C
cornbread_r2
Guest
Quotes from a judge and other professionals in the field mean nothing. Ignore it. BTW, is Dr. Rekers’s research being used in any other trials lately? I can’t seem to find any citations.
- Status
K
karoleck
Guest
I did not call you Judas; but if the cap fits wear it! I justy mentioned it within the idea that not everyone who calls out “Lord”,“Lord” is a practising catholic believer.I thank you for your background info. May I trouble you for a link so that I may read this info on my own.
As for Judas comment, I’ve been called worse by better people (See InSoG post)
The Act of Faith prayer states–" I believe all that the Catholic Church** believes **and teaches—’’ We as catholics , do not belong to a “roll your own version”;that is how The Protestant Churches cut themselves away from The Holy Catholic Church.
That link belongs to a paper given out in Mexico City by the learned expert’s followers.
Here is another link about this issue.If you read down the page there is a sub-title which reads-
"Every child needs a mum and a dad
This is about that a child needs not what some adults want!
This is what the crux of this issue is about–not placating some adult relatives(I have a “gay” person in my extented family and I treat that person with all the love and respect as I treat all my family;but that does not mean I have to approve of the chosen lifestyle acted out!)
orthodoxytoday.org/articles/DaileyGayAdopt.php
K
karoleck
Guest
A court of Law might bring down a verdict that the moon is green ;but this does not alter the fact that the actual colour of the moon is yellow!
calcatholic.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?id=ab3efae8-b9bf-4269-828b-13604acaa059
B
Boulder257
Guest
I have a gay “married” sister with a child and I would say that agreeing with and upholding Church teaching IS showing compassion. I would rather a person suffer for a limited time here on Earth, bearing their cross and growing with the Lord, rather than suffer an eternity because they chose not to head God’s law, warnings, and teachings. Not only that, but we have a responsibility to look out for those that we love. To ignore this is to put ourselves and them at risk of losing their share in heavenly rewards. I would say it is pretty compassionate to show someone you care about them by caring about their eternal happiness more than worrying about offending their earthly/worldly desires.
B
Birdpreacher
Guest
I am not calling you a less compassionate person. If anything I am commenting on how much wiser you are than I for being able to comprehend the Church’s teaching on the issue.
I am human and the Church’s teachings are expansive, encompassing so many topics. I am struggling with the Church’s teaching on SSA because I am a human. I doubt that most people understand 100% of what the Church teaches on everything. I do not doubt that most Catholics submit to the Church’s teachings.
Please do not take my post as an attack on your stance. If anything I admire your ability to uphold Church doctrine in the midst of your own personal situations. I will pray for you and your family.
B
Boulder257
Guest
I think this is very well said!!! I also think it’s important to remember that a personl can struggle with a certain teaching while still submitting to the authority of the Church. None of is told to blindly follow. We all have those things that we can easily accept, easily understand, and easily agree with. We all probably struggled with something at some point, are struggling now, or will struggle in the future. It doesn’t take away from our Catholicity (did I just make that word up or does it really exists?!?!??).
B
Birdpreacher
Guest
I agree but there is a difference between “practicing” and “perfect”. On the road to holiness we all encounter struggles and burdens which we most overcome through the guidance of Holy Mother Church and the Communion ofSaints.
Thank you for the additional link. I just want to clarify something on my statements on having gay relatives. By bringing up gay relatives I just wanted to explain what causes my confusion on the Church’s teaching on SSA.
I am not saying that having gay relatives should/ would cause someone to have the same issues with Church teaching. Obviously you and other posters are very capable of adhering to Church teachings seamlessly. I commend you for your faith and ask that you pray for me.
B
Boulder257
Guest
E
Elizabeth502
Guest
I’m sorry for my miscommunication. I actually didn’t think that you were calling me personally a less compassionate person, merely that your “but” statement implied to me that having a family member with SSA would logically make it difficult to support Church teachings on sexuality. (And this is a common view among Catholics.) I disagree with that view.
Thank you, but I think you’re being far too generous to me. I wouldn’t classify it as “wisdom,” but rather an ability to distinguish between the behavior of others and how I’m commanded to respond to that behavior. IOW, I “get it,” intellectually. That does not mean that when someone behaves like a rude jerk to me in person, I respond the way a Christian is commanded to (just because I understand it intellectually). Someone else having SSA, or acting on that SSA, does not present an offense to me personally (unlike the rude jerk!), unless the former demands my approval, whereas the latter wounds pride and sets into gear a spontaneous defense mechanism for most people.
Back to SSA and moral theology in general: If I were to let my emotions interfere with my ability to make moral discernments, I would be giving off very confusing signals, and at some point the lines would blur so much I would lose the ability to make those discernments. Too much of publicly discussed morality in modern America is emotion-driven; that extends far beyond sexuality. And that emotion-laden discussion is picked up by Catholics, instead of their being formed as a priority by the Church’s views, against which secular discussions (including all those emotionally-laden ones) are then measured and modified.
I mean, if you had a relative who was committing different immoral acts, you would feel “challenged” by the Church’s moral absolutes? Why? If they were cohabiting, suddenly it would cause you to question the teaching on exclusively marital sexuality? Or if they admitted cheating on their taxes (to a gross degree), you would think that the Seventh Commandment should be an exception for them? Because you “love” them?
Jesus said, “If you love me, Keep My Commandments.”
You see, this is where the internal “logic” of this kind of thinking falls apart, and makes me (and many others) suspect that it’s really not about family relationships (or friendships) being “the problem.” It’s about this one area of moral theology being supposedly subject to variation; it tells me that there is a lack of conviction on the part of such a Catholic about that teaching, because in no other areas do they register such a degree of doubt and exceptionalism. I would not call it moral relativism. What it is, is Exceptionalism based on emotion.
I think maybe a better word than ‘expansive’ is comprehensive? Because the former implies that the Church is simply ‘all over the map,’ whereas the latter suggests a woven together, integrated theology, which is precisely what it is. It’s not deconstructible; it’s cohesive. That’s the other part that makes no sense about Exceptionalism. Take my example about the rude jerk. Emotion “permits” me to make an exception for the commandment of charity: someone just attacked my feelings, my ‘personhood,’ as it were, challenging that equal personhood, and wounding me. That ‘exceptional thinking’ is just as illogical as saying that the teaching on homosexuality should be a “personal” challenge for me because I have personal friends acquaintances, relatives with this problem. Unless I’m confused about where my responsibilities lie and his responsibilities lie, then there should be no confusion or challenge. My responsibilities lie with my behavior toward those people: am I accepting, caring, compassionate, with the same level of non-reservation as I am with people whose behavior the Church approves of, I approve of, etc.? Disapproval does not mean rejection. And acceptance does not mean approval. Different animals. Gosh, if I didn’t understand those distinctions, I would find it impossible to parent!
Well, surveys of Catholics reveal that most Catholics do not submit to Church teachings on some very core areas.
I didn’t,
, but thank you anyway.Thank you again; that’s very kind. (And wise. I think you shortchange yourself, perhaps.)
Remember that you don’t need to “feel” perfect assent with doctrine. Who does??? Lots of times, for lots of us (and depending on the issue), it’s a matter of The Will, not the emotional response to the doctrine. I don’t know that I call that “wisdom” (in myself). I call that adequate catechesis.
E
Elizabeth502
Guest
^ Correction! I meant Exceptionism, not Exceptionalism.
Or maybe I didn’t.
“Exceptional” can denote good or bad exceptions, but commonly connotes good. I meant it as a neutral descriptor, naturally.
Or maybe I didn’t.
“Exceptional” can denote good or bad exceptions, but commonly connotes good. I meant it as a neutral descriptor, naturally.
J
John21652
Guest
Well said.
Rolling over on an issue like this, just because a relative has crossed the moral divide is not showing anyone the right path. It condones what is anathema to right living and undermines the entire philosophical and theological base of Christianity, as Elizabeth502 has so eloquently explained. Rolling over on an issue such as this is akin to excusing the wayward behaviour of a child simply because it’s your child.
S
sharptiger999
Guest
Marriage is a tradition since the beginning of recorded history. Why should the state (you) get in the way of anyone voluntarily making a contract? I’m with Ron Paul in that the government needs to get out of our lives. You don’t own me and I don’t own you.
J
John21652
Guest
Because some contracts are not in the national interest, is why.
K
karoleck
Guest
My friend,thank you for your comments but to quote st.Phillip Neri “Nay,but for the grace of God go I”
You asked me about real stories to back up my claims about the ninety nine who fall by the wayside,here is a quotation from **Bill Muehlenberg **from his recent book called Strained Relations:The Challenge of Homosexuality.(he is not a catholic)
In my recent book, Strained Relations: The Challenge of Homosexuality, I have thoroughly documented how children suffer as a result of the homosexual agenda being forced on society. And I quote plenty of homosexuals themselves who acknowledge just how destructive their lifestyle choices can be.
Let me offer a few paragraphs from that book: “One woman who was raised by lesbians now runs a support and recovery program for those coming out of the homosexual lifestyle and their families.
“She put it this way: ‘I realise that homosexuals feel they can give a child love and support that even many straight families can’t provide, but I’ve been there. I know the finger-pointing and the shame one carries. For years, you struggle with the thought that you might be a homosexual. People say “like mother, like daughter”. Most of us become promiscuous to prove we’re straight.’
“Another woman says this of her upbringing by two homosexuals: ‘From 40 years of experience, I can tell you that, even though my father loved me, his homosexual orientation handicapped my ability to learn to relate to life in a healthy way. My homosexual home stunted my growth as a person and as a woman, not to mention the damaging effect of 16 years of drugs and alcohol abuse on my early childhood development. I spent the first 20 years of my life in a family that nearly destroyed me and the last 20 years analysing and being analysed in order to make sense of it.
“The bottom line is: I was dearly loved by my father. His love alone was not enough to give me the foundation that I needed to grow into a secure young woman…. My father and I have looked back through the past and discussed the issue of homosexual parenting. With great remorse, he agrees the homosexual lifestyle, no matter how conservative, is not healthy for children. My father and I agree: homosexuality and raising healthy children exclude each other.’
“Or consider the tragic case of a 12-year-old Melbourne boy who has run away from home five times. The reason? He refuses to live with his mother and her lesbian partner. The boy’s father has repeatedly been denied access to the child, and the boy has threatened to kill himself as a result.
“And finally, someone who can speak from experience in this area. A lesbian mother has publicly expressed her regret at bearing three children through artificial insemination. The New Zealand woman, who says she is ‘now in the process of becoming a heterosexual’, had a stormy relationship with her lesbian lover, which eventually broke down.
“Her comments are worth noting: ‘I realise now that I deprived my kids of their right to a father, and I see the hurt in their faces every day…. I believe children should have the best opportunities in life. The best way they can have a balanced view of what is normal is with heterosexual parents’.” (Quoted in Strained Relations, pp.134-135).
K
karoleck
Guest
You have the correct approach–as the saying goes “Love the sinner but not the sin”
The official Vatican stance on the issue, annunciated by Cardinal Josef Raztinger in 1992, twelve years before he became pope.
As head of the Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, which protects Church teaching, Ratzinger wrote that “’Sexual orientation’ does not constitute a quality comparable to race, ethnic background, etc. in respect to non-discrimination. Unlike these, homosexual orientation is an objective disorder (cf. ‘Letter,’ No. 3) and evokes moral concern.”
He added, “Including ‘homosexual orientation’ among the considerations on the basis of which it is illegal to discriminate can easily lead to regarding homosexuality as a positive source of human rights, for example, in respect to so-called affirmative action or preferential treatment in hiring practices. This is all the more deleterious since there is no right to homosexuality (cf. No. 10) which therefore should not form the basis for judicial claims.”
Bishop Luiz Gonzaga Bergonzini, a pro-life leader among Brazilian Catholic bishops, told ACI Digital in an interview today that the new language inserted into the homophobia bill does not redeem it in his eyes.
(the devil’s arm is a long one and is reaching far and wide,even to Brazil)
Bishops Luiz’s interview----
“Every year 105,000 Christians are killed, only for professing their faith in Jesus Christ. Can you imagine if 105,000 homosexuals were killed every year? What would be the reaction of governments and society? There is no difference between human persons, men or women, the homosexual male human person or the female homosexual. The penal code establishes all of the penalties for crimes of aggression, homicide, and other wounds to the human body. There is no necessity of any new law to protect people in that sense.”
“If the bill talks about ‘liberty of conscience, belief and religion, there is also need to create an equal law for Christians, who are attacked and insulted, as happened on Paulista Avenue, with the public attacks on Catholic saints by homosexuals,” he added, referring to the mockery of Christianity by homosexuals during the annual gay parade in Sao Paulo.
Contact information
National Conference of Brazilian Bishops
M
marymary1975
Guest
Well I wonder if anybody has analized the content itself of this kid’s speech instead of looking at the overall picture, because if you do you will notice how he is affected by being raised by lesbians. First he states that his family is just any other, they have dinner together, vacations and sometimes fight. That statement shows that he is entirely confussed because he is family IS NOT like a heterosexual family because interactions between men and women are compeltely different: He doesn’t know that! He has never ever lived in a different family and all he knows is the world in which he has lived so far, therefore that shows how unexperienced and inmature he is. He will obviously face in the future problems trying to establish a relationship because he hasn’t realized yet that interactions between man and woman are different. Another statement, he said it was cool that he and his sister are full blood siblings. Excuse me! I wonder if he realizes that most people do have full siblings. His statement to me sounds like asking a ten year old about something he doesn’t know and just coming out with “cool” because he doesn’t know what else to say.
I think everybody with this video is letting the emotional part of oh he is defending his family influence their thinking and they are not paying attention to what the kid is saying. If you pay attention to the content of his words and think about it you will find out that he is more screwed than what many think. He does it because he doesn’t know anything different but analyze him and you will see how erred he is.
I think everybody with this video is letting the emotional part of oh he is defending his family influence their thinking and they are not paying attention to what the kid is saying. If you pay attention to the content of his words and think about it you will find out that he is more screwed than what many think. He does it because he doesn’t know anything different but analyze him and you will see how erred he is.
N
ndeparis88
Guest
Elizabeth502;8663665 said:
immoral acts, you would feel “challenged” by the Church’s moral absolutes? Why? If they were cohabiting, suddenly it would cause you to question the teaching on exclusively marital sexuality? Or if they admitted cheating on their taxes (to a gross degree), you would think that the Seventh Commandment should be an exception for them? Because you “love” them?
Jesus said, “If you love me, Keep My Commandments.”
You see, this is where the internal “logic” of this kind of thinking falls apart, and makes me (and many others) suspect that it’s really not about family relationships (or friendships) being “the problem.” It’s about this one area of moral theology being supposedly subject to variation; it tells me that there is a lack of conviction on the part of such a Catholic about that teaching, because in no other areas do they register such a degree of doubt and exceptionalism. I would not call it moral relativism. What it is, is Exceptionalism based on emotion.
I think maybe a better word than ‘expansive’ is comprehensive? Because the former implies that the Church is simply ‘all over the map,’ whereas the latter suggests a woven together, integrated theology, which is precisely what it is. It’s not deconstructible; it’s cohesive. That’s the other part that makes no sense about Exceptionalism. Take my example about the rude jerk. Emotion “permits” me to make an exception for the commandment of charity: someone just attacked my feelings, my ‘personhood,’ as it were, challenging that equal personhood, and wounding me. That ‘exceptional thinking’ is just as illogical as saying that the teaching on homosexuality should be a “personal” challenge for me because I have personal friends acquaintances, relatives with this problem. Unless I’m confused about where my responsibilities lie and his responsibilities lie, then there should be no confusion or challenge. My responsibilities lie with my behavior toward those people: am I accepting, caring, compassionate, with the same level of non-reservation as I am with people whose behavior the Church approves of, I approve of, etc.? Disapproval does not mean rejection. And acceptance does not mean approval. Different animals. Gosh, if I didn’t understand those distinctions, I would find it impossible to parent!
Well, surveys of Catholics reveal that most Catholics do not submit to Church teachings on some very core areas.
I didn’t,
, but thank you anyway.Thank you again; that’s very kind. (And wise. I think you shortchange yourself, perhaps.)
Remember that you don’t need to “feel” perfect assent with doctrine. Who does??? Lots of times, for lots of us (and depending on the issue), it’s a matter of The Will, not the emotional response to the doctrine. I don’t know that I call that “wisdom” (in myself). I call that adequate catechesis.
I think there is also something in the whole struggling with doctrine we as Catholics do. Sometimes I try to be in another persons shoes to see what are the benefits if any of the argument. There are few times I feel in sync with doctrine, but that’s part of the beauty, it’s that cross that we bear and it really highlights our freedom. I mean as a young adult of the age 23, you can get piked out pretty easy. But if you float along with the waves of the current thought out there, then you give people know reason to want to know more about the Truth, the Truth that Jesus is. It’s easier for you to accept the teaching when you see how it ties in with other things and how deep the rabbit hole goes. When I cam back home to the Church I never knew I could see the beauty that was there. The love that it is. You want to proclaim it on the roof tops but now a days you may the shot down. But most of all I trust it. I trust in the apostolic succession and the infallibility of faith and moral things of the pope. It allows me to have courage to say if I am ever on trial for being a Christian I hope they have enough evidence to convict me. The people who die for Christ who were martyrs didn’t just give themselves up for a heavenly place, it was more than that. Do you really think if it wasn’t all true they would have folded under torture, they didn’t I know some things are hard, but that’s where we find our true strength.
J
John21652
Guest
T
TheRealJuliane
Guest
None of these quotes surprises me at all. In fact as I was reading your post, I was like this
:sad_yes:
This social experiment of homosexuals creating and raising children is already having negative results and we are sure to see a lot more over time.
(I see this book was published in Oz…I wish I could get hold of a copy…
)
J
John21652
Guest
Juliane, go here if you have a credit card. If you haven’t, borrow one!:sad_yes:
This social experiment of homosexuals creating and raising children is already having negative results and we are sure to see a lot more over time.
(I see this book was published in Oz…I wish I could get hold of a copy…
- Status