1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

The Catholic Church and the Future of Same-Sex Marriage

Discussion in 'Off-Topic' started by Smellincoffee, Jan 22, 2014.

  1. classical_hero

    classical_hero In whom I trust

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2003
    Messages:
    33,262
    Location:
    Perth,Western Australia
    You just pick and choose what you want to believe, which is very hypocritical. You are not the ultimate authority on the Bible.

    "Bad laws are the worst sort of Tyranny". Edmunde Burke. We must fight against laws that are bad and destructive to society.
     
  2. Darkflight

    Darkflight Prince

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2012
    Messages:
    340
    Location:
    Norway
    The bible is all there, so thinking that instead of proving it is lazy. It's irrelevant either way. It may be okay to god, but I think the government is going to be a bit miffed. And the government is the ruling body of the country, not god.
    The existence of god and the validity of what is written in the bible are personal opinions. So by your standards pointing to god or the bible as justification to treat people differently based on sexual preference is discrimination.

    God doesn't have to bow to the law of humans, humans do.

    Try proving in any way that letting two adult males or two adult females make the same legal contract that one adult male and one adult female can make today is destructive to society.
     
  3. timtofly

    timtofly One Day

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2009
    Messages:
    9,445
    I will take my chances with God and retain my right to choose. If your choices take away your right to choose, remember that as long as one is breathing they can still choose God, unless of course, God has taken that choice off the table.


    This is an interesting concept that God does not bow to human will. Some people may see the Jews who begged God to put Jesus blood on the heads, that God may have actually obeyed. At least some people felt they were obeying God, by persecuting and killing the Jews. It also seems to me that if someone chooses to disregard God, that God honors that person and never attempts to offers His will any more to them. I am not sure how any one can claim that God does not bow to human will. Unless you are Calvinist and just assume that it is God's will to let humans have their own way. That would still seem to me to be God letting people have their own way and giving into their desires. In fact he said he would let it go on till the third and fourth generation. He then would step in and allow human will to once again have a choice to follow God. Could letting people have their own way be another form of punishment especially if they no longer have a say in the matter?

    If as you say the Bible is all there, then my opinion has very little to do with things?
     
  4. Farm Boy

    Farm Boy The long wait

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2010
    Messages:
    20,205
    I watched this thing on Sandusky, and all employees of universities approve of raping children too. Frankly, I don't see why they raise such a fuss about sex with drunk girls at parties since they're already all perverts.

    Did I get that right?
     
  5. warpus

    warpus In pork I trust

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2005
    Messages:
    51,412
    Location:
    Stamford Bridge
    It's so weird to me to see people discuss God as if that's something that should somehow affect the laws we make for our secular society.

    We have to base our laws on facts and what works for us. Basing our laws on books that were written thousands of years ago isn't going to do anyone any good.
     
  6. daft

    daft The fargone

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2013
    Messages:
    1,398
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    New World
    Wouldn't it cure most of the catholic church's problems to finally abandon priest celibacy?
     
  7. Farm Boy

    Farm Boy The long wait

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2010
    Messages:
    20,205
    Given that rates of sexual offense within the priesthood don't seem dissimilar from offense rates in protestant religious service or really the population at large, I don't think that's particularly likely, no. Now, if you limited religious orders to women only, that would actually impact the rates some. Regardless of flavor of faith.
     
  8. Formaldehyde

    Formaldehyde Both Fair And Balanced

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2003
    Messages:
    33,999
    Location:
    USA #1
    At least it would give priests a reasonable basis to discuss sex, which they now ostensibly lack.

    I really have no idea how anybody is willing to take marital or sexual advice from those who are so eminently inexperienced with both normal human activities.
     
  9. JollyRoger

    JollyRoger Slippin' Jimmy Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2001
    Messages:
    42,981
    Location:
    Chicago Sunroofing
    Are you zjealous?
     
  10. Neverwonagame3

    Neverwonagame3 Self-Styled Intellectual

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2006
    Messages:
    3,549
    squadbroken- Integrity is inherently worthy of respect. We respect itv in most circumstances- why not here?

    Everyone- Either God exists, or he doesn't. The secularist attitude of picking and choosing is utterly hypocritical.
     
  11. JollyRoger

    JollyRoger Slippin' Jimmy Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2001
    Messages:
    42,981
    Location:
    Chicago Sunroofing
    There is nothing hypocritical about thinking there are certain verses of the Bible worth considering as having positive value while discarding much of the rest for various reasons.
     
  12. Berzerker

    Berzerker Deity

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2000
    Messages:
    20,012
    Location:
    the golf course
    Jesus rejected parts of the Bible that went against his conscience
     
  13. squadbroken

    squadbroken King

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2009
    Messages:
    716
    I reject that notion. Integrity by itself means nothing. I respect a hypocrite who does the right thing more than someone who sticks to their guns no matter how reprehensible.

    So no, I don't respect the Church for continuing to push hateful doctrine.
     
  14. Formaldehyde

    Formaldehyde Both Fair And Balanced

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2003
    Messages:
    33,999
    Location:
    USA #1
    I bet that went over big with his own father / self when he turned out to not be nearly as vindictive and arbitrary.
     
  15. Darkflight

    Darkflight Prince

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2012
    Messages:
    340
    Location:
    Norway
    We never said that god doesn't bow to human will, we said he doesn't have to. At least the god that is described in your bible. Because laws are about humans and to some extent other animals and things about nature and the earth, and not about god. And the god in your bible has powers that means that law simply can't do anything should he choose to break it.

    No, I am saying that instead of saying "I think that the bible says xxxxxx" you could create a list of passages that supports your point.
     
  16. Berzerker

    Berzerker Deity

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2000
    Messages:
    20,012
    Location:
    the golf course
    might be why the Father sacrificed him, rebellious kids are to be put to death
     
  17. Smellincoffee

    Smellincoffee Trekkie At Large

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2003
    Messages:
    5,988
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Heart of Dixie
    What would you have him do, read through the Bible and endorse God's command to the Hebrews to slay all the people in a given region, but save the virgin women for their use? No one can read through the Bible (or the Quran, or Buddhist legal canons, or our own legal codes) and find something that's not morally revolting. We all pick and choose our beliefs, religious beliefs among them. The difference is that some of us are aware we're doing the picking. .
     
  18. Arachnofiend

    Arachnofiend Perturbed Pugilist

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2012
    Messages:
    1,950
    I think you're confusing integrity with arrogance. There's nothing worthy of respect about being wrong and continuing to be wrong until you've driven yourself into the ground.
     
  19. Jehoshua

    Jehoshua Catholic

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2009
    Messages:
    7,204
    There is a distinction between dogma, doctrine, theological inquiry, discipline and practice in Catholic teaching which is not really appreciated. Dogma is unchangeable, and no one not even the pope has the authority to change it. That doctrine which is not dogmatic can develop over time, but similarly it cannot really be suddenly overturned. Disciplines (such as the prohibition of married men becoming priests in the Latin church) can be scrapped or change, and religious practise (such as the form of the mass) can licitly be altered by the authority of the Magisterium. Theological inquiry being the purely speculative musings of theologians has no official capacity beyond private theological opinion even if it becomes normative (as for example with Thomism) to the point of being referenced in magisterial documents. However despite shifts in the popularity of one theological speculation over another through time, the unpopular opinion is rarely declared invalid (limbo, although now unpopular, is still a valid theological speculation and not heretical as I will talk more about below)

    The things that have been mentioned here about "changing dogma" are in fact not changes of dogma at all, but rather the scrapping of theological speculation of no dogmatic weight in the theological consensus, or the alteration of religious practice and discipline. Some of them (such as the staking of heretics) were practices of the civil jurisprudence of the day rather than anything to do with Church doctrine or discipline per se (obviously heresy has the same gravity as a crime against religion within the Church as it did then) Passion plays too, were expressions of popular piety and are separate from the Church's discipline, praxis, or anything dogmatic or doctrinal.

    This is a reference to the advisory body (to the Holy See) known as the International Theological commission, whose theologians stated their opinion that there was a reasonable hope (still asserting that they lacked certain knowledge) that unbaptised infants might be saved. Benedict XVI authorised its publication since it was licit theological opinion, however it is not on the level of doctrine and is not magisterial teaching (since the commission is not the Magisterium, and has no doctrinal authority at all in the Church, what the commission says, along with what any theologian says is simply their opinion). Indeed in considering that it is opinion, the same document also stated that Limbo was a possible theological hypothesis, I quote.

    "the theory of limbo, understood as a state which includes the souls of infants who die subject to original sin and without baptism, and who, therefore, neither merit the beatific vision, nor yet are subjected to any punishment, because they are not guilty of any personal sin. This theory, elaborated by theologians beginning in the Middle Ages, never entered into the dogmatic definitions of the Magisterium. Still, that same Magisterium did at times mention the theory in its ordinary teaching up until the Second Vatican Council. It remains therefore a possible theological hypothesis"

    Ergo, the doctrine of the Church remains that the sacrament of Baptism is necessary for salvation, with this being affirmed through the constant tradition of the Church and defined clearly in the ecumenical council of Florence. The theological speculation that those who die unbaptised have a "reasonable hope' of being saved is due to a consideration of the mercy of God, and the fact that God obviously is not bound by his sacraments. However since there is no way to know, it can only ever be opinion. Thus to say that the Church "expanded its teachings on salvation" in 2007 is quite erroneous, since its dogmatic teaching on the subject remains unchanged.

    -

    PS: As to Church doctrine on Homosexuality and sodomy, I do not thing it shall change seeing as it is clearly established in the deposit of faith that sodomy is a grave sin. On another thing, for the benefit of the interested, here is a list of dogmatic teachings of the Catholic Church.
     
  20. timtofly

    timtofly One Day

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2009
    Messages:
    9,445
    Humans do not have to submit to the law either. In fact they break it all the time. And if they are not breaking it, they are overthrowing it, until the next batch of people overthrow them. The point of a law is control, but humans have to give up their wills if such control is going to be effective. It would seem to me that the more laws, the more rights to "skirt" the law, the more people cry discrimination and the more laws are added, until the law is made null.

    There is a reason that state and church should remain separate. And it is not to protect the church.
     

Share This Page