Will the Real Bishops Please Stand Up? Please Stand Up

[Brad]

Well, since we were all preaching about preaching, I decided to chime in. I think we all have some pretty strong opinions here. I’m having a hard time discerning what you’re really trying to say here regarding adequately representing the position of the organization. Are you suggesting that somehow my quote from the Catechism is an inadequate representation of the Holy Mother Church? Help me to understand what you mean here.
.

I’m not sure which Catechism quote you are referring to. Any quote from the Catechism of the Catholic Church from Vatican.va, I would agree with.

So you think that love and sensitivity are not necessarily joined?

You may love someone but you cannot guarantee that your act of love will be received in an inoffensive manner. There are many other variables regarding circumstances of the life of the person you love that may contribute to their response. What is sensitive for one is not sensitive for another. Jesus is love but I’m sure that many didn’t think so when he was calling them “broods of vipers”. Today we never even come close to saying anything like that but we live in a hyper-sensitive society that cannot escape it’s own guilt. Another example is Padre Pio was often “insensitive” to unreprentant confessors. His concern was for their eternal welfare not that they may not be temporarily offended.

Thus, the document you referenced referred to the necessity of the truth of Jesus Christ but did not go as far as to define sensitivity.

Why is it that we’re so easy to dismiss what the Bishops teach when it doesn’t suit our hardness of hearts?

A) That is a judgement.
B) I did not dismiss what the document said.
C) It still stands that each diocesan Bishop is in charge as much as they are in communion with the Holy Father. The USCCB is not in charge. It is made up of many lay people in addition to Bishops.

Why is it that we only follow the Bishops to the letter when they preach about abortion or other such topics, and any other time we’re quick to dismiss their teaching out of hand, even though Canon Law says we are BOUND to obey them?

I quote:

Can. 208 Flowing from their rebirth in Christ, there is a genuine equality of dignity and action among all of Christ’s faithful. Because of this equality they all contribute, each according to his or her own condition and office, to the building up of the Body of Christ.

Can. 209 ß1 Christ’s faithful are bound to preserve their communion with the Church at all times, even in their external actions.

ß2 They are to carry out with great diligence their responsibilities towards both the universal Church and the particular Church to which by law they belong.

Can. 210 All Christ’s faithful, each according to his or her own condition, must make a wholehearted effort to lead a holy life, and to promote the growth of the Church and its continual sanctification.

Can. 211 All Christ’s faithful have the obligation and the right to strive so that the divine message of salvation may more and more reach all people of all times and all places.

Can. 212 ß1 Christ’s faithful, conscious of their own responsibility, are bound to show Christian obedience to what the sacred Pastors, who represent Christ, declare as teachers of the faith and prescribe as rulers of the Church.

Good stuff. Thanks for the quote. I’m not sure what anyone would disagree with here.

Why are my comments considered preaching when I raise some feminist issues, when the rest of you are using the same method to expound about the topics priests should be preaching about?

What difference does it make. So we are all preaching. The question is are we proclaiming the truth of the Gospel of Jesus Christ as guided and taught by our Holy Father from Peter through Benedict XVI?

Your comment almost sounds to me as if love and sensitivity are optional. It’s just too easy of an excuse to say that their teaching isn’t binding when it doesn’t fit in with a certain viewpoint.

Love is never optional for a Christian. As I explained above, sensitivity is subjective and dependent on the receiver of the message. We can act in the best love we know how and someone may still say you were insensitive.

I’m not looking for excuses. The USCCB waters down and gets involved in political matters that are not binding by faith. We can agree or disagree about immigration policy. We can agree or disagree about welfare policy. We cannot disagree on legality of abortion or legal modification of marriage definition. It’s really quite simple.

 

[verdigirl]

I’m not sure which Catechism quote you are referring to. Any quote from the Catechism of the Catholic Church from Vatican.va, I would agree with.

Ok, how about this:

2358 The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God’s will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord’s Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.

vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P85.HTM (PART THREE: LIFE IN CHRIST, SECTION TWO THE TEN COMMANDMENTS , CHAPTER TWO YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF, Article 6 THE SIXTH COMMANDMENT , II. The Vocation to Chastity)

How, then, are YOU interpreting “respect, compassion and sensitivity”? Are you exempt because you don’t know someone’s threshold, or should you just do your best?

A) That is a judgement.
B) I did not dismiss what the document said.
C) It still stands that each diocesan Bishop is in charge as much as they are in communion with the Holy Father. The USCCB is not in charge. It is made up of many lay people in addition to Bishops.

Are you saying, then, that your Bishop has no authority over you?

What difference does it make. So we are all preaching. The question is are we proclaiming the truth of the Gospel of Jesus Christ as guided and taught by our Holy Father from Peter through Benedict XVI?

The difference is that you saw fit to single out my opinions as “preaching to the thread.”

Are you suggesting that these Bishops, who are appointed by Benedict XVI, have no authority?

The USCCB waters down and gets involved in political matters that are not binding by faith. We can agree or disagree about immigration policy. We can agree or disagree about welfare policy. We cannot disagree on legality of abortion or legal modification of marriage definition. It’s really quite simple.

I just cannot understand this line of reasoning. If we are all professing allegiance to the Pope, then why would we not take on the teaching of the Bishops as binding by faith? Aren’t the Bishops really an extension of the Pope (assuming they’re doctrinally in line, right?), and therefore “whatever you bind on earth” applies to them as well? Isn’t that disobedience and contrary to the Canon Law I quoted?

If you dismiss the teaching of the Bishops, then from whom will you accept teaching? I’m not sure that B16 will approve of us ignoring the teaching of the Bishops HE appointed, do you?