E
evelynicholson
Guest
Great quote and yes, we have to get on with living our life.So I;ve got todo ironing shopping and half a dozen jobs and get off the forum! Great fun talking to you on the forum! Bye
- Status
E
evelynicholson
Guest
"This is the effect of true charity: to be on good terms with all men, to consider no one your enemy, and to live at peace with those who hate peace."
–St. Robert Bellarmine
–St. Robert Bellarmine
K
Kaninchen
Guest
The Bishop of Hereford is involved with an Employment Tribunal – that’s not a trial.
Almost inevitably “behaviour likely to cause a breach of the peace” or “threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour” [If not, perhaps you could reveal the nature of the charge].
I await proof of ‘persecution’.
E
evelynicholson
Guest
After what *your *people have endured I know it is nothing at all yet, but people are beginning to notice the small signs as were there before Hitler and it is important we know what is going on,
Distributing leaflets is not ‘breach of the peace’ all sorts of people go and talk at Hyde Park Corner for example, sensibile people and nutters. alike. They all have the right of free speech.The gay marchers should have just laughed and carried on. One of the ‘Spiritual Works of Mercy’ which we Catholics are asked to do is to ;gently admonish sinners’ and ask them to turn from their sinful ways.This is a part of belief That is all this couple did.
As the ‘rights’ and well being of the 'gay brothers and sisters are obviously very close to your heart there isno point in my responding to you.Your religion is not mine anyway and there are always differences.We will all of us only find out at the Last Judgement.
E
E_Kubena
Guest
You are right I do need to study my bible more. We can and should refer to the ten commandments out of love for our neigbor. I do see the face of Christ in all, but as in prayer #2 of the St Brigid prayers we must realize and see that the enemy surrounds us as furious lions. You say I am very young (I wish I was) but we need to truly consider the message we send to our youth when we do not confront this sin and expose it. If we do not do this no one will. I, being a grevious sinner, do not claim to be above anyone else, but this is being forced upon my family through the media, in the schools, in the workplace, and throughout society. I condenm no one but voice my hatred of the sin itself. One must hate the Devil, Flesh, & the World, or else one is duped by it. Can you not see by covering up the violation of moral law (ten commandments) with we hate them claims is a con. If you are using love & discrimation claims to cover up evil
acts and to kind of sweep them under the rug I question if you truly know the meaning of love. I have two very young children and see them growing up in a society that looks more and more like Sodom.
acts and to kind of sweep them under the rug I question if you truly know the meaning of love. I have two very young children and see them growing up in a society that looks more and more like Sodom.
E
evelynicholson
Guest
You are absolutely right, which is why I suggest that one of the things we can do is the prayer to Michael (above) every day. I always explain to my son the persusive and reasonable sounding voice of evil. He was confirmed last year please God made a fast in Lent and has been sticking up in school for the Church’s teaching. He has been teased, bullied and upset by it, but keeps on defending the faith to his peers. He has enormous respect from teachers and other pupils, is balanced and compassionate. It is so important that we catechise our children well, so they can spot bias.Relaxation of almost every law known to man resulted three weeks ago in the rape and murder of a two year old baby. We must never lose sight of the fact that evil wants to destroy our spirit make us like itself. We do have to aggressively attack the sins and almost bore our children with Church’s teaching. We are a close family and I thank God for the optimism of my son. Listening to the Daily Breakfast by cheery priest Father Roderick at sqpn,com also keeps me cheery in the mornings. My parish too is very strong. This is the best defence against attack. I pray for your children, who will learn to be strong for the faith when they see what it means to you , whom they love and it is neccessary as you have found to keep talking all the time . I totally understand your fears for your children, I had the same ones but children will be guided by the spirit . They will know when to say no if they are taught lovingly the way of truth and love and to be gentle with sinners, I am one too. I’m sorry I thought you were very young, It said junior member so I thought you were.I will pray for your family from the UK and will pray the prayer of St Michael every day from now on as well.We know God will come through for us in the end .
P
prv
Guest
Your concern is that churches cannot refuse halls to civil unions and blasphemous garbage of the sort? Show us the law.
Now as for Anglican Bishop of Hereford, may God grant him a good reward in heaven.
For the Stonewall Gay group, Lord have mercy, Christ have mercy, Lord have mercy.
Yes, requiring Catholic and other Christian schools to accept students of other faiths is absolutely oppressive. Now, having a voluntary arrangement for those other other faiths to attend our schools is praiseworthy, though it is most certainly not sinful to reserve our educational facilities to our own children.
I don’t know of any law in the U.K. or the U.S. where churches or anybody else have to rent any hall to anybody. Can anybody show me some proof first?
G
GreenJeans
Guest
M
Mirdath
Guest
Excuse me? How would you know?
Kitty Chan:
I have never heard of an attempt to force churches to marry couples they do not want to. The gay marriage debate is over civil marriage, not religious.
These laws do not discriminate against the free exercise of religion; instead they forbid religious discrimination using public funds. If the Catholic Church would rather take its ball and go home, that’s up to it – but if it wants to play, it needs to follow the laws of the state. A pity that its bishops value such a nonsensical double standard (after all, converts to Protestant churches commit the mortal sin of schism, live that ‘lifestyle’, and can adopt) over caring for children.
D
DanteAlighieri
Guest
The principle of relgious freedom precludes governmental interference in the Church’s teachings and practices. The government may not impose on any religious institution practices which are contrary to its fundamental teachings.
That limitation only disappears when the religious institution – in this case, the Catholic adoption agencies – engage in practices which present a danger to others or are contrary to the common good of the people. Because there are many secular and non-Catholic channels for adoption, it does not follow that Catholic agencies’ “discrimination” is a threat to the common good.
Those who entrust their infants to Catholic agencies should not have to worry that their children may be raised outside of the Church. Let those who do not wish to raise their children as Catholics use other channels to adopt.
Furthermore, it’s absurd to accuse the Church of a double standard with regards to the care of a child when it is the government who would pull the funding. This could lead to the shutdown of Church-run adoption agencies, forcing the children in their care to be placed by state-run, secular, or compliant faith-based agencies, adding more strain to an already over-taxed system and increasing the possibility that children will be misplaced in dangerous or unhealthy homes.
Finally, your gross overstatement (in bold above) is a strawman at best, and a slander at worst. The Church holds no such preference; in fact, the refusal of adoptions to gay couples is done out of concern for the welfare of the child – not, as some would say, out of hatred for homosexuals.
Peace,
Dante
G
GreenJeans
Guest
Do the Catholic agencies make sure they are not placing kids into homes where the parents practice ABC? Would living in a home where embryos are regularly murdered by abortificants be a problem?
M
Mirdath
Guest
Operating an adoption agency is not a religious practice. It is a secular practice that happens to be engaged in by some religious institutions. It is governed by civil law.
Catholic adoption agencies already send children to non-Catholic homes. Oops.
The government is threatening to pull funding if the agencies’ secular operations do not comply with secular law. This is nothing new, and I imagine if the scenario didn’t hit a little close to home you wouldn’t think it a big deal at all.
Strawman? Slander? Please show me evidence that Catholic adoption agencies only adopt children out to orthodox Catholic nuclear families of which all members are verified to be in the state of grace.
‘Welfare of the child’ is a specious argument at best. If a gay couple can get past the rest of the screening process for potential parents, they’re pretty obviously going to be able to provide for the child’s welfare. If you’re arguing that it’s because of their unrepentant, sinful lifestyle, you’re inconsistent because former Catholics, artificial family planning practitioners, and a whole host of other varieties of unrepentant sinner are all allowed to adopt.
G
GreenJeans
Guest
The state government runs the adoption program in the US. It sets standards and various organizations choose to join the program. Those who are content with the standrads join. Those not content with the standards do not join. No organization has a right to be in the program, and no organization has the right to demand special standards for itself. The organizations that join the program are simply government contractors who agree to follow the contractual specifications of the program. The standards are set for the benefit of the whole society, not the special needs of the contractors.
D
DanteAlighieri
Guest
Ah, it appears I was misinformed about the function of Catholic adoption agencies. Thanks for correcting my misconception – and extra thanks for the very charitable way in which you mocked me.
A child’s welfare does not begin and end with having food in his belly and clothes on his back. Furthermore, the fact that gay couples can get through the screening process should not be misunderstood as an affirmation of their ability to guide a child’s moral development.
I can see why “welfare of the child” might seem specious from a relativist point of view, but in light of Church teaching, it is exactly the issue in question here. The unrepentant sinful lifestyle of a gay couple has a direct bearing on the moral formation of the child. Children need a mother and a father, and they need to grow up witnessing their parents’ love as a mirror of Christ’s love for the Church.
Peace,
Dante
M
Mirdath
Guest
The Church’s argument for this always comes down to its moral problems with homosexuality. However, the Church’s moral authority does not extend to non-members; and the adoption agencies already ignore many other Catholic moral qualms. A heterosexual couple can still adopt if they’re completely irreligious, in schism, use artificial birth control, have aborted in the past and are not repentant, and so on and so forth. These sins are at least as great as homosexual acts, are they not? Wouldn’t any of those environments come up lacking in the moral formation department from an orthodox Catholic point of view? Yet only homosexuality comes up as the problem. It’s rather inconsistent. And can we please dispense with this idea that homosexuals are incapable of true love? It’s just not so.
It’s important to remember that the adoption agencies are a secular concern the Church has chosen to become involved in, not a religious one the civil government happens to oversee.
D
DanteAlighieri
Guest
I’ll concede your point about the secular nature of adoption – partly because of my ignorance of its workings – but I cannot concede that the Church’s moral teachings do not extend to non-believers. That point of view smacks of relativism in its worse sense: that, if one doesn’t believe the Church’s teachings, one should find a church that accomodates one’s own beliefs. Either the Church teaches the truth, or it doesn’t – one doesn’t get to pick and choose.
With regard to the moral environment of the households of various types of sinners, I must say that the homosexual lifestyle is an overt and blatant denial of the Catholic concept of family that even young children are able to recognize on some level – which results in the loss of their innocence. Those who have procured abortions, who use ABC, or who are in schism with the church are not necessarily in an invalid marriage as a result of their sins; homosexuals are, by definition, NOT married.
Furthermore, “true love” – a trite and nebulous term, by the way – is that which mirrors God’s love for us (when we love our neighbor) or the Church (when we love our spouse). Homosexual relationships do neither. There is no openness to procreation in a homosexual relationship, so the sex act is inherently disordered. In addition, same-sex relationships are devoid of the complementary nature found in a male-female relationship – an aspect that is important in creating an ideal nuturing environment for children.
Peace,
Dante
G
GreenJeans
Guest
So, living in an environment of hidden sin is OK for kids? If you cover it up you get the kid? If a couple said they would tell the kid they use ABC, are they then unfit? Don’t ask, don’t tell unless they are gay? What is the principle upon which an agency should allow an adoption?
Catholic Charities of Boston placed kids in gay homes for twenty years and reports no problems.
D
DanteAlighieri
Guest
Don’t be absurd. We’re all sinners; that is not what makes us unfit to be parents. You are avoiding the issue: that a gay couple cannot properly mirror God’s love for the Church, nor replace the missing gender’s needed presence in the child’s life – not to mention the open rebellion against the definition of family.
Look at it this way: the Church does not condone placing children with unmarried, hetorosexual couples who are cohabiting, as far as I know. True inconsistency would be to deny these people the right to be parents but to give that right to gay couples.
With regards to CC of Boston: please cite your source – and remember: that they report no problem does not mean that there are none.
Peace,
Dante
E
evelynicholson
Guest
Where churches and chapels hire out their halls for wedding functions and various other events, it is the law now that if, for example Stonewall insisted on hiring it and the church refused, the church would be guilty of discrimination and would be fined. The churches need the income in many cases, but if you search this new law you will see this is true. Several years ago Stonewall broke into Canterbury Cathedral and on our high holy day carried out a noisy demonstration, not caring about the offence it caused to the faithful there. Don’t think they won’t force the issue. Single gay men can adopt as long as they are celebate as the church asks. This is an argument no one can finish, since they are requiring he church to condone their behavious, which it will not do. The Anglican Church is being destroyed because people’s need for approval for a controversial lifestyle has overruled their God centred life.Their will be done, not his. Amen
- Status