Who is obsessed with the Church's traditional stance on homosexuality and women in ministry?

  • Thread starter Thread starter JReducation
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

JReducation

Guest
Commenting on the Holy Father and the media’s exchange on the pope’s way home, I think that Cardinal Dolan has hit the nail on the head.

But, as usual, the press predictably brought these weary issues up, and have given them more ink than any of the other noble themes that rang through Copacabana Beach. It’s not the Church that is obsessed with those topics, but the media!

I would say that not only the media, but many of us who are not part of the media are also fixated on these issues that the Church has already addressed throughout her 2,000 year history.

Original Statement
 
I was - what really hits the spot - amused? bemused? by the whole reporting. As in, so missing the point.

The reporters were reading into the comments their own personal agendas, and not particularly thinly veiled at that. I wonder how long it will take before they wake up and figure out this Pope is just as Catholic as the ones before him.

Ah well, the circus continues.
 
otjm said:
I was - what really hits the spot - amused? bemused? by the whole reporting. As in, so missing the point.

The reporters were reading into the comments their own personal agendas, and not particularly thinly veiled at that. ** I wonder how long it will take before they wake up and figure out this Pope is just as Catholic as the ones before him.**

Ah well, the circus continues.
Click to expand...
The bold is mine.

I’m waiting for this too.

But I’m praying that they don’t realize it, but rather are so charmed by him that they will follow him down the right path. You know, kind of not realizing when you’re being transformed.
 
I believe it’s both “liberals” and “conservatives” that dislike the Holy Father’s comments.

We all know why “liberals” don’t like it. But the reason why “conservatives” becasue when it comes to “conservative” Christianity, especially in the US, “conservative” Protestants have a monopoly. From what I heard, many “conservative” “christian” are upset at the Holy Father’s comments becasue he does not believe people with SSA are to hell.

And so many faithful Catholics are upset at the decline in the Church, they borrow “conservative” Protestant language like the US government borrows money

As for women “priests”, the media have misunderstanding what Priest’s role in the Catholic Church is, most were raised in Protestant traditions and they believe that the Priest plays a similar role, so that is why they say “Why not?” to women “priests”
 
Lord_Keynes said:
Wedge issues…I hate them SO much. :banghead:
Click to expand...
This is not really a “wedge issue” for faithful Catholics. The teaching on homosexuality is clear. Homosexual attraction alone is not a sin, the sexual act is. Women “priests”? Jesus already answered that question for us and that answer was “No.”
 
The media and others are fixated on these issues because they wish desperately that the Church will change its stance on these issues. Of course, it will not and cannot. It is an impossibility.

Since the culture is in an accelerated rate of decline, there is an inevitable clash between Church and culture. Not only that, but as a result of the contraceptive culture brought on by rejection of Humanae Vitae, the family itself is in an accelerated state of decline. When family structure disintegrates, so does society and civilization.
 
Lord_Keynes said:
I’m referring to the media’s majorly over exaggerated play up of this whole thing.
Click to expand...
Media always cherry pick. If you look at other threads, you could see their “divide and conquer” strategy is working
 
JReducation said:
The bold is mine.

I’m waiting for this too.

But I’m praying that they don’t realize it, but rather are so charmed by him that they will follow him down the right path. You know, kind of not realizing when you’re being transformed.
Click to expand...
Br. JR, would you mind elaborating on how you think this will play out? I’d be very interested in your opinion 🙂
 
The pope said about ten interesting things on that plane, any one of which would have been a big deal by itself. They may not represent doctrinal shifts, but they were a major shift in emphasis and tone. The whole context was a major change in style. The Catholic church is not just a bag of doctrines—style, emphasis and tone matter. The effort to downplay this in some quarters utterly baffles me.

To make a hyperbolic–but fun–comparison, it’s as if someone heard Jimi Hendrix’ rendition of the national anthem and said “Bah, the NOTES were all there.”
 
JimG said:
The media and others are fixated on these issues because they wish desperately that the Church will change its stance on these issues. Of course, it will not and cannot. It is an impossibility.

Since the culture is in an accelerated rate of decline, there is an inevitable clash between Church and culture. Not only that, but as a result of the contraceptive culture brought on by rejection of Humanae Vitae, the family itself is in an accelerated state of decline. When family structure disintegrates, so does society and civilization.
Click to expand...
The truth is that even were the church to change its teachings in these two areas, homosexuality and women priests, it would do nothing to stem a decline in numbers. The Anglican Church is a perfect example of how useless liberalising these two areas is if the aim is to increase church attendance. The Anglican Church in England has gay priests, women priests, married priests, allows the use o f birth control, blesses gay unions and still their numbers are decimated. Every time I visit England more and more Anglican churches have been turned into cafes, restaurants and private homes. What the mass media wants is for the Catholic Church to justify secular values, this will make all those who aren’t attending church feel better but it won’t get them to church. The best approach would probably be to ignore public opinion. As far as liberal beliefs, I think Benedict is to the left of Francis, it’s just that the majority of people have not bothered to read his books.
 
I think Benedict is often misunderstood. He was a conservative, but so deeply steeped in the history of the church that he was not of the “conserve last week” school. But can you spell out what you mean by your comment?
 
TimSpalding said:
I think Benedict is often misunderstood. He was a conservative, but so deeply steeped in the history of the church that he was not of the “conserve last week” school. But can you spell out what you mean by your comment?
Click to expand...
If you read Light of The World, Benedict said basically the same thing that Francis just said.
 
Glad2behome said:
If you read Light of The World, Benedict said basically the same thing that Francis just said.
Click to expand...
Here’s what Benedict said in Light of the World (p. 152):

“Homosexuality is incompatible with the priestly vocation. Otherwise, celibacy itself would lose its meaning as a renunciation. It would be extremely dangerous if celibacy became a sort of pretext for bringing people into the priesthood who don’t want to get married anyway. …*The Congregation for education issued a decision a few years ago to the effect that homosexual candidates cannot become priests because their sexual orientation estranges them from the proper sense of paternity, from the intrinsic nature of priestly being.”

Your assertion is that Francis said that? I find that—well, completely bogus.

If Francis really believed that a homosexual orientation was intrinsically incompatible with the priestly nature, surely he wouldn’t have said what he said. Benedict goes well past “the tendency is not a problem.” He says the tendency IS a problem. Keep in mind the immediate context for Francis statement was homosexuality among priests!
 
TimSpalding said:
Here’s what Benedict said in Light of the World (p. 152):

“Homosexuality is incompatible with the priestly vocation. Otherwise, celibacy itself would lose its meaning as a renunciation. It would be extremely dangerous if celibacy became a sort of pretext for bringing people into the priesthood who don’t want to get married anyway. …*The Congregation for education issued a decision a few years ago to the effect that homosexual candidates cannot become priests because their sexual orientation estranges them from the proper sense of paternity, from the intrinsic nature of priestly being.”

Your assertion is that Francis said that? I find that—well, completely bogus.

If Francis really believed that a homosexual orientation was intrinsically incompatible with the priestly nature, surely he wouldn’t have said what he said. Benedict goes well past “the tendency is not a problem.” He says the tendency IS a problem. Keep in mind the immediate context for Francis statement was homosexuality among priests!
Click to expand...
I believe Benedict was referring to persons active in the lifestyle of homosexuality. "If they accept the Lord and have goodwill, who am I to judge them?" As my main motto goes “Deum time, et mandata eius faciamus” and if a Priest who does just that but has a past history of homosexual acts or has SSA but his SSA IS UNDER CONTROL, then I don’t see a reason to judge them.

I have the bad habit of bringing up Saint Austin in this type of talks, and I am going to it again:p Saint Austin had a long history of sin, so many in his youth he could not remember them all. All unmarried persons, persons with SSA, Priests and Bishops are called to chastity. And as President Bush* said if one repents of his sinful past, we should be saying “Glory Hallelujah”

This quote referrers to what Pres. Bush said about funding faith based organizations for the purpose of battling drug addiction
 
The media is there to scandalise. Scandal sells newspapers. “A nice thing happened today” does not. So they do what brings in readers (scandal!) and thus advertisers and thus, money.

“Pope reiterates Christ’s teachings”.
“Meh” says editor.

“Pope liberalises conservative Church”.
“Clear the front page!”, says editor.

If the Church wants a fair shake in the media, it should start its own papers and TV stations. Political parties do this.

Or we could just seek God’s good graces. The rest will then take care of itself.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top