Stable gay relationship is better than a 'temporary' one, says Cardinal Schönborn [CH-UK]
- Status
N
Neofight
Guest
He has a point.
M
Murmurs
Guest
From the point of view of the welfare of the child, I am sure he’s correct. And really, in this kind of situation that is what has to matter more than anything else.
(It’s not really an argument for same-sex marriage; just that, as is patently obvious, a stable-relationship same-sex couple have just as much potential to be good parents as any other).
(It’s not really an argument for same-sex marriage; just that, as is patently obvious, a stable-relationship same-sex couple have just as much potential to be good parents as any other).
S
SWolf
Guest
And cutting off your leg is better than slitting your throat.
Can’t we just avoid both?
Z
zamyrabyrd
Guest
Right!
R
Regina7
Guest
No, they don’t have the same potential to be good parents because there is a HUGE gap- that kid is missing either a mother or father. Growing up in a divorced home should show the cardinal what missing a parent (full time) is like. Kids in same sex household are the same- either missing mom or dad. Having an extra mom or dad does not make up for not having the other.
Z
zamyrabyrd
Guest
It’s amazing how a clergyman has the nerve to write this but please pay attention to the end:
*"It must be recognised that this person took an important step for his own good and the good of others, even though it certainly is not a situation the Church can consider ‘regular’.”
*
Why not ‘regular’? Because these unions particularly of men are notorious for being ‘open’. The safety valve for two non-complimentary sexes is the possibility of letting off steam outside. The extra promiscuity plus probable, not just possible, attraction to young boys are other red flags why same sex couples should not be allowed to adopt children or contrive to produce them by artificial insemination.
M
marymary1975
Guest
S
Seamus_L
Guest
It’s just a gradual watering down of Catholic teaching on homosexuality.
Z
zamyrabyrd
Guest
Not acceptable AT ALL!!!
Z
zz912
Guest
From the article:
The Church’s ministers, the cardinal said, **should recognise what is good **where it is found. For example, he said, a civil marriage is better than simply living together, because it signifies a couple has made a formal, public commitment to one another. “Instead of talking about everything that is missing, we can draw close to this reality, noting what is positive in this love that is establishing itself.”
Cardinal Schönborn spoke in the interview about a gay friend of his who, after many temporary relationships, is now in a stable relationship. **“It’s an improvement,” he said. They share “a life, they share their joys and sufferings, they help one another. It must be recognised that this person took an important step for his own good **and the good of others, even though it certainly is not a situation the Church can consider ‘regular’.”
The Church’s negative “judgment about homosexual acts is necessary”, he said, “but the Church should not look in the bedroom first, but in the dining room! It must accompany people.”
The cardinal is saying that a homosexual union is good.
Let’s not kid ourselves. This is an attempt to ok homosexual acts and unions. Notice the language he uses, “irregular” and “regular” instead of sinful and holy.
The Church’s ministers, the cardinal said, **should recognise what is good **where it is found. For example, he said, a civil marriage is better than simply living together, because it signifies a couple has made a formal, public commitment to one another. “Instead of talking about everything that is missing, we can draw close to this reality, noting what is positive in this love that is establishing itself.”
Cardinal Schönborn spoke in the interview about a gay friend of his who, after many temporary relationships, is now in a stable relationship. **“It’s an improvement,” he said. They share “a life, they share their joys and sufferings, they help one another. It must be recognised that this person took an important step for his own good **and the good of others, even though it certainly is not a situation the Church can consider ‘regular’.”
The Church’s negative “judgment about homosexual acts is necessary”, he said, “but the Church should not look in the bedroom first, but in the dining room! It must accompany people.”
The cardinal is saying that a homosexual union is good.
Let’s not kid ourselves. This is an attempt to ok homosexual acts and unions. Notice the language he uses, “irregular” and “regular” instead of sinful and holy.
C
CaptFun
Guest
So has a suppository. But it’s hard to grasp, going to a dark place, and at best likely to produce “fruit” that’s best gotten rid of quickly.Sorry for the penetrating imagery - but the word “gay” precedes the word “Cardinal” by eight words in the headline - and since the two words are together without any sign of ***spiritual counsel to the spiritually “at risk” *** looking like it’s forthcoming … I fear the Church is, once again, being made the butt of some joke here.
Did he at least get paid for this unsolicited commercial for the “gay community” so that monies might go to struggling single Mom’s (or Dad’s like a friend of mine raising 3 kids)?
Addressing the issue of “patchwork families” via his personal experience might have been directed to a better solution IMO. Obscure utterances or ***easily spun into craziness by an ever “hostile to the Church” press *** – is likely to lead to a “patchwork Church” that cannot or does not guide its children through the dangerous shoals of sin unto heaven … but congratulates itself on doing so half of the time with (analogies): a clearly flawed unqualified helmsperson … because: “it’d be better” than no skipper at all … or a “qualified” flawed one … or a highly idealistic one who fell short … or … or…" :nope:
** - What? Stable? As in "mortal sin free"? Or "mortally sinful to both parties …** BUT** likely to lead LESS partners to hell now because he’s tapered off (or maybe is now only interested in just this ONE person). Given the intentionally obscure IMO wording … I DID jump to the conclusion(s) that:
… this is not a heterosexual relationship;
… that might be on its WAY to becoming a Catholic marriage
… but for some of the financial or social barriers keeping “the couple” from DOING that good thing that they ***really otherwise want to do. ***
If the good Cardinal is addressing an uncharitable behavior he sees in the Church that is preventing some from “coming home” - even then his wording and “teaching” is at least unfortunate due to what it SEEMS to say … or not say … about serious sins. Each teaching he clearly recounts seems to be followed by a big …** BUT!**
OK per the “dining room” vs. the “bedroom” comparison the Cardinal made … he seems to me to be sermonizing the wrong (LESS at risk) people. To those living in an “impossible to reconcile with Church teaching” relationship maybe this example could be reformed to say:
YES! Have a meal together! INSTEAD of … :blushing: well, you know …
U
Usige
Guest
That’s kinda what it seems like. In trying to be pastoral we seem to continue down a path where sin is simply regrettable, but not actually bad. It just makes me sad that so many have embraced a false sense of compassion.
C
Corki
Guest
And a married man having a long-term affair is better than having a one-night stand?
M
Megan7
Guest
Yea, right?
I mean this is the “forever one” you know? Where did I hear that again? 
Compared to the last affair, one night stand, right?Ahhhh, the slippery slope of making everything OK
You are OK, HE is OK, THEY are OK, etc. etc. Everything is being watered down…
Oh, I read of a couple of cases where men adopted boys, and abused them later on
But, since the “couple” is in a “stable relationship” it makes it all better What about when they adopt teenage boys, umm??? What could go wrong there???We are definitely in the Valley of tears!
With every MORTAL SIN treated as “it is ALL OK” we are just piercing Our Blessed Lords Heart over & over again!!! :bighanky:
Lord have Mercy on us ALL!!
May Our Blessed Mother & Saint Michael the Archangel keep us safe!
+PAX
J
JimG
Guest
Perhaps the theory is that for a pederast to bring boys into his home is an improved situation over an orphanage…Yea, right?
Ahhhh, the slippery slope of making everything OK
Everything is being watered down…
Oh, I read of a couple of cases where men adopted boys, and abused them later on
We are definitely in the Valley of tears!
With every MORTAL SIN treated as “it is ALL OK” we are just piercing Our Blessed Lords Heart over & over again!!! :bighanky:
Lord have Mercy on us ALL!!
May Our Blessed Mother & Saint Michael the Archangel keep us safe!
+PAX
What’s wrong is wrong.
R
Robert_Bay
Guest
MODERATOR NOTE
The charity level of this thread needs to improve
The charity level of this thread needs to improve
H
HCTC
Guest
Cardinal Christoph Schönborn, Archbishop of Vienna, is a very accomplished individual who studied under Fr. Joseph Rarzinger (later Pope Benedict XVI) and with him co-edited the Catechism of the Catholic Church. He has been a Bishop for 24 years and a Cardinal for 17 years, In addition to his native German, Cardinal Schönborn is fluent in French and Italian, and proficient in English, Spanish and Latin. He also speaks Czech. He lived for several years in France and French-speaking Switzerland, and speaks French at a near-native level.
In my humble opinion, the views that Cardinal Schönborn expresses in the interview that we are discussing are both intelligently nuanced and come from a very relevant historical perspective.
In my humble opinion, the views that Cardinal Schönborn expresses in the interview that we are discussing are both intelligently nuanced and come from a very relevant historical perspective.
C
ComplineSanFran
Guest
The Cardinal is speaking very pastorally as well as historically. The one image I took away from this report was that he wanted us to look at families and how people love and care for each other.
[his friends] share “a life, they share their joys and sufferings, they help one another. It must be recognised that this person took an important step for his own good and the good of others, even though it certainly is not a situation the Church can consider ‘regular’.”
“but the Church should not look in the bedroom first, but in the dining room! It must accompany people.”
How can we not meet people around the table? That invitation is from Christ himself. These are our brothers and sisters in Christ. Share a meal, learn how they create family together. I totally understand what the Cardinal is saying to us.
[his friends] share “a life, they share their joys and sufferings, they help one another. It must be recognised that this person took an important step for his own good and the good of others, even though it certainly is not a situation the Church can consider ‘regular’.”
“but the Church should not look in the bedroom first, but in the dining room! It must accompany people.”
How can we not meet people around the table? That invitation is from Christ himself. These are our brothers and sisters in Christ. Share a meal, learn how they create family together. I totally understand what the Cardinal is saying to us.
H
HCTC
Guest
My understanding of a “pastoral approach” is informed primarily by parables in the Bible and my own abductive reasoning so I am feeling unsure of the real meaning of references to it. I think that a “pastoral approach” describes a set of behaviors by which priests, bishops, cardinals, and the Pope make an effort to know and consider the real life situations that are impacting the lives of the their Catholic flock.
Cardinal Schönborn says: “We are all called to observe the situation, not gazing from above and beginning with abstract ideas, but with the gaze of pastors who scrutinize today’s reality in an evangelical spirit." I am concluding that Cardinal Schönborn’s point is that taking an abstract approach to discussing family excludes the harsh realities that families face - adult men and women but especially children. A pastoral approach would take care to appreciate fine point distinctions of detail and complexity having to do with meaningfulness and value.
I would appreciate any clarification or correction (from anyone) if I am mistaken.
- Status