True. Assuming that you consider contraception and SSM to be wrong, then two wrongs do not make a right. But most people who are complaining about SSM are not guilty of some minor infraction of church rules. Contraception is a mortal sin. It should preclude you from taking the sacrament. And we are talking about the majority of Catholics here.
Scandel is defined by the conventions of a culture. Two men holding hands in another culture doesn’t hint to homosexuality in any way, for example.
That is correct. I heard the following from a 17 year old who was about to turn 18 to his raised Catholic, and sent him to Catholic school, parents. “When I turn 18, I don’t gotta listen to you no more!”
I said for many people.
I think that emphasizes my point.
Not only are openly gay people in a relationship not allowed to serve in a leadership role, they can’t even participate in the Eucharist. In that respect, they are treated like Catholics who have been divorced and remarried without an annulment.
And one wrong does not prevent the naming of another.
Be involved? Sure.
Using the mortal sin card is just a way of restating that “homosexuality is immoral” because no human can know whether or not his brother or sister in a state of mortal sin; perhaps the action can be observed as “grave” based on traditional teachings and standards. But no one is apt to know whether someone is without grace in his or her soul.
Coming from a church (ELCA) that practices open communion where everyone who believes that Jesus Christ is truly present in the bread and wine is welcome to participate, the fact that the Catholic Church restricts who can participate is one reason I could never be a Catholic.
But if a person feels called to sexual acts with a person of the same sex, shouldn’t reason require them to think deeply about the source of the call and the wisdom of the act?
While there is some NT basis for being properly prepared to receive the Eucharist, based on Paul’s words and the fact that Christians receive Jesus, I think the CC goes too far by restricting the Eucharist from groups of people. Perhaps we should go back to the Didache, which tells of the faithful confessing their sins before communion. Each of us needs to be properly disposed, but this legalistic outlook on mortal sin in Catholic theology is a problem, I think.Coming from a church (ELCA) that practices open communion where everyone who believes that Jesus Christ is truly present in the bread and wine is welcome to participate, the fact that the Catholic Church restricts who can participate is one reason I could never be a Catholic.
I hope they did sex education in his school. Because it doesn’t sound like they did anything associated with English grammar.
And for those not finding a spouse? Is chastity for them too?
We always have communal confession and absolution in our church services in the ELCA where, before we receive communion, we all say:
Our pastor then does the sign of the cross and gives us absolution by saying:
Wow I did not know any Lutheran church did that, or considered the minister as being able to do that… I thought absolution was a uniquely Catholic/Orthodox (and Anglican?) practice. But neat! There is also a public confession similar to that in the Mass, as you probably know, but the priest’s absolution is not so explicit at that time.
The Church asks those who have sinned seriously to exclude themselves. They are able to re-admit themselves through confession. You speak as though this is some kind of unjust discrimination.
Yes, though for a single person, one includes the other.