Senior German Priest Calls Homosexuality a Sickness. A Report

  • Thread starter Thread starter mdgspencer
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Respectfully, I do not also think that’s what Jesus was addressing when He spoke to Peter. This was meant to show the Lord’s (and His Church’s) concern more for the salvation of souls than hurting feelings. The truth is sometimes…
I say this rose321 because I see you talk about the Act and not the persons involved
 
Last edited:
grave issue of
I don’t understand this part. Your saying the Act is not grave or that the church/scripture doesn’t say it is?. Well you have mentioned Leviticus, you’ve I guess come across Rom1 and read the CCC’s teaching and on the Act etc… Apart from this, do continue to pray and Let the Lord Himself reveal just how grave or not the ACT is. (Hope I understood that part of your comment well). Courage!
 
I don’t understand this part. Your saying the Act is not grave or that the church/scripture doesn’t say it is?.
Sorry for poor communication was asking why this issue was not in great detailed mention, taught on by the prophets, Moses, Jesus even in his time…or throughout the whole bible? Jesus himself does not speak greatly on this does he why? Knowing also Jesus was a Hebrew Israelite Jew…but gentles this would all be new to them right? 🤭

This era seems to make it a strong topic issue yet I find it hard to believe this did not also exist in Moses time, Abraham time etc etc…thou no heavy teaching on… why? Maybe because they had a deeper Spiritual understanding to it? Or not an issue…some were born this way?
Not a sin to love someone right?
Did King David not have Johnathon or am I mixed up?

I guess the latter one…scripture does not say it I am pondering on…why?? 🤔

Note also St Paul is speaking to gentles right not Jews, would this be correct? They the gentles not of this faith or belief would not know all this right, what the Jews have known such laws for generations, through their own teaching also?
Just asking is all. Thank you…
 
Last edited:
Scripture does mention homosexuality several times. For example when the angels came to warn Lot about the destruction of Sodom, the men of Sodom came to Lot and told him to “bring the men out, that we may know them.” “Know” was often used in Scripture for the marital act. With regard to David and Johnathan, “love” in this case would be “philia”, or friendship, not “eros”, or sexual attraction. Both are often translated as love (together with two other Greek words).
 
“Know” was often used in Scripture for the marital act.
Thank you for kind reply can one then explain what is written… Joseph did not know Mary until after her first born? confused with your reply …know…

Peace
 
Last edited:
How did Michal not have children until she died?
 
Last edited:
Thank you for kind reply can one then explain what is written… Joseph did not know Mary until after her first born? confused with your reply …know…
This Scripture passage is often used by Protestants to refute the perpetual virginity of Mary. However, to say that “until” in this context means that St. Joseph “knew” Mary after she bore a son doesn’t necessarily follow. A Scriptural example is, as mentioned earlier “Deborah bore no children until the day of her death.” Obviously, she had no children after she died.
 
40.png
rose321:
Thank you for kind reply can one then explain what is written… Joseph did not know Mary until after her first born? confused with your reply …know…
This Scripture passage is often used by Protestants to refute the perpetual virginity of Mary. However, to say that “until” in this context means that St. Joseph “knew” Mary after she bore a son doesn’t necessarily follow. A Scriptural example is, as mentioned earlier “Deborah bore no children until the day of her death.” Obviously, she had no children after she died.
Of course Deborah didn’t have any children after she died because death would make this impossible. But in the case of Joseph, the way the sentence is constructed implies that he did have marital relations with Mary some time after the birth of Jesus. Otherwise, why not have said, “He took her as his wife but never had marital relations with her/never knew her.”

Here are various translations:

NRSV: “he took her as his wife, but had no marital relations with her until she had borne a son.”

King James: “And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son.”

Douay-Rheims: “And he knew her not till she brought forth her firstborn son.”

Most people reading these without any knowledge of the subject would assume based on the construction of the sentence that he had marital relations with her afterwards.

I had never actually read this passage before, so it is definitely interesting. But I’m not sure how this thread got onto this subject.
 
Last edited:
If we go on further, then we should start a different thread, but you forget that the Bible was not written in our language and culture. Within the linguistic and cultural context, all it means is what it explicitly states. If you want to talk more about the Perpetual Virginity, I would be enthusiastic about a new thread on it.
 
But in the case of Joseph, the way the sentence is constructed implies that he did have marital relations with Mary some time after the birth of Jesus.
As an English construct that is right. But the gospels were written in Greek by Hebrews, who spoke Aramaic. Understanding what such phrases meant at the time they were written requires comparison to their contemporary language. As the case of Deborah indicates, this type of phrase implies nothing about anything after the point of “until,” only that something did not occur up to that point.
 
Last edited:
If we talk more about this, it should be on a different thread since this is not the subject of the thread.
 
Last edited:
Can one feel that homosexuals can get married in there own secular way and be catholic?
 
As an English construct that is right. But the gospels were written in Greek by Hebrews, who spoke Aramaic. Understanding what such phrases meant at the time they were written requires comparison to their contemporary language. As the case of Deborah indicates, this type of phrase implies nothing about anything after the point of “until,” only that something did not occur up to that point.
I still don’t have any idea what this verse is about Deborah. The only one similar to the one that EZweber quoted that I can find is 2 Samuel 6:23 which says, “And Michal the daughter of Saul had no child to the day of her death.” But that, of course, is in Hebrew, not Greek, so is irrelevant in understanding Matthew 1: 25.
 
Can one feel that homosexuals can get married in there own secular way and be catholic?
You cannot be a practicing Catholic while in open and knowing defiance of the Church’s teachings. The teaching on homosexuality is infallible and will never be reversed.
 
If we want to continue this topic, we should start a different thread. I will start it if anyone is interested.
 
40.png
Dourbest:
Can one feel that homosexuals can get married in there own secular way and be catholic?
You cannot be a practicing Catholic while in open and knowing defiance of the Church’s teachings. The teaching on homosexuality is infallible and will never be reversed.
According to a Pew Research Survey from last year, 67 percent of Catholics support same-sex marriage, which means that at least two thirds of Catholics must not be “practicing Catholics”.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top