US Bishops Set to Tell Catholics Opposed to Teaching on Abortion or Homosexuality not

  • Thread starter Thread starter WanderAimlessly
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
W

WanderAimlessly

Guest
But will they listen?
**US Bishops Set to Tell Catholics Opposed to Teaching on Abortion or Homosexuality not to Receive Communion
**By John-Henry Westen
WASHINGTON, October 20, 2006 (LifeSiteNews.com) - The U.S. bishops will vote on a proposed document, “Happy Are Those Who Are Called To His Supper: On Preparing To Receive Christ Worthily in the Eucharist” during their annual November meeting in Baltimore, Nov. 13-16.
Better question. Will certain Bishops enforce it?
 
But will they listen? Better question. Will certain Bishops enforce it?
We will soon be inundated with posts from “Catholics:” telling that although this may be binding on pro-abortion Catholic Politicians it most certainly does not apply for those who vote for them.!
 
Interesting timing. It’s after this years congressional election and almost two years ahead of the next Presidential vote (time enough for the excitement to wear down). :rolleyes:
 
Interesting timing. It’s after this years congressional election and almost two years ahead of the next Presidential vote (time enough for the excitement to wear down). :rolleyes:
I think the timing is right. This way they cant be accused of being politcaland it gives most policians two years to come in complance.
 
What if one is opposed to homosexual behavior but feels there is nothing disordered in the orientation? Are we also forbidden to receive the Eucharist? Certainly there is a difference in opinion but no mortal sin involved. This is the compromise I have been trying to live in my life. I can’t afford those highfalutin psychologists who say you can change orientation and then proceed to accept no insurance for treatment. So I have had to resign myself to living with the orientation and being pleased with myself by not acting out.
 
Dear goofyjim,

I am no expert by any means, but I think you are in good standing.
Catechism:
[2357](javascript:openWindow(‘cr/2357.htm’)😉 Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex. It has taken a great variety of forms through the centuries and in different cultures. Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained. Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity,141 tradition has always declared that "homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered."142 They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.

2358 The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible.*** This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial.*** They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. ***These persons are called to fulfill God’s will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord’s Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition. ***
[2359](javascript:openWindow(‘cr/2359.htm’)😉 ***Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection. ***
I think when the Church says “disordered”, She means it in the sense of being against the Natural Order. She does not call those with SSA to change their orientation, though that may be acceptable and perhaps preferred. In fact, as bolded above, She says “the psychological genesis remains largely unexplained.” All She asks is that you live a chaste life.

God bless,

Robert
What if one is opposed to homosexual behavior but feels there is nothing disordered in the orientation? Are we also forbidden to receive the Eucharist? Certainly there is a difference in opinion but no mortal sin involved. This is the compromise I have been trying to live in my life. I can’t afford those highfalutin psychologists who say you can change orientation and then proceed to accept no insurance for treatment. So I have had to resign myself to living with the orientation and being pleased with myself by not acting out.
 
Dear goofyjim,

I am no expert by any means, but I think you are in good standing.

I think when the Church says “disordered”, She means it in the sense of being against the Natural Order. She does not call those with SSA to change their orientation, though that may be acceptable and perhaps preferred. In fact, as bolded above, She says “the psychological genesis remains largely unexplained.” All She asks is that you live a chaste life.

God bless,

Robert
Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained.
I’m so glad you pasted that, here.
I believe in the possibility that SSA could somehow be genetic.
Maybe not every single person, but some.

God Bless!
 
We will soon be inundated with posts from “Catholics:” telling that although this may be binding on pro-abortion Catholic Politicians it most certainly does not apply for those who vote for them.!
But surely that’s obvious. Why would it apply?

Edwin
 
What if one is opposed to homosexual behavior but feels there is nothing disordered in the orientation? Are we also forbidden to receive the Eucharist? Certainly there is a difference in opinion but no mortal sin involved. This is the compromise I have been trying to live in my life. I can’t afford those highfalutin psychologists who say you can change orientation and then proceed to accept no insurance for treatment. So I have had to resign myself to living with the orientation and being pleased with myself by not acting out.
Have you seen the *Courage *web site?
couragerc.net/Clogo4.jpg
 
What if one is opposed to homosexual behavior but feels there is nothing disordered in the orientation? Are we also forbidden to receive the Eucharist? Certainly there is a difference in opinion but no mortal sin involved. This is the compromise I have been trying to live in my life. I can’t afford those highfalutin psychologists who say you can change orientation and then proceed to accept no insurance for treatment. So I have had to resign myself to living with the orientation and being pleased with myself by not acting out.
I think the Church has spoken on this. The orientation is disordered but not sinful unless acted upon.
 
Why Abortion and Homosexuality? Why not every other catholic doctrine too? In fact, I think we should have Catholics fill out questionares before communion, to be turned into the Eucharistic Minister before recieving. If they don’t agree on everything the Church teaches, they are to go back to their seat. Everything from the Divinity of Christ to the Immaculate Conception of Mary to the Immorality of Abortion and Homosexuality to Papal Infallibility to the reality of Purgatory.

If a Catholic doesn’t agree with the whole of Catholicism, they are cafeteria Catholics, right? Time to close the buffet!
 
We will soon be inundated with posts from “Catholics:” telling that although this may be binding on pro-abortion Catholic Politicians it most certainly does not apply for those who vote for them.!

What do “Catholics” who voted for George Bush - who is by no means entirely pro-life - have to say to that ?​

Two can play at this silly game - it’s a very silly one: and very dangerous. All it does is give one lot of Catholics the satisfaction of belittling those whom they (despite not being bishops), see fit to judge as not Catholic at all; and it embitters and tempts those who are judged in what they are likely to see as a less than impartial fashion. And who is sanctified & increased in grace & love & kind-heartedness & long-suffering & graciousness & goodness by attitudes such as those ?

Both are Catholic, both are flawed, both can be accused of self-serving and self-ignorance. Neither is any less Christian for that; because Christ came not for the righteous, but for the unrighteous - and that completely destroys all self-exaltation of others. It leaves no place for self-love, but only for humility toward others. We are all sick, & we all need each other; this is proved by the fact that we are all members of Jesus Christ, despite our shortcomings - perhaps because we are flawed, poor, naked, needy, blind, and wretched: IOW, because of our short-comings ##
 
Take heed Senators Kerry, Kennedy, Durbin, Leahy, etc.
Don’t forget Biden, Smith, Pilosi, Landrieu, Cantwell, P. Kennedy, Mikulski, Murray, Harkin, Dodd, Dingell, Meighan, Rangel, Moran. Some are in the House.
 

What do “Catholics” who voted for George Bush - who is by no means entirely pro-life - have to say to that ?​

Two can play at this silly game - it’s a very silly one: and very dangerous. All it does is give one lot of Catholics the satisfaction of belittling those whom they (despite not being bishops), see fit to judge as not Catholic at all; and it embitters and tempts those who are judged in what they are likely to see as a less than impartial fashion. And who is sanctified & increased in grace & love & kind-heartedness & long-suffering & graciousness & goodness by attitudes such as those ?

Both are Catholic, both are flawed, both can be accused of self-serving and self-ignorance. Neither is any less Christian for that; because Christ came not for the righteous, but for the unrighteous - and that completely destroys all self-exaltation of others. It leaves no place for self-love, but only for humility toward others. We are all sick, & we all need each other; this is proved by the fact that we are all members of Jesus Christ, despite our shortcomings - perhaps because we are flawed, poor, naked, needy, blind, and wretched: IOW, because of our short-comings ##
Theology teaches that if you fail to support the lesser of the two evils, you automaticly give support to the greater of the two evils.
 
Why Abortion and Homosexuality? Why not every other catholic doctrine too? In fact, I think we should have Catholics fill out questionares before communion, to be turned into the Eucharistic Minister before recieving. If they don’t agree on everything the Church teaches, they are to go back to their seat. Everything from the Divinity of Christ to the Immaculate Conception of Mary to the Immorality of Abortion and Homosexuality to Papal Infallibility to the reality of Purgatory.

If a Catholic doesn’t agree with the whole of Catholicism, they are cafeteria Catholics, right? Time to close the buffet!
not sure if you were being sarcastic…but after I read this…I just…:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

However, you forgot one more thing…each marriage couple over the age of 37 will need to answer an essay question on why do we only have 2 children and we have been married for 16 yrs.? How far shall we go with this? Are confessions going to become inquisitions?

After all is said and done…there will be no one left to come to the table to enjoy the buffet. How sad… 😦
 
The US Bishops should have the confidence in their faith to come out against politicians who support birth control.
lifesite.net/ldn/2006/oct/06102001.html
Catholic teachings are clear – faithful Catholics do not use birth control. And Catholic politicians who support the continued sale and distribution of birth control devices have no right to receive the sacraments until they confess and publically repent of their sinful ways.
Catholic politicians in fact have the duty to sponsor and pass legislation to outlaw birth control drugs and devices. I understand birth control pills especially cause abortion and therefore should not be sold or distributed in the US.
prolife.com/BIRTHCNT.html
When will the US Bishops publically deny the sacraments to politicians who allow birth control to continue unchallenged. In fact, why aren’t “Catholics” who use the pill are not banned from the sacraments in every US parish?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top