Why is the US Catholic church so obsessed with the gay issue?

  • Thread starter Thread starter catholic1seeks
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
drac16 said:
Well, can you blame them? I certainly don’t blame them. The pro LGBT activists are threatening the freedom of christians and many others. Those LGBT activists are threatening religious leaders to bow the knee to the golden calf, or else face legal action. They’re slowly [but surely] overcoming the public school system; they’re coming for our mosques next.
Click to expand...
They’re already there…
At first, the devout Muslims who gathered in a Washington, D.C., conference center seemed like they could have come from any mosque. There were women in headscarves and bearded men who quoted the Quran.
Click to expand...
But something was different. While mingling over hors d’oeuvres, they discussed how to change Islam’s future. A woman spoke about fighting terrorism; she had married outside the Islamic faith, which is forbidden for a Muslim woman. A Pakistani man mentioned his plans to meet friends for drinks, despite the faith’s ban on alcohol.
Click to expand...
In a corner of the room, an imam in a long gray tunic counseled a young Muslim with a vexing spiritual conflict: being gay and Muslim. The imam, also gay and in a relationship, could easily sympathize with the youth’s difficulties.
Click to expand...
On this brisk Monday night in late October, members of Muslims for Progressive Values, a nascent American reformist organization, had gathered from around the country to celebrate a milestone: In four years, the group had grown from a few friends to a thousand members and spawned a string of small mosques and spiritual groups that stretched from Atlanta to Los Angeles.
Click to expand...
Today, as America’s Muslim leaders debate controversial topics like political radicalism inside mosques and states’ attempts to ban Shariah law, this growing network of alternative mosques and Islamic groups is quietly forging a new spiritual movement.
Click to expand...
They’re taking bold steps, reinterpreting Islamic norms and re-examining taboos. While far from accepted by mainstream clerics, these worshippers feel that the future of the religion lies not solely with tradition but with them. Women are leading congregations in prayer, gay imams are performing Islamic marriages, and men and women are praying side by side.
Click to expand...
huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/29/progressive-muslims-launch-gay-friendly-women-led-mosques_n_1368460.html
 
drac16 said:
Don’t talk to me about charity, Captain Morality. You would have us lose our freedom to believe if you were given half the chance…
Click to expand...
Heh? What are you even talking about?
Anywho, I certainly find referring to those who disagree with you as whores to be uncharitable.
:hug1:

No need to be grumpy.
 
estesbob said:
Their premise is that everyone who went before us got it wrong. They even claim that somehow we are more enlightened than previous generations in interpreting scripture. They also throw in some comments about compassion and tolerance. Ive said it before but this rationale presupposes a totally inept god that would allow his people to be in grievous error for over 2,000 years. If the Catholic Church made such assertions I believe I would leave organized religion entirely ,probably becoming an agnostic. I refuse to believe in a god who lets his people stumble around in error for thousands of years.
Click to expand...
I.e., in my taxonomy you’re a 213 on this issue:p

I think you need use your your 213s more sparingly, but of course you are under no obligation to listen to me.

It is very clear that God has allowed his people to mess up in some pretty major ways for a pretty long time. So I don’t find this to be as obvious an argument as you do.

Also, I don’t think you are actually addressing the substance of the (admittedly long) document to which I linked. Just to your picture in your head of what “liberals” think. Not really very helpful.

Edwin
 
Thorolfr said:
In December 2013, the United Nations recognized Muslims for Progressive Values (MPV) as an official non-government organization (NGO) association member. There are a number of progressive mosques associated with MPV.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslims_for_Progressive_Values
Click to expand...
So if a building claims to be a mosque, it is a mosque…:confused:

Nope. Not historically, anyway. A mosque is more than a building-- it’s a place where Allah azza wa jal is worshiped. Part and parcel of worshiping Him is to submit to His truths and seek to live by them. You can’t do that in a building that teaches it’s OK to commit the major sin of homosexuality.
 
catholic1seeks said:
Heh? What are you even talking about?
Anywho, I certainly find referring to those who disagree with you as whores to be uncharitable.
:hug1:

No need to be grumpy.
Click to expand...
It wasn’t just because they disagree with me-- it’s because they are teaching lies that send people to Hell.
 
drac16 said:
It wasn’t just because they disagree with me-- it’s because they are teaching lies that send people to Hell.
Click to expand...
ah, I think often we have a primordial understanding of hell.

I think we have a lot of development and understanding to undergo if we believe that a homosexual person’s getting married to the person he loves inherently is a one-way ticket to hell.
 
catholic1seeks said:
You approach this awkwardly.

God would not have led the Church wrong all that time;
Click to expand...
God has NEVER led the Church wrong.

“Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I shall build My Church…**and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.”
**

Non-Catholics wish that passage was not included in the bible.
Besides, the Church is never 100% correct. For the vast majority of its history, the Church assumed the existence of slavery as part of a fallen world.
Click to expand...
We went over the slavery issue once or twice before…remember? Several well documented and logical posts refuted your way of thinking about that subject.

Try another example of the Catholic Church being incorrect. Slavery is getting old.
 
Zoltan_Cobalt said:
God has NEVER led the Church wrong.

“Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I shall build My Church…**and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.”
**

Non-Catholics wish that passage was not included in the bible.

We went over the slavery issue once or twice before…remember? Several well documented and logical posts refuted your way of thinking about that subject.

Try another example of the Catholic Church being incorrect. Slavery is getting old.
Click to expand...
So you deny that the Church accepted slavery for the majority of its existence?
 
catholic1seeks said:
Several Catholic organizations in the US seem to be uncomfortably and awkwardly preoccupied with gay issues. Catholic Answers Live, a radio show I love, sometimes has specific shows dedicated to same-sex marriage or homosexuality. I just switched on EWTN on my TV and the show was talking about the “militant homosexual agenda.” Catholic bloggers and articles are always dedicating topics on this issue; everytime I go to NewAdvent.org, there is a good chance I’ll see a highlighted article casting the issue in a severe light.

My question is, what is this emphasis on this issue meant to achieve? Is it supposed to help those gay persons who are already struggling to find a place in the Church? Is it supposed to convince the “militant homosexual” activists? Is it supposed to reach out to those in the Church and the world who disagree with church teaching and accept homosexual relationships? Or is it supposed to comfort those who already agree with church teaching?

Maybe I am just sensitive. But I do not see the point with this over-emphasis. I could see how such a preoccupation would turn away those from the Church, as it is making me really disappointed with the USA church’s outreach to those on the fringes.
Click to expand...
If only that “over-emphasis” was true. Sad fact is, the Church has been a lion on abortion, and a lamb on “gay” issues, same-sex “marriage” etc. Perhaps the reason for that is the infiltration of homosexually-oriented men in the priesthood (at least 50-60 percent of clergy in the USA are same-sex oriented according to studies, and it’s worse in the seminaries). So no wonder the church would be reticent about dealing with this issue.
 
catholic1seeks said:
ah, I think often we have a primordial understanding of hell.

I think we have a lot of development and understanding to undergo if we believe that a homosexual person’s getting married to the person he loves inherently is a one-way ticket to hell.
Click to expand...
I think you personally need a lot more “development and understanding” to grasp the truth of the teachings of the Catholic Church.

The concept of a homosexual marriage being a “one-way ticket to hell” should be very easy to understand.

Assume that two Catholic homosexuals were civilly married or simply engaged in a homosexual relationship. When they engage in homosexual behavior, they both commit mortal sins. Their immortal souls are now in grave danger. Of course as Catholics, they can avail themselves of the Sacrament of Reconciliation. Their mortal sin will be absolved, but they still must atone for the sin at judgement day.

To be truly in love with another person you must want the best for the one you love. The best for another is eternal salvation. How can two people love one another if they continue to endanger the eternal life of the other???

Assume again that our two homosexual friends spent a romantic Friday evening engaging in all sorts of homosexual activity. Since they go to Mass on Sundays, they plan to go to Confession on Saturday so they can receive Communion at Mass. However, one of the partners decides to run down to the pharmacy to buy more condoms. On the way he is struck by a train and dies instantly. 😦

According to the teaching of the Church…he just bought his ticket to hell.

But…

The Church never condemns anyone to hell. We never claim that someone is “in hell”. Because even the most evil person could have reconciled himself with God the moment before he died. We just don’t know. We pray that forgiveness was granted and hope it was.
The bottom line is…it is not worth the risk.
 
catholic1seeks said:
So you deny that the Church accepted slavery for the majority of its existence?
Click to expand...
Of course the Church accepted slavery. Slavery existed before Christ founded the Church and long after. Would you expect the Church to claim slavery did not exist?
 
Zoltan_Cobalt said:
Of course the Church accepted slavery. Slavery existed before Christ founded the Church and long after. Would you expect the Church to claim slavery did not exist?
Click to expand...
The early Church could have condemned slavery and forbid Christians from owning slaves. God could have condemned slavery in Exodus or Leviticus or Deuteronomy and forbid the Jews to own slaves just like He forbid them to do all sort of other things such as wear clothing made from two kind of material or plant fields with two kinds of crops (Leviticus 19:19). But what did God say in Leviticus 25:44-46:
As for the male and female slaves whom you may have, it is from the nations around you that you may acquire male and female slaves. 45 You may also acquire them from among the aliens residing with you, and from their families that are with you, who have been born in your land; and they may be your property. 46 You may keep them as a possession for your children after you, for them to inherit as property.
Click to expand...
Or how about in the Ten Commandments in Deuteronomy 5:21:
Neither shall you covet your neighbor’s wife.
Click to expand...
Neither shall you desire your neighbor’s house, or field, or male or female slave, or ox, or donkey, or anything that belongs to your neighbor.
Click to expand...
 
Zoltan_Cobalt said:
I think you personally need a lot more “development and understanding” to grasp the truth of the teachings of the Catholic Church.

The concept of a homosexual marriage being a “one-way ticket to hell” should be very easy to understand.

Assume that two Catholic homosexuals were civilly married or simply engaged in a homosexual relationship. When they engage in homosexual behavior, they both commit mortal sins. Their immortal souls are now in grave danger. Of course as Catholics, they can avail themselves of the Sacrament of Reconciliation. Their mortal sin will be absolved, but they still must atone for the sin at judgement day.
Click to expand...
This concept of sin is laughable. Our puny human minds compared to the awesome love of God. HA! We think we know what will send a person to hell.

Hell is the result of choosing something in place of God, of rejecting him. How many homosexual persons are rejecting God’s love by committing themselves in a relationship of love and self-sacrifice? God made these humans who are homosexual, knowing that they would have the inherent biological inclinations they have. To condemn them simply for following the natural consequence of their desire to love someone of the same sex is unjust. Thankfully, the concept of mortal sin you just described is not the only understanding of morality in the Christian Faith. 👍
 
catholic1seeks said:
This concept of sin is laughable. Our puny human minds compared to the awesome love of God. HA! We think we know what will send a person to hell.

Hell is the result of choosing something in place of God, of rejecting him. How many homosexual persons are rejecting God’s love by committing themselves in a relationship of love and self-sacrifice? God made these humans who are homosexual, knowing that they would have the inherent biological inclinations they have. To condemn them simply for following the natural consequence of their desire to love someone of the same sex is unjust. Thankfully, the concept of mortal sin you just described is not the only understanding of morality in the Christian Faith. 👍
Click to expand...
Love is not the source of potential condemnation. It’s the wrong use of their sexual faculties. Desire is not justification.

It seems that the set of elements of Catholic teaching with which you have difficulty is actually quite broad.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top