered for 2000 years” - but sometimes I doubt it, we no longer take so many of the teachings from Leviticus seriously, we dont take the punishments demanded for sins like adultury seriously. We no longer have the beliefs about sexual fluids (we wouldn’t proclaim that a woman who has gone through the menstrual period is unclean for 7 days), we don’t still have an acceptance of polygamy.

Even the pope is looking into changing the concept of Limbo.

As for Jesus proclaiming these teachings, he didn’t even have anything to say about homosexuality, then there is the bible, which appears only to have a problem with gay men - there is a shortage of stories about lesbians it would appear.

Unaltered Truth? Sometimes I wonder…

 

[Brendan]

Libero:

In fact one book that I hunted out from a library even states that the church used to marry homosexual missionaries within the first 100 - 200 years of it’s existence. It then goes further to discuss how our church was corrupted by the Roman Empire.

And I know of a book in a library that claims the Earth is Flat. Does the existance of such a book make is so?

I frequently hear “The Truth that has been unaltered for 2000 years” - but sometimes I doubt it, we no longer take so many of the teachings from Leviticus seriously, we dont take the punishments demanded for sins like adultury seriously. We no longer have the beliefs about sexual fluids (we wouldn’t proclaim that a woman who has gone through the menstrual period is unclean for 7 days), we don’t still have an acceptance of polygamy.

The Moral Law is always unchanged. The Biblical concept of ‘unclean’ did not mean ‘immoral’ and never did. Do you really think that the Israelites even then thought than a married woman bearing a child was an immoral thing???

Even the pope is looking into changing the concept of Limbo.

And could you point out exactly where the Church has said that the Limbus Infantum was anything other than a thelogical discussion point.

As for Jesus proclaiming these teachings, he didn’t even have anything to say about homosexuality,

Sure He did. The words of Leviticus are the words of Jesus too. He is the exact same God.

then there is the bible, which appears only to have a problem with gay men - there is a shortage of stories about lesbians it would appear.

Under your logic, a parent shouldn’t accept a returning Prodigal Daughter, as only sons were mentioned. Or that a Rich woman should have to give to the poor when following God, as only Rich MEN were mentioned.

Really bad logic there Libero.

 

[frommi]

Brendan:

Truth on Faith and Morals is Objective. It cannot vary by personal perspective.

Actually one of the great challenges of understanding truth is not letting our personal perspective get in the way.

We can’t get into this idea that we carry the truth around in our back pocket.

And in my experience, as soon as someone says they are following the ‘truth’, it means they don’t have anything intelligent left to say