I
irenaeus1
Guest
This makes no sense. Please clarify.
In Christ,
Irenaeus
SanFrancisco bishop Thinks Gay Propaganda Film Brokeback Mountain is "Very Powerful"
- Status
In Christ,
Irenaeus
I
irenaeus1
Guest
You just asked if estesbob thought he was naive with regard to Catholic understanding. Sounds like you held him in high esteem???
In Christ,
Irenaeus
E
estesbob
Guest
I personally have to step back from the heated rhetoric for a minute and acknowledge that this has become , in many ways. a pile on Libero thread. I regret the tone of some of my replies to him and espcecially regret my crack about his age.
My fear is that in my(our) strident defense of Church teachings WE are goingh to push Libero away from the Church as much as his disatisfaction with the teachings of the Church on homosexual behavior will.
In my circle of friends and acquaintainces the Church’s teachings on homosexual behavior are accepted and understood. In Liberos’ world (in school) stateing that homosexual behavior is immoral would be akin to declaring the world is flat or the sun revolves around the earth.
So naturally Libero is going to question what he has been taught and to his credit has researched the issue in his library-unfortunately a library that would hold to the “homosexual behavior is OK” school of thought.
The point I have been trying to make is that the research has been done for us. The One True Church, the Church founded by Jesus Christ himself, has told us that homosexual behavior is gravely disordered and a geivious sin. When Christ left this world he did not do do with an admonition that everyone born in the future had to figure everything out for themselves. He left a Church to guide them in following the TRUTH.
The problem is sometimes the TRUTH is hard to follow. I have people very close to me that are homosexauls and i love them dearly in spite of their sin(just as they love me in spite of my sins). But just becuase I love them does not mean I have to(or should) show accpetance of their behavior. Its wrong and they know I consider it wrong. If I condone or accept their behavior , even if just by my silence, i am complict in their sin-I know the TRUTH and have to share it.
So Libero you go ahead and study and go ahead and question and go ahead and argue. Hopefully you will find, like I did, that when i questioned a Church teaching it was not the teaching that was wrong-it was my understaning of it. Understanding comes through the Church.
My fear is that in my(our) strident defense of Church teachings WE are goingh to push Libero away from the Church as much as his disatisfaction with the teachings of the Church on homosexual behavior will.
In my circle of friends and acquaintainces the Church’s teachings on homosexual behavior are accepted and understood. In Liberos’ world (in school) stateing that homosexual behavior is immoral would be akin to declaring the world is flat or the sun revolves around the earth.
So naturally Libero is going to question what he has been taught and to his credit has researched the issue in his library-unfortunately a library that would hold to the “homosexual behavior is OK” school of thought.
The point I have been trying to make is that the research has been done for us. The One True Church, the Church founded by Jesus Christ himself, has told us that homosexual behavior is gravely disordered and a geivious sin. When Christ left this world he did not do do with an admonition that everyone born in the future had to figure everything out for themselves. He left a Church to guide them in following the TRUTH.
The problem is sometimes the TRUTH is hard to follow. I have people very close to me that are homosexauls and i love them dearly in spite of their sin(just as they love me in spite of my sins). But just becuase I love them does not mean I have to(or should) show accpetance of their behavior. Its wrong and they know I consider it wrong. If I condone or accept their behavior , even if just by my silence, i am complict in their sin-I know the TRUTH and have to share it.
So Libero you go ahead and study and go ahead and question and go ahead and argue. Hopefully you will find, like I did, that when i questioned a Church teaching it was not the teaching that was wrong-it was my understaning of it. Understanding comes through the Church.
I
irenaeus1
Guest
It is absolutely irrelevant whether the Church has “other appeal than just it’s teaching” if it is seriously deluded and deceiving. This is the only other conclusion that one can have if the Church is not infallible as she claims to be. Please explain how the Church can be at all appealing if she is either unintentionally deceitful (because she sincerely believes that she is infallible when in actuality she is not) or intentionally deceitful (in which case she is a liar).
In Christ,
Irenaeus
L
Libero
Guest
I do, naive is not always a bad thing, besides, being naive does not mean you are not intellignet. Also, I asked, I did not state, besides, this topic has turned very sour - I am guilty of having being mean, and so are others, but I wont name names
L
Libero
Guest
Thankyou, I am torn between two very different worlds, my school/ social life, where morals are a completely foreign concept, and then this life - where morals are the life - and there are only one set of morals.
I have also long mantained that the type of American Catholicism is very different from British Catholicism, maybe the Brits will understand where I am coming from?
God has sent me down this path for a reason…
I do not believe any church is infallible, or any religion for that matter, as we are humans, and the human nature of the church makes it not infallible. Does that mean I should be excluded from any religious practice what so ever? I bought Professor Kung’s book “Infallible” a little while ago, but have yet to read it, I think it shall prove to be interesting.
Appealing, compared to others, I could choose to join an Anglican or Methodist Church, but I don’t want to, The RCC has so many other appeals, like it’s size, the diverse people, it’s history etc.
E
estesbob
Guest
Here the problem with not accepting the infalibiltiy of Church teachings. Lets say i decide the Church’s teachnig on contraception is wrong. Well if their teachings on contraception are wrong how do i know that anything else they teach is right?? Is Christ physically present in the Eucharist. The Church says he is but how do i know that is true? If they lied to me about contraception how do i know they are not lying to me about the “real presence” ? How do I know they are not lying to me about Abortion? About Salvation?
When we pick and choose the doctrines we want to believe we undermine our Faith. It is important to note that the doctrines most often questioned on the ones that our secular society attacks on a daily basis. It is hard to adhere to the TRUTH when the rest of society is loudly telling you you are wrong. Pointing out the sinfullenss of hmosexual behavior makes one a pariah in many segments of todays culture. No one likes to be a pariah so rather than stick to the truh we waffle. In the end you have to ask yourself-who am I going to trust? Man or the One True Church founded by Jesus Christ? it was not an easy path but i have come to realize that the latter is ALWAYS the way to go.
I
irenaeus1
Guest
You haven’t answered the question. Since you have admitted that you do not believe the Church to be infallible (which the Church claims herself to be with regard to teachings on faith and morals), then why would you willingly and knowingly want to belong to a deceptive organization. And I’m sure you know that Kung has been censured by the Church as a Catholic theologian.
If these are whom you are seeking out, are you also seeking out books and correspondents with bishops that actually teach in conformity with Church teaching? You didn’t name the books or the bishops, so I don’t know whether they are dissident are not.
Also, human nature does not preclude the Church from being infallible anymore than the NT writings being written by humans preclude them from being inspired. Remember, the church is the pillar and foundation of truth. If some church somewhere is not infallible, then what is this passage referring to.
In Christ,
Irenaeus
L
Libero
Guest
Look to Christ, and look to his word. I would assume that you think the bible is of greater importance than the Catechism. Think, what would Christ make of abortion? Do not think What does the pope make of abortion.
There should also be a gut instinct, educate yourself in a matter, find out all you can, and then confront it. How do I really feel, is contraception right? Or do I know that really, it is not?
You will know - God knows, and it is through our hearts that God works…
But you see, to me, issues of homosexuality are not God. They are not religion, I think “Why is it that God is so against homosexuality” - and I cannot come up with an answer, yet I can for abortion, and for killing, and for teachings on charity, in my mind, there are alarm bells ringing when I read about our religions stance on homosexuality.
To me, homosexuality plays a really insignificant part, who represents Christianity to me.
Is it Ian Paisley or Cardinal O’Connor, who furiously condemn gays and stick to the letter of the bible precisely. - NO
It is people like Blessed Mother Teresa and H.E. Jacques Gaillot, the people who are not afraid to leave their offices and to live with the poor, to save the people, to defend the immigrants, to associate themselves with societies outcasts. Religion lives in them - they are Christianity.
Who’s comments do I respect more?
Cardinal Arinze with: “Homosexuals mock society” or
Mother Teresa with: “I see God in every human being. when I wash the leper’s wounds, I feel I am nursing the Lord himself. Is it not a beautiful experience?”
The answer is simple. To me, Christianity is not about condemning the undesirables and the sinners, but about welcoming them with open arms, and loving them for who they are. It is about sharing Christs love with everyone, without any conditions, as opposed to refining the catechism in a Vatican office.
There will be many things you can pick at in this comment, some of my statements will be wrong, but really, it does not matter to me, I have no interest in telling gays to change, I want to help those who really need it, and be able to feel only good about myself, - I better stop now, I am struggling to put my feelings into anymore words - but, do you get my drift?
L
Libero
Guest
Yes, I am well aware of Professor Kung’s reputation, but he is still a priest, still a man who is devoted to obtaining world peace, and he is still very intelligent, he still holds a university chair as well.
His Emminence Dr. Cormac Cardinal Murphy O’Connor - Archbishop of Westminster. You may consider him somewhat dissident, but I like him - he is a great person, and one who I would defend furiously - you may have noticed that in the “lets get Cardinal Murphy O’Connor thread”.
I have a fundamental problem with the infallible claim, it is that humans wrote the bible, and humans head the church. My problem is that all humans are flawed, so how can a church that was founded and is run by humans, using a book that was written by humans claim to be infallible? - Note, I may be willing to change on this matter, I am no expert here
I
irenaeus1
Guest
Do you not see the fallacy in your own logic. You say to go to the bible, yet since Christ doesn’t teach directly on the issue of abortion, you resort to a philosophy of what do you think Christ would make of abortion. While I agree with you on what I believe Christ would make of abortion, Frances Kissling and Catholics for Free Choice would not. And they would take your instruction to look at the Bible without the benefit of the Catechism (which helps ensure that one is interpreting the Bible in light of Apostolic Tradition) and claim that you are wrong and they are right in believing that abortion is morally acceptable and that Jesus never addressed the issue. See what is wrong with this process.
In Christ,
Irenaeus
I
irenaeus1
Guest
Therein lies the problem. Your ability to come up with an answer has no relevance as to whether a particular teaching is correct or not. YEs, please research… please investigate, but never presume that you are the one that is correct merely because you do not understand the “why.”
Why is God so against it? Does it matter? Scripture is clear on this matter, so does it matter. I suppose that fornication is acceptable to you, or do you KNOW why God is against this, but not homosexual activity?
In Christ,
Irenaeus
L
Libero
Guest
Christ did teach on killing though did he not? Abortion is merely mutated killing, using a pervese science to assert superiority and bring about death. Would Christ support this? I think a pro choice person would struggle greatly to try and overcome this point - even with the “Christ didn’t mention it” point.
I
irenaeus1
Guest
These statements are not mutually exclusive.
Wow! This is quite telling… it does not matter to you whether your above statement are right or wrong - amazing. And you have a very truncated view of Christianity if you believe condemnation has no part of it. There is plenty of admonishing and condemning in the NT alone. Again, why is it either/or for you rather than as the Bible teaches - both/and.The answer is simple. To me, Christianity is not about condemning the undesirables and the sinners, but about welcoming them with open arms, and loving them for who they are. It is about sharing Christs love with everyone, without any conditions, as opposed to refining the catechism in a Vatican office.
There will be many things you can pick at in this comment, some of my statements will be wrong, but really, it does not matter to me, I have no interest in telling gays to change, I want to help those who really need it, and be able to feel only good about myself, - I better stop now, I am struggling to put my feelings into anymore words - but, do you get my drift?
In Christ,
Irenaeus
L
Libero
Guest
Well, I am a stubborn old mule… (nope, I aint changing)
Clearly I am going to be the percet quasi - Catholic, you can take the condemning part, and I can take the helping part
I
irenaeus1
Guest
And?..
So you have problems with the Bible, too?I have a fundamental problem with the infallible claim, it is that humans wrote the bible, and humans head the church. My problem is that all humans are flawed, so how can a church that was founded and is run by humans, using a book that was written by humans claim to be infallible? - Note, I may be willing to change on this matter, I am no expert here
In Christ,
Irenaeus
I
irenaeus1
Guest
No… I take both.Well, I am a stubborn old mule… (nope, I aint changing)
Clearly I am going to be the percet quasi - Catholic, you can take the condemning part, and I can take the helping part
In Christ,
Irenaeus
L
Libero
Guest
I have no quarell with that -
Well I thought you had already got that one.
???
I
irenaeus1
Guest
Jesus taught concerning murder, not mere killing. And that’s the issue, if it’s not a ‘person’, then abortion is not murder. And that is just it - a supposedly pro-choice Catholic does not struggle with this because they follow the same philosophy that you are proposing; that is, ignore the Catechism (because that would point you to the interpretation of Scripture advocated by Tradition) and interpret the Bible in accordance with one’s preconceived theology.
In Christ,
Irenaeus
L
Libero
Guest
But the Catholic church teaches that all life begins at conception, against the prevailing scientific opinion, therefore, it is really a person, thus it is murder.
- Status