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

[childofmary1143]

Looks like the Cabrini site has been updated, and the Statement of Reconciliation has been removed. Also, on the diocese website, the links to Cabrini and St. Joan of Arc parishes have been removed. The parish info is there, but no site links, when many other parishes are linked.

Both Cabrini and St. Joan have big GLBT ministries.

Minor action by the diocese. Very minor.

This minor action was probably only done because with the Internet all news can travel around the world so fast!

 

[Wolseley]

Are you inferring these parishes are "santan"ic?

Yup. I certainly am.

From what I have read in their own websites, these people are completely blinded and deluded by the god of this world, and they are utterly under Satan’s sway.

 

[NewUlm1976_2000]

Well that’s who influenced Adam and Eve to sin and he’s doing the same thing today to people who think gay sex is okay. Once again, nice use of quotes. Are you going to ignore my questions all day, or are you going to answer me? Do you or do you not believe in Sin, Hell, and Satan?

What relevance is this towards this discussion? The discussion is about same-gender relationship blessings.

 

[SemperFidelis]

What relevance is this towards this discussion? The discussion is about same-gender relationship blessings.

It has a lot to do with the discussion. The only possible way you could reject the fact that homosexuality is a sin, and that it leads to hell, is if in fact you reject the very idea of hell and satan to begin with. You don’t want to answer do you?

 

[NewUlm1976_2000]

Mortal Sin seperates one from the beatific vision, and hence the Church. That is why there is Reconciliation.

Source? What theologians debate about is not infallible. You don’t think the Church is infallible but you do think the opinions of a minority number of theologians are. Pure hypocrisy.

Accepting and condoning sin as normal behavior most certaintly rejects the Church. Because of this, it also rejects Jesus.

Once again, the Church teaching here is anything but broad, unless you believe that the minority opinions of a few theologians are infallible, which you so obviously do.

Please quote me where I have said this.

There is a ongoing discussion and debate among many theologians about same-gender relationships. The USCCB came out with a middle-of-the-road statement for the time being while this goes on.

And it goes for same-gender relations, sure they are often done outside marriage, which would need to change for them to have relations inside a marriage bond for life (possible in the future). Yet how do we handle this as long as that option does not exist in the present? Compassion and constructive debates are a start while fine points of theology are discussed back and forth. You will learn that the Vatican moves very slowly at times, so it probably will not be in either of our generations.

 

[NewUlm1976_2000]

Yup. I certainly am.

From what I have read in their own websites, these people are completely blinded and deluded by the god of this world, and they are utterly under Satan’s sway.

Compassionate = Santanic

Does showing compassion to you really mean it is a sign of Satan? These parishes are showing openness towards their fellow person, who are at times seen as outcasts by others. Hardly Satanic.

 

[SemperFidelis]

Please quote me where I have said this.

Specifically pointing out which item you’re talking about would help.

There is a ongoing discussion and debate among many theologians about same-gender relationships.

So once again, you believe the truth can be found due to debates by theologians, but when the Church has declared something, it is not infallible. At least we know where your loyalties lie and what your agenda is.

You will learn that the Vatican moves very slowly at times, so it probably will not be in either of our generations.

It will not happen, ever. The Bible has stated that this will be the case, but of course we’ve already realized that you don’t believe in the Bible or the Church, so I guess it doesn’t matter to you anyway.

 

[NewUlm1976_2000]

It has a lot to do with the discussion. The only possible way you could reject the fact that homosexuality is a sin, and that it leads to hell, is if in fact you reject the very idea of hell and satan to begin with. You don’t want to answer do you?

This appears to be a black and white argument and setting up a strawman discussion. We, on this lower plane do not know what Hell really is, as nobody has been able to go and come back (same for heaven). What leads to Hell and the definition of it has changed based on what times you look at. Only at the end of our life will the true answer be revealed to us, in the meantime it remains a secret on the plane of spirituality.

 

[SemperFidelis]

This appears to be a black and white argument and setting up a strawman discussion. We, on this lower plane do not know what Hell really is, as nobody has been able to go and come back (same for heaven). What leads to Hell and the definition of it has changed based on what times you look at. Only at the end of our life will the true answer be revealed to us, in the meantime it remains a secret on the plane of spirituality.

Ah, giving me an answer without actually giving me an answer. The “purest” liberal tactice if ever there was one. We do know what Hell is like because the Bible tells us what it’s like. Try picking it up. The Church has consistantly declared that at the end of time, that all people will go to heaven or hell, forever. You’re right about one thing though: that it is a black and white argument.

 

[NewUlm1976_2000]

Specifically pointing out which item you’re talking about would help.

So once again, you believe the truth can be found due to debates by theologians, but when the Church has declared something, it is not infallible. At least we know where your loyalties lie and what your agenda is.

It will not happen, ever. The Bible has stated that this will be the case, but of course we’ve already realized that you don’t believe in the Bible or the Church, so I guess it doesn’t matter to you.

Please stop from putting words in my mouth.

The Bible, you will learn is only one part of Catholic Theology, the Church is much broader than just that. There is no literal interpretation of it (due to all the human fallacies added to it through history (e.g. translation differences)).

You will also learn that “infallibility” (e.g. ex cathedra) was only brought about during the turmoil around Vatican I, 1860ish and even then it caused turmoil. Accepting fallibility from our imperfect humanity is a strength for the entire Church. Fallibility does not always disprove matters but it adds to wisdom when it comes down to interpretations that have been made public.

 

[NewUlm1976_2000]

Ah, giving me an answer without actually giving me an answer. The “purest” liberal tactice if ever there was one. We do know what Hell is like because the Bible tells us what it’s like. Try picking it up.

As you will learn, the Bible is not taken as a literal word in Catholic Theological Tradition.

 

[SemperFidelis]

You will also learn that “infallibility” (e.g. ex cathedra) was only brought about during the turmoil around Vatican I, 1860ish and even then it caused turmoil.

You really don’t know your Church history do you? The Infallibility of the Church has been around as long as the Church has existed (ie: the Councils are infallible.) Papal Infallibility is what your talking about, and it can be proved that it was believed long before it was defined. In fact Blessed Pius IX declared an ex cathedra statement (The Immaculate Conception) before Papal Infallibility was even defined.

 

[SemperFidelis]

As you will learn, the Bible is not taken as a literal word in Catholic Theological Tradition.

Show me one, just one, official source that denies the existence of hell. I think that you think that we live in some “fairy-land-world,” where it’s okay to reject the Church. WAKE UP. THIS IS NOT REALITY!

 

[SemperFidelis]

As you will learn, the Bible is not taken as a literal word in Catholic Theological Tradition.

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.

 

[Wolseley]

Compassionate = Santanic

No. Rejection of the Magesterium = Satanic.

Does showing compassion to you really mean it is a sign of Satan? These parishes are showing openness towards their fellow person, who are at times seen as outcasts by others. Hardly Satanic.

Fr. Leo Tibesar, the pastor of St. Francis Cabrini Parish recently stated he would defy the authority of the Holy See by performing homosexual “marriages”, as well as preached a homily in which he not only attacked the hierarchy, but openly denounced the teaching of the Church on homosexual “marriage”, homosexuals adopting children, artificial insemination, and artifical birth control.

The parish website features such tidbits as this:

"When in 1992 the Vatican issued a letter that labeled homosexual persons as ‘objectively disordered’ the Social Justice Committee of the parish requested a Task Force be formed to explore ways that we as a community might reach out to the gay and lesbian communities.

Some organizations that provide support for gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgendered, and friends are:

(website deleted, only one of a list) Providing social events for the trans, genderqueer and allied communities!"

As for St. Joan of Arc, their heterodoxy is well known also. Their parish website endorses homosexual adoption of children, along with a number of other oddities, including this bit of paganism:

“‘Eco-spirituality’, which embraces earth-centered and creation-centered spirituality, fosters an awareness of how we are inseparably interconnected with all of creation. It calls us to be stewards of the earth and students of her rhythms and the mystery of her sacred landscape so that we act wisely and learn to live justly amongst its abundance and rich diversity. It challenges us to raise our awareness and change our behavior in all our relations with the earth, its creatures and each other.”

There is more, much more, but what it boils down to is this: if these two “parishes” wish to engage in this type of stuff, that’s fine, but they are not Catholic, and they should at least have the decency not to identify themselves as such. And if anyone advocates the type of stuff that the people in these two “parishes” are advocating, then yes, they are under Satan’s sway, whether they realize it or not.

 

[Neil_Anthony]

Show me one, just one, official source that denies the existence of hell. I think that you think that we live in some “fairy-land-world,” where it’s okay to reject the Church. WAKE UP. THIS IS NOT REALITY!

I don’t know why you bother. It’s pretty clear that they’d rather romp around doing unmentionable things while pretending that it’s all OK and Jesus approves. What can anyone say when they refuse to listen? The Church teaching is right there in the Catechism if and when they become interested in learning.

 

[SemperFidelis]

I don’t know why you bother.

I don’t either sometimes. It just irks me though when I see someone who claims to be Catholic so blatantly and rebeliously reject what the Church has taught for 2000 years. Somebody has to stand up for what the Church teaches or their opinions will be the only ones out there and it will lead people in the wrong direction. These are the very people who are trying to destroy the Church and the same people who give the Church a bad name. 500 years ago they just left and became protestants. Today they stay in the Church and claim the moniker “liberal catholic” and try to taint or destory anything that is recognizably Catholic. It’s sad to say the least, but I know “the gates of hell won’t prevail,” so I guess in the end all will be well.

 

[NewUlm1976_2000]

You really don’t know your Church history do you? The Infallibility of the Church has been around as long as the Church has existed (ie: the Councils are infallible.) Papal Infallibility is what your talking about, and it can be proved that it was believed long before it was defined. In fact Blessed Pius IX declared an ex cathedra statement (The Immaculate Conception) before Papal Infallibility was even defined.

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.

 

[NewUlm1976_2000]

Show me one, just one, official source that denies the existence of hell. I think that you think that we live in some “fairy-land-world,” where it’s okay to reject the Church. WAKE UP. THIS IS NOT REALITY!

Actually “reality” is all around us, it is the application of the teachings and the debates and discussions around them. Do we life in fear of the afterlife or work humbly in the present to make the world a better place? I would rather the view of others be made joyfully in the present than out of a place of fear.

 

[fix]

"When in 1992 the Vatican issued a letter that labeled homosexual persons as ‘objectively disordered’ the Social Justice Committee of the parish requested a Task Force be formed to explore ways that we as a community might reach out to the gay and lesbian communities.

They should produce the letter that said that because it is not accurate.