US Catholic Parish set to "Publicly Bless the Relationship of Same-Sex Couples"

[NewUlm1976_2000]

Not everything is taken literally, but it is clear that the Bible is to be taken literally when it pertains to Faith and Morals, and this subject falls under that. For like the hundreth time, read your freakin’ Catechism. You are so “lost in the sauce,” it’d be amazing if we could find you in there.

As you will learn, the Church is not all about the books and paragraphs listing this and that. What the Catechism fails to show is the humanity of the Church at all levels.

Let me ask you this, do you carry around tomes of domestic state and federal laws to make sure you know each and every one of them?

 

[wanner47]

While that definition holds to some, it is not a widespread accepted belief for the reasons I have talked about before. Invoking “infallibility” unnecessarily adds a level of personal pride at the highest levels. To accept fallibility in one’s self adds a level of humanity, which is the base of the Church, the people in the pews.

The fly in the ointment here is that this authority is not human authority. It’s authority granted by God Himself, through the power of the Holy Spirit. And it’s not to be used lightly – the Pope can’t infallibly declare that Oreos are God’s favorite cookies, for example. It’s only on issues of faith and morals. Plus, the Pope has to have the full agreement of the Magesterium.

So, your assumptions are flawed. I’m with Semper – if your beliefs are thus, why do you WANT to call yourself Catholic? Why do you continue to identify yourself by a faith you clearly don’t believe in? If you don’t believe the Church teaches the Truth, why are you still in it?

Now, I’m NOT saying “don’t let the door hit you on the way out,” but I’m honestly curious as to why you WANT to call yourself Catholic, given the beliefs you hold. It’d be like me calling myself a Nazi although I’m 1000% opposed to every single one of their beliefs.

 

[NewUlm1976_2000]

No. Rejection of the Magesterium = Satanic.

Then all of the Church is “Satanic” in a way to use that definition. Nobody agrees 100% with everything that is said in Rome. If any disagreement is “Satanic”, then how can the Church have changed to what it is today? Would that mean that we need to go back to the house-masses of 70-80AD or all be accused of being “Santanic”?

See, the Church is not “Satanic” because it has been allowed to change due to the internal diversity it has had from the start. It is as true today as it was 2000 years ago. This applies to stances from Cabrini and St Joan of Arc which are open and compassionate towards others that are unfairly spurned or looked down open as a lesser person (very dangerous slippery slope).

Try this spiritual exercise today and in the next few days. As you walk the streets, interact with others, try to see the likeness of God in each and every one of them. Some you will know, some you will not know, some you will get to know later and then can compare what you saw in them to how they actually are. It really is a wonderful exercise to grow spiritually.

 

[fix]

As you will learn, the Church is not all about the books and paragraphs listing this and that. What the Catechism fails to show is the humanity of the Church at all levels.

Let me ask you this, do you carry around tomes of domestic state and federal laws to make sure you know each and every one of them?

It is not about a dusty book with laws. Catholics obey the moral law because they love Christ. Truth is a person. He does not contraidct His Church. He did not come to abolish the moral law.

 

[NewUlm1976_2000]

So, your assumptions are flawed. I’m with Semper – if your beliefs are thus, why do you WANT to call yourself Catholic? Why do you continue to identify yourself by a faith you clearly don’t believe in? If you don’t believe the Church teaches the Truth, why are you still in it?

Now, I’m NOT saying “don’t let the door hit you on the way out,” but I’m honestly curious as to why you WANT to call yourself Catholic,

I think you are seeing it as a “one-size-fits all” faith, a “take it or leave it” one. As I mentioned in a earlier post on this thread, Cabrini and St Joan of Arc are on par with St Agnes (to use the Archdiocese of St Paul as an example). They are peers spiritually but vary what traditions are focused upon. They are both still Catholic in all senses.

CAF is only a sub-group of Catholics, there is one style presented here but it does not represent the entire Church as a whole, which is very diverse and under constant discussion on how to understand the present and move towards the future. Yet the common faith between us is the common bond and to why we can still move forward.

The gift of CAF is to let these diverse discussions happen so things can be worked out in a mostly peaceful manner.

 

[wanner47]

I think you are seeing it as a “one-size-fits all” faith, a “take it or leave it” one. As I mentioned in a earlier post on this thread, Cabrini and St Joan of Arc are on par with St Agnes (to use the Archdiocese of St Paul as an example). They are peers spiritually but vary what traditions are focused upon. They are both still Catholic in all senses.

CAF is only a sub-group of Catholics, there is one style presented here but it does not represent the entire Church as a whole, which is very diverse and under constant discussion on how to understand the present and move towards the future. Yet the common faith between us is the common bond and to why we can still move forward.

The gift of CAF is to let these diverse discussions happen so things can be worked out in a mostly peaceful manner.

You didn’t answer my question. Let me put it in one sentence and in all caps so it’s clear.

IF YOU **REJECT **THE ****AUTHORITY ****OF THE CHURCH, WHY ARE YOU STILL IN IT?

I left Lutheranism because I convinced that they didn’t have the authority to teach the Truth. I wanted to be in the one Church that Jesus established and gave the power to teach the Truth infallibly. The only church that fits that definition is the Catholic Church.

Your belief that Catholicism isn’t “all or nothing” is mistaken. Either you accept the authority of the Church, or you reject it. If you reject it, *why *do you stay? Why do you want to remain in a faith that you believe *doesn’t *teach the Truth?

There are different rites and such in Catholicism, but we are all united under the teaching of the Church as found in the Catechism. It is NOT an option for ANY Catholic parish or any Catholic individual to reject the truth anything found in the Catechism. To do so is to reject the teaching authority of the Church, and thus reject the Church.

 

[SemperFidelis]

While that definition holds to some, it is not a widespread accepted belief for the reasons I have talked about before.

Proof? Sources? Just because you know a few “liberal-wackos” or go to a Parish that thinks like this and rejects the infallibility of the Church does not make it so. You seem to be all for democracy in the Church, but I bet there’s not but a handful of “Catholics” who think like you, so even then your plan wouldn’t get you what you want. Thank God, the Church doesn’t revolve around the utter lunacy of the opinions of NewUlm.

Invoking “infallibility” unnecessarily adds a level of personal pride at the highest levels. To accept fallibility in one’s self adds a level of humanity, which is the base of the Church, the people in the pews.

Wrong. The base of the Church is the authority granted to it by the Lord himself.

 

[Wolseley]

Then all of the Church is “Satanic” in a way to use that definition. Nobody agrees 100% with everything that is said in Rome. If any disagreement is “Satanic”, then how can the Church have changed to what it is today? Would that mean that we need to go back to the house-masses of 70-80AD or all be accused of being “Santanic”?

Apples and oranges. Were the house Masses of 70-80 AD ever condemned by the Church as immoral?

See, the Church is not “Satanic” because it has been allowed to change due to the internal diversity it has had from the start. It is as true today as it was 2000 years ago.

Name me one defined dogma that has changed since it was defined. Name me one Church authority from 33 AD on down that approved of active homosexual behavior. (Standard bibliographic reference will be fine.)

This applies to stances from Cabrini and St Joan of Arc which are open and compassionate towards others that are unfairly spurned or looked down open as a lesser person (very dangerous slippery slope).

There is a vast difference, which you are apparently unable to grasp, between showing compassion for a sinner and approving of or legitimizing his sin. Under the type of mindset that those two parishes are operating under, Jesus should have told the adulterous woman, “Go, and continue doing what you’ve been doing.”

Try this spiritual exercise today and in the next few days. As you walk the streets, interact with others, try to see the likeness of God in each and every one of them. Some you will know, some you will not know, some you will get to know later and then can compare what you saw in them to how they actually are. It really is a wonderful exercise to grow spiritually.

And you try this one: for the next few days, read the Church Fathers, papal encyclicals, the Catechism, and various books about Catholic sexual morality with an official Imprimatur and Nihil obstat. It really is a wonderful way to find out what a Catholic is required to believe in these areas.

 

[Neil_Anthony]

Nobody agrees 100% with everything that is said in Rome. If any disagreement is “Satanic”, then how can the Church have changed to what it is today?

I agree with everything said by Rome. I’m not Satanic.

 

[Wolseley]

You didn’t answer my question. Let me put it in one sentence and in all caps so it’s clear.

IF YOU **REJECT **THE ****AUTHORITY ****OF THE CHURCH, WHY ARE YOU STILL IN IT?

I left Lutheranism because I convinced that they didn’t have the authority to teach the Truth. I wanted to be in the one Church that Jesus established and gave the power to teach the Truth infallibly. The only church that fits that definition is the Catholic Church.

Your belief that Catholicism isn’t “all or nothing” is mistaken. Either you accept the authority of the Church, or you reject it. If you reject it, *why *do you stay? Why do you want to remain in a faith that you believe *doesn’t *teach the Truth?

There are different rites and such in Catholicism, but we are all united under the teaching of the Church as found in the Catechism. It is NOT an option for ANY Catholic parish or any Catholic individual to reject the truth anything found in the Catechism. To do so is to reject the teaching authority of the Church, and thus reject the Church.

Save your breath, wanner. He is tossed back and forth by the waves, and blown here and there by every wind of teaching and by the cunning and craftiness of men in their deceitful scheming. (Eph. 4:14.) You will never convince him that the Church is nothing more than a shapeless blob that can be molded to fit any form that man approves of. (Evidently the Holy Spirit doesn’t lead the Church in NewUlm’s world, because if He does, He’s contradicting Himself at every turn.)

Wipe the dust from your feet, leave him to his delusions, and pray for him. It’s all you can do.

I know I’m finished. It’s senseless to try to explain to someone that the sky is blue when they adamantly insist that it’s really green.

 

[SemperFidelis]

Then all of the Church is “Satanic” in a way to use that definition.

The Church is Holy, but it is certaintly not because of the people in the Church. People sin, but it doesn’t make the Church un-holy. People in the Church can most definitely be satanic, as is the case with those parishes in Minnesota. This does not make the Church satanic, for the same reasons it doesn’t make the Church un-holy.

 

[fix]

Then all of the Church is “Satanic” in a way to use that definition. Nobody agrees 100% with everything that is said in Rome.

You mean the magisterium? Which teachings from Christ are we free to reject?

This applies to stances from Cabrini and St Joan of Arc which are open and compassionate towards others that are unfairly spurned or looked down open as a lesser person (very dangerous slippery slope).

There is no compassion in confirming others in sin.

Try this spiritual exercise today and in the next few days. As you walk the streets, interact with others, try to see the likeness of God in each and every one of them. Some you will know, some you will not know, some you will get to know later and then can compare what you saw in them to how they actually are. It really is a wonderful exercise to grow spiritually.

We cannot grow in faith if we are not humble. How are we humble when we reject the magisterium?

 

[rwoehmke]

I have known and still know and count as more or less friends some people from Cabrini and some of the other parishes listed. Most of them are well meaning folks, but they do have some blind spots in how they view the Church. None of them are or were active or even closet homosexuals or lesbians although there is a definite tendency to be very accepting of that lifestyle in others.

It would be an inaccurate assumption that every one of the people on their parish councils and committees are even Catholics. Some are folks of other or no faith who have kind of drifted in and become active without becoming converts. Cabrini and the Newman Center were very close during the 60’s and 70’s and may still be.

A third point, which I am not making about the people I know from these parishes, is that I am coming to the conclusion that most dissent from any part of the Church’s teachings eventually boils down to matters of pelvic activity. Sex and sexuality are a very powerful driving force and illicit or immoral use of the same is very difficult to justify without first finding points of dissension in other matters like liturgy, sacraments, the hierarchy, etc. If Catholics and other Christians have an Achilles heel, I think this is it. Greed is probably a close second. If one can discredit parts of the Church’s teaching in ones own mind all things become possible and acceptable.

 

[Petergee]

As you will learn, the Church is not all about the books and paragraphs listing this and that. What the Catechism fails to show is the humanity of the Church at all levels.

You obviously haven’t read it.

Let me ask you this, do you carry around tomes of domestic state and federal laws to make sure you know each and every one of them?

No, but I don’t need to carry around tomes of laws to know that the state says it’s illegal to rob, murder, kidnap, etc. Similarly while a Catholic might plausibly plead ignorance of some of the finer points of Church doctrine and discipline, it is inconceivable that a Catholic could be unaware of such a basic principle of morality that it is a mortal sin to engage in sexual activity with a person of the same sex.

 

[Petergee]

Then all of the Church is “Satanic” in a way to use that definition. Nobody agrees 100% with everything that is said in Rome.

I do, and so do hundreds of millions of others, in fact anybody who truthfully calls himself a practising Catholic. (I assume by “said in Rome” you mean “infallibly taught by the Magisterium of the Church”, bnot just in Rome but everywhere, at all times.

If any disagreement is “Satanic”, then how can the Church have changed to what it is today? Would that mean that we need to go back to the house-masses of 70-80AD or all be accused of being “Santanic”?

See, the Church is not “Satanic” because it has been allowed to change due to the internal diversity it has had from the start. It is as true today as it was 2000 years ago. This applies to stances from Cabrini and St Joan of Arc which are open and compassionate towards others that are unfairly spurned or looked down open as a lesser person (very dangerous slippery slope).

Try this spiritual exercise today and in the next few days. As you walk the streets, interact with others, try to see the likeness of God in each and every one of them. Some you will know, some you will not know, some you will get to know later and then can compare what you saw in them to how they actually are. It really is a wonderful exercise to grow spiritually.

If you knew anything about St Joan of Arc you’d know that she agreed 100% with “everything that is said in Rome”. And please refrain from your calumnious implication that anyone here has “spurned” or “looked down” on any other human being as “a lesser person”, or failed to “see the likeness of God” in any human being. Nobody here has suggested anything of the sort. Your posts here are a pile of waffle, evasion and obfuscation.

 

[timotheos]

Originally Posted by NewUlm1976_2000

I think you are seeing it as a “one-size-fits all” faith, a “take it or leave it” one…

…CAF is only a sub-group of Catholics, there is one style presented here but it does not represent the entire Church as a whole, which is very diverse and under constant discussion on how to understand the present and move towards the future.

Reflection of the day: If we have this much difficulty with members IN the Church, how are we ever going to reconcile with the kajillion Protestant denominations/OSAS crowd?

I really, really want to believe this is the beginning of the end of the '60s. That Godless, arrogant, unprincipled, pleasure-seeking, authority-challenging, ultimately selfish and spiritually bankrupt philosophy that has poisoned so much of our lives could have only come from one source. I condemn the sin, and the slithering serpent who spewed it on us.

Love the sinner, hate the sin. In the Church, these two statements are necessarily and fundamentally inseparable, and each is true ONLY when both are EQUALLY true.

May God bless those who have stood up for the Truth that is Jesus Christ and the Church he founded, and have done so with love.

-Tim

 

[brigid12]

We the Catholic Church take in whole Anglican communities because they are against this sort of thing that has been approved by their higher-ups. So now that we have one of our own I think we should give them to the Anglicans.

I honestly think that there will be many many people watching how the Bishop and even Rome handles this to see if we hold true to our faith. Pray that they will see that we are faithful and not PC.

rolleyes: that poor parish with such a deluded pastor!)

 

[childofmary1143]

Reflection of the day: If we have this much difficulty with members IN the Church, how are we ever going to reconcile with the kajillion Protestant denominations/OSAS crowd?

I really, really want to believe this is the beginning of the end of the '60s. That Godless, arrogant, unprincipled, pleasure-seeking, authority-challenging, ultimately selfish and spiritually bankrupt philosophy that has poisoned so much of our lives could have only come from one source. I condemn the sin, and the slithering serpent who spewed it on us.

Love the sinner, hate the sin. In the Church, these two statements are necessarily and fundamentally inseparable, and each is true ONLY when both are EQUALLY true.

May God bless those who have stood up for the Truth that is Jesus Christ and the Church he founded, and have done so with love.

-Tim

Hear Hear:clapping: :clapping: :clapping:

 

[johnstown_johnn]

Hear Hear:clapping: :clapping: :clapping:

How a priest can bless a deviant union in front of the Tabernacle is Satanic.

 

[JuanVelarde]

I have been following this thread all morning and it seems to be coming to a close.

First, I must agree with one thing NewUlm has been saying. This is a wide spread problem. The arch diocese in MN is not the only place such liberal views are promoted. I would say that is why Pope John Paul II said in his visit to the U.S. that cafeteria catholics are a big problem for the catholic church in our country.

I think we all tend to see our community as the norm. Sadly, for some, the struggle for social justice has become a search for social conformity and moral reletivism. The blessing of homosexual “unions” is wrong and scandalous. It gives the idea that the ages old Magesterium is outdated and up for debate. The leadership of the church is not in the multitudes in pews, but in the Word of God. We cannot change the truth just because we don’t like it. God forgive those priests.

NewUlm, I will accept your challenge to “try to see the likeness of God in every each and evryone…”. Please accept the challenge to read the catechism and the church fathers. (I know the catechism seams like a big, old book, but if you use it as you would an encyclopedia, you will find it is pretty easy to use.) Understand that the days of public revelation have come to a close, and as such, no new teaching can contradict what was revealed to us by Christ, the Apostles and Early church fathers.

SemperFi is correct in his argument that, as catholics, we are required to learn, follow and conform to the teaching of holy mother church. As her children, we sometimes have trouble understanding the reasons for her decisions. That is why we must accept and follow her teachings, and if we like, ask why. (The vatican library is open to all, some information is even available on-line.) But understand that her wisdom comes from the eternal truth, which is Jesus Christ. Besides, I think that the more one understands the teachings of the church, the more one grows to love and respect the church.

I think Tim said it best…

Reflection of the day: If we have this much difficulty with members IN the Church, how are we ever going to reconcile with the kajillion Protestant denominations/OSAS crowd?

I really, really want to believe this is the beginning of the end of the '60s. That Godless, arrogant, unprincipled, pleasure-seeking, authority-challenging, ultimately selfish and spiritually bankrupt philosophy that has poisoned so much of our lives could have only come from one source. I condemn the sin, and the slithering serpent who spewed it on us.

Love the sinner, hate the sin. In the Church, these two statements are necessarily and fundamentally inseparable, and each is true ONLY when both are EQUALLY true.

May God bless those who have stood up for the Truth that is Jesus Christ and the Church he founded, and have done so with love.

-Tim

God help us all.

In nomine Patris, et Filii, et Spiritus Sancti. Amen