What to tell a non-christian (Homosexuality & slavery)

[AbsolutionBliss]

My friend (atheist/non-christian) recently started arguing with me about homosexuality and that christians are ok with slavery. I am getting ready to be confirmed as a catholic & therefor would like your answers, as fellow Catholics, to her argument about homosexuality and slavery, not only so I can have help in this, but so I can learn from it too.

So, I will post her responses and I would love your answers to them.

She recently stated:
"So you acknowledge that christians, over the centuries, have had to change their ideas regarding slavery, as the cultural shifted around it. Why can the same not be said for homosexuality? How do you choose which teachings still need to be abided, and which are no longer culturally relevant?
And do you really think it’s okay to beat another human being, even if it takes them “a day or two” to recover? (Ex 20 : 21) Since when are athletes severely beaten?

So people had to do what was necessary to survive. Ok. So why is slavery okay, but prostitution is not? Both are contracts, according to you. Both are done in to survive.
“There is nothing in the bible that says slavery is right, where did you hear this?”
This statement of yours above already proves you don’t know the bible for beans. Then OOPS someone actually has READ the bible, so you had to modify your original statement to include “benevolent” slavery."

 

[Hadrianus]

As to slavery, the Catholic Church has never taught that slavery was a good thing. In the Greco-Roman world slavery was ubiquitous and part of the social order. It could hardly be abolished overnight in a premodern society. What the Church could and did do was insist upon the fair treatment of slaves, then as society became fully Christianized, slavery was abolished. This took a long time, but it happened precisely because of Christianity.

Then in the 16nth Century a new kind of slavery appeared in the Americas. It was condemned by the Popes from the very beginning; but as with so much that the Popes have condemned–abortion comes to mind–there was too much money in it for people to listen.

Opponents of Catholicism sometimes drag up answers to moral questions posed by Catholics in a society in which slavery existed to attempt to show that the Church was actually endorsing slavery. This is clearly not the case when read in context. For example Gregory XVI firmly condemned the slave trade–just one of many Popes to do so–in the 1830’s, but at the same time Catholics still had to deal with the problem on a daily basis in the American South and parts of South America for much of the 19nth Century.

PS Ex. 20. 21: You’d have to ask a rabbi how the Jews of today interpret it. Christians look to the New Testament as the fullfilment of the Old.

 

[AbsolutionBliss]

As to slavery, the Catholic Church has never taught that slavery was a good thing. In the Greco-Roman world slavery was ubiquitous and part of the social order. It could hardly be abolished overnight in a premodern society. What the Church could and did do was insist upon the fair treatment of slaves, then as society became fully Christianized, slavery was abolished. This took a long time, but it happened precisely because of Christianity.

Then in the 16nth Century a new kind of slavery appeared in the Americas. It was condemned by the Popes from the very beginning; but as with so much that the Popes have condemned–abortion comes to mind–there was too much money in it for people to listen.

Opponents of Catholicism sometimes drag up answers to moral questions posed by Catholics in a society in which slavery existed to attempt to show that the Church was actually endorsing slavery. This is clearly not the case when read in context. For example Gregory XVI firmly condemned the slave trade–just one of many Popes to do so–in the 1830’s, but at the same time Catholics still had to deal with the problem on a daily basis in the American South and parts of South America for much of the 19nth Century.

PS Ex. 20. 21: You’d have to ask a rabbi how the Jews of today interpret it. Christians look to the New Testament as the fullfilment of the Old.

Thanks! I think this will clear it up about slavery
But, I really think she got me on what she said about how prostitution was done to get money/survive, just like slavery was… I can’t think really find anything to deny that…

 

[Leegal]

My friend (atheist/non-christian) recently started arguing with me about homosexuality and that christians are ok with slavery. I am getting ready to be confirmed as a catholic & therefor would like your answers, as fellow Catholics, to her argument about homosexuality and slavery, not only so I can have help in this, but so I can learn from it too.

So, I will post her responses and I would love your answers to them.

She recently stated:
"So you acknowledge that christians, over the centuries, have had to change their ideas regarding slavery, as the cultural shifted around it. Why can the same not be said for homosexuality? How do you choose which teachings still need to be abided, and which are no longer culturally relevant?
And do you really think it’s okay to beat another human being, even if it takes them “a day or two” to recover? (Ex 20 : 21) Since when are athletes severely beaten?

So people had to do what was necessary to survive. Ok. So why is slavery okay, but prostitution is not? Both are contracts, according to you. Both are done in to survive.
“There is nothing in the bible that says slavery is right, where did you hear this?”
This statement of yours above already proves you don’t know the bible for beans. Then OOPS someone actually has READ the bible, so you had to modify your original statement to include “benevolent” slavery."

“Are okay with slavery.” "Is okay with slavery? Even assuming the Church or Catholics looked the other way on slavery, the word assumes a present tense condition. The Church is not presently “okay” with slavery. And the Church, Jesus’s fullfillment had not yet occured when Exodus was written. This would actually be a better question for a Jew or convert from Judaism.

I don’t know of an infallible teaching on slavery. But if one exists, it did not exist during Exodus. The Church’s teaching on homosexuality is infallible so that cannot change according to social custom.

We do not believe in scripture alone. All the comprises Catholic teaching is the Bible, the Pope, the Magisterium, Canon Law, theologians, the Catechism. Are you listening to someone who is using scripture alone to challenge your faith? We don’t rely solely upon scripture and the NT fullfills the prophecy of the OT. She cannot argue against our faith based upon the OT.

As for prostitution, the objection or sin is sex outside of a consecrated marriage. It violates the marital act by Church teachings. It’s also against secular law.

 

[AbsolutionBliss]

Thank you, I replied that to her, and she replied:

“How do you determine a fallible versus infallible teaching? I’m not talking about what’s okay with the church. I’m talking about what is okay with your god. And your god says it’s perfectly okay to beat another human being, even if it takes days for the person to recover.
You god also called Lot a “righteous man” even though Lot offered his virgin daughters to total strangers to “do with as the will.” What was that about sex out of marriage again?”

 

[dandingo]

Thank you, I replied that to her, and she replied:

"How do you determine a fallible versus infallible teaching? I’m not talking about what’s okay with the church. I’m talking about what is okay with your god. And your god says it’s perfectly okay to beat another human being, even if it takes days for the person to recover.
You god also called Lot a “righteous man” even though Lot offered his virgin daughters to total strangers to “do with as the will.” What was that about sex out of marriage again?"

For one, it never says that was Lot did in that situation was righteous. Every important figure in the bible, with the exception of Jesus, made mistakes. Just because he made a mistake does not mean that he wasn’t righteous. If your dad was a righteous man his entire life but succumbed to temptation one time, would you deem him entirely unrighteous? Remember, our religion is one of sinners. Had the bible been written with every single figure being perfect, including the righteous ones, I would be extremely skeptical.

I also believe it shows the devotion that Lot had to God. He would rather give his most previous gifts, his virgin daughters, to an angry, sinful group of heathens than to defile the Lord. An angel is literally a “Messenger of God”.

Here’s a good thread on the forum about Lot’s situation …

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=93545

 

[Hadrianus]

Thanks! I think this will clear it up about slavery
But, I really think she got me on what she said about how prostitution was done to get money/survive, just like slavery was… I can’t think really find anything to deny that…

The difference is that the prostitute is entering into a contract to do something which is evil in itself. A slave is not necessarily in a situation in which he must do something evil. The institution of slavery is a societal evil, but the individual need not be. Think of people who work in sweatshops? Their very existence is an evil, but surely the people who work in them in order to survive are not doing anything evil themselves.

 

[AbsolutionBliss]

Wow thank you guys, she hasn’t responded to me in a couple hours. I think she is struggling to find something to prove the catholic faith wrong. Really, when you overview it all, you cannot deny that our religion is flawed.

 

[Hadrianus]

PS With regard to infallibility: Whenever the Church proposes a doctrine of Faith or Morals to be held by all Catholics then that teaching is infallible. This can be done either by a definition in a council or by the Pope alone. The more usual form, however, is simply when the Pope and the bishops of the world concur in this teaching. Alternatively, even if only the Popes alone have taught something, if they have done so for a continuous period of centuries, that in itself is sufficient to show that it is a Catholic doctrine. From very early times theologians such as St Irenaeus of Lyons have taught that to know what is the Catholic Faith it is sufficient to look to the Church of Rome. That’s why we are called Roman catholics because as Catholics we define our faith by what has always been taught by the bishops of Rome.

When we say in the Creed, "I believe One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church we are implicitly professing that we believe the Church to be true and founded by God to teach us those things God wishes us to know and do. Hope this helps to clarify things.

 

[atheistgirl]

My suggestion is to invite your atheist friend to join CAF so she can ask the questions directly herself. I can assure her most here are very reasonable and knowledgable people, happy to try and answer questions and offer explanations

Sarah x

 

[Leegal]

Thank you, I replied that to her, and she replied:

“How do you determine a fallible versus infallible teaching? I’m not talking about what’s okay with the church. I’m talking about what is okay with your god. And your god says it’s perfectly okay to beat another human being, even if it takes days for the person to recover.
You god also called Lot a “righteous man” even though Lot offered his virgin daughters to total strangers to “do with as the will.” What was that about sex out of marriage again?”

The Church teaches that sex without the sacrament of marriage is a sin. However, as to prostitution, there are conditions that we do not know as to why the person has chosen this life. By force? By having been abused themselves so that abuse leads to a damage that we do not fully understand?

Basically, it’s a sin to have sex without marriage but I do not condemn the prostitute because we leave it up to God to decide what was in the person’s heart that led them to create this sin. There are conditions – they must know it’s wrong, they must know it’s a mortal sin, and they must then decide, in the rejection of God, to do it anyway. And even then only God understands all. We do not judge. We have a rule to go by – and God knows the circumstances upon which He judges - not us. If by force, certainly someone who is forced into prostitution at an early age did not have the necessary capacity to consent to the act. Even those who turn to prostitution later, but were abused as children, may be acting under some defect brought on by the prior abuse. That’s why we frequently say “God will judge.”

Infallibility is complex. Simply put, when the Pope speaks infallibly on faith and morals we are told so. When he speaks on opinion, he is not infallible.

There are 3 Magisteriums – the law making body of the Church. The Sacred is always infallible; the Universal and the Ordinary not always so and so it’s not automatically assumed to be infallible, but we must assume that it is truth unless our moral conscience, in comport with all the teachings, tells us that it’s something we need to or can decide for ourselves.

I would say that the Pope’s teaching on the use of condoms for prostitutes would fall under a fallible teaching that we may reject if our moral conscience tells us that it is wrong, but it’s not automatic and requires that moral conscience. I may be wrong; I do not know what the Magisterium has said on the Pope’s words on condoms.

Not everyone is automatically infallible. Theologians are not. Bishops (singularly) are not. Infallibility is conferred upon the Pope and the Sacred Magisterium (comprised of a body of Bishops) and those teachings must be accepted as infallible. When the Pope speaks “ex cathedra” we know it.

If a Universal or Ordinary teaching is deemed infallible it moves to the level of the Sacred.

I think it’s useless to argue the Old Testament as the sum of the Church’s teachings. I already explained that we do not believe by scripture alone, but by all of the Church’s various teachings and bodies. And the birth of Chirst and the NT was the new “Word.”

Two things; it’s useless to defend the Church when the argument against it is taken solely from scripture taken from the OT – things we no longer believe and follow. Christ came to establish his Church and change things in fulfilling a prophecy. Second, I have a problem with the lower case usage of god. It’s disrepectful.

Last, why are you arguing with an atheist about the OT as the sum of Church teachings? Your friend appears to be creating controversy where there is none. I would say that you are on thin ice here if you give any credence to someone who challenges the Church based upon the OT alone, without an understanding of all the Church means. Obviously, your friend has no knowlege of the NT. Get your friend a copy of the NT. Jesus was certainly lenient with prostitutes, for one.

 

[Leegal]

Wow thank you guys, she hasn’t responded to me in a couple hours. I think she is struggling to find something to prove the catholic faith wrong. Really, when you overview it all, you cannot deny that our religion is flawed./

Really? You are skating on thin ice.

 

[dandingo]

AbsolutionBliss;8723314:

Wow thank you guys, she hasn’t responded to me in a couple hours. I think she is struggling to find something to prove the catholic faith wrong. Really, when you overview it all, you cannot deny that our religion is flawed./

QUOTE]

Really? You are skating on thin ice.

I’m pretty sure she meant to say not flawed.

 

[Leegal]

Leegal;8723414:

I’m pretty sure she meant to say not

flawed.

You can be sure; I’m not. I read what was there.

 

[AbsolutionBliss]

Haha oops, I meant:
“Really, when you overview it all, you cannot claim that our religion is flawed.”

 

[AbsolutionBliss]

@Hadrianus Spoken like a true Catholic I’ll be sure to say these things if she chooses to deny the faith further.

@atheistgirl That is actually a really good idea. If she responds to me I will definitely tell her to come to the forums & argue with people who have deep knowledge of the Catholic religion
@leegal Oh & I was quoting her words, thus the “God” in lower case.
**“Last, why are you arguing with an atheist about the OT as the sum of Church teachings?” ** I don’t have full knowledge of the OT, but I thought I could defend it anyway, I’m not sure why I did. You ended up to be right because she disappeared after I talked about the NT

Thank you for all your help everyone. Ever since I told her that you cannot argue on the Catholic religion based on the OT, she stopped responding.

Hopefully she will at least consider God is real in some way(s)
Though with my experience atheists don’t like to admit they are wrong. Though I pray that isn’t the case

 

[atheistgirl]

@atheistgirl That is actually a really good idea. If she responds to me I will definitely tell her to come to the forums & argue with people who have deep knowledge of the Catholic religion

It will also give you practice with your apologetics… but with a whole batallion of apologists who’ve got your back

Though with my experience atheists don’t like to admit they are wrong. Though I pray that isn’t the case

Some maybe, not all

Sarah x

 

[Hadrianus]

@Hadrianus Spoken like a true Catholic I’ll be sure to say these things if she chooses to deny the faith further.

@atheistgirl That is actually a really good idea. If she responds to me I will definitely tell her to come to the forums & argue with people who have deep knowledge of the Catholic religion
@leegal Oh & I was quoting her words, thus the “God” in lower case.
**“Last, why are you arguing with an atheist about the OT as the sum of Church teachings?” ** I don’t have full knowledge of the OT, but I thought I could defend it anyway, I’m not sure why I did. You ended up to be right because she disappeared after I talked about the NT

Thank you for all your help everyone. Ever since I told her that you cannot argue on the Catholic religion based on the OT, she stopped responding.

Hopefully she will at least consider God is real in some way(s)
Though with my experience atheists don’t like to admit they are wrong. Though I pray that isn’t the case

When Leo XIII opened the archives to Lugwig von Pastor He said the Church has nothing to fear from the truth. This has always been the attitude of the Popes. Reason, truth and history have always been on the side of the Church. We have nothing to hide.

 

[LovePatience]

On Slavery, the Church made a BIG mistake that was not in accord with what God wanted.

**1 Corinthians 13:9 ** For we know partially and we prophesy partially, but when the perfect comes, the partial will pass away.

There were Popes for slavery.

“We weighing all and singular the premises with due meditation, and noting that since we had formerly by other letters of ours granted among other things free and ample faculty to the aforesaid King Alfonso – to invade, search out, capture, vanquish, and subdue all Saracens and pagans whatsoever, and other enemies of Christ wheresoever placed, and the kingdoms, dukedoms, principalities, dominions, possessions, and all movable and immovable goods whatsoever held and possessed by them and to reduce their persons to perpetual slavery, and to apply and appropriate to himself and his successors the kingdoms, dukedoms, counties, principalities, dominions, possessions, and goods, and to convert them to his and their use and profit – by having secured the said faculty, the said King Alfonso, or, by his authority, the aforesaid infante, justly and lawfully has acquired and possessed, and doth possess, these islands, lands, harbors, and seas, and they do of right belong and pertain to the said King Alfonso and his successors”.

romancatholicism.org/popes-slavery.htm

 

[LovePatience]

However, St. Bridget of Sweden (one of the six patron saints of Europe) received Revelations directly from Jesus that this was wrong.

Book 1: Chapter 129:“The righteous person, whoever he or she may be, should also consider the material sustenance of the infidels converted to the faith so that they do not have to beg or be oppressed in slavery or be deprived of their corresponding rights. He should also take diligent care that such a convert should be continually instructed in the holy Catholic faith and in holy examples of virtue. It is indeed pleasing to me that pagan converts should see habits of holiness and hear words of charity. Many Christians come to the pagans undisciplined and in a state of moral disorder, boasting that they kill the pagans’ bodies and gain their temporal possessions. This pleases me about as much as those who sacrificed to the molten calf in the desert. Therefore, anyone who desires to please me by going to the pagans, let him first pluck out his eye of avarice and worldly fear. But he should keep his eye of compassion open along with his understanding so as to win their souls, desiring nothing but to die for God’s sake and to live for God.”

Book 7: Chapter 28 Now, however, know that in the Neapolitan citizenry many different horrible and secret sins are being committed which I am not relating to you. But instead I am speaking to you now about two kinds of open sins that greatly displease my Son and me and all the heavenly court.
The first sin is the fact that in this said city many buy pagans and infidels to be their slaves and that some masters of those slaves do not bother to baptize them and do not want to convert them to the Christian faith. And even if some of them are baptized, their masters bother no more, after the slaves’ baptism, to have them instructed and trained in the Christian faith or to train them in the reception of the Church’s sacraments than they did before the slaves’ baptism and conversion. And so it results that the said convert slaves, after accepting the faith, commit many sins and do not know how to return to the sacraments of penance and communion or how to be restored in the state of salvation and of reconciliation with God and of grace.
Moreover, some keep their female servants and slaves in extreme abjection and ignominy, as if they were dogs - selling them and, what is worse, frequently exposing them in a brothel to earn money that is a disgrace and an abomination. Others, in fact, keep them in their own houses as prostitutes both for themselves and for others; and this is extremely abominable and hateful to God and to me and also to the whole heavenly court.
Some other masters so grieve and exasperate these said servants of theirs with abusive words and blows that some of the said servants come to a state of despair and want to kill themselves. Indeed these sins and acts of negligence much displease God and all the heavenly court.
For God himself loves them because he created them; and to save all, he came into the world, taking flesh from me, and endured suffering and death on the cross. Know too that if anyone buys such pagans and infidels with the intention of making them Christians and wants to instruct and train them in the Christian faith and virtues and intends, during his life or at his death, to set these slaves at liberty so that the said slaves may not pass to his heirs, such a master of slaves merits much by this and is acceptable in the sight of God. But know for very certain that those who do the contrary will be heavily punished by God.

And Jesus condemns the Popes who did wrong.

** Book 1: Chapter 41** I now complain over you, o head of my Church, who sit on my seat which I gave to Peter and his successors to sit on with a threefold dignity and power: First, so that they would have the power of binding and loosing souls from their sins. Second, so that they would open Heaven for the penitent. Third, so that that they would close Heaven to the damned and to those who despise my Law. But you, who should be healing souls and presenting them to me, you are in truth a murderer of souls. I appointed Peter as shepherd and guardian of my sheep. But you, however, scatter and wound them. You are worse than Lucifer. For he was envious of me and desired to kill none but me so that he could rule in my place. But you are so much worse, for you do not only kill me by driving me off from yourself by your bad deeds, but you also kill souls by your bad example. I redeemed the souls with my blood and entrusted them to you as to a faithful friend, but you deliver them back again to the enemy from whom I redeemed them. You are more unrighteous than Pilate. He judged no one else but me to death, but you not only judge me as if I were a powerless lord and worthy of no good thing, no, you also judge and condemn the souls of the innocent and let the guilty go free without any rebuke. You are more cruel than Judas who only sold me, but you not only sell me, but also the souls of my chosen men for your own shameful profit and vain name’s sake. You are more despicable than the Jews, for they only crucified my body, but you crucify and torture the souls of my chosen men for whom your malice and your sins are more bitter than from any wound from a sword. And so, since you are like Lucifer and more unrighteous than Pilate and more cruel than Judas and more despicable than the Jews, I complain over you with justice.