• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Vatican proposes 'stunning' shift on gays, lesbians

ChezC3 said:
Eh, you know, see you go and start showing favoritism and you get a whole bunch of people who feel left out...

I'm not one to cause hurt feelings...
Click to expand...

More inquisition like, got it. Thanks.
 
Gathomas88 said:
Granted, they're being a bit less "fire and brimstone" than is traditional. However, the core of the belief system remains unchanged.
Click to expand...
Which is... exactly as it should be, otherwise there can be no 'categorical imperative'.

Christianity recognizes that while there is an ideal state of perfection or truth, which is eternal, the reality of human nature is flawed. But despite this, we do not need to be condemned. Even for someone who has hit rock-bottom, there is a way out. Accept the fact you are a sinner and give yourself to Jesus, and you will find it. I think this is what makes it unique among all religions.
 
Gathomas88 said:
Nevermind. I think I misread your post.

Were you implying it was a negative thing?
Click to expand...

I guess torturing someone until they changed their beliefs could be construed as positive by some.
 
Hari Seldon said:
I guess torturing someone until they changed their beliefs could be construed as positive by some.
Click to expand...

That isn't what the inquisition actually did, first off. They wouldn't even execute heretics. That was generally something the secular authorities did, as heresy was equated with treason.

Secondly, even in the rare circumstances where inquisitors did use torture, it tended to be nothing compared to what the secular courts would do to their own prisoners.

In reality, the inquisitions (yes, even the Spanish variety) were actually some of the most progressive courts in all of Europe at the time.

Sometimes secular prisoners would even go so far as to deliberately commit blasphemy just so they would be so lucky as to get transferred to an inquisitorial prison in the first place.
 
Last edited:
Jetboogieman said:
The Kingdom of god is within man, not one man (pope) nor a group of men (church) but in all men.
Click to expand...

That's not in the Bible I read.

For instance, Jesus said the corrupt Jews belonged to "your father the devil." - John 8:24

And there's other passages like that.
 
MaggieD said:
Did he follow them? ;)
Click to expand...
I believe Jesus was an anti-capitalist, as he said 'Ye cannot serve both God and mammon.' (which is, material wealth and greed).

I think the church has shown itself to be imperfect over the centuries, if you look at their history but that is because it is led by human beings, the same ones that are born imperfect by nature. But the ideal still must be supported, believed in and practiced as much as our imperfect natures allow. To strive, to reach for but never attain, that is human nature and... faith.
 
Manny said:
Haven't you heard the news?
"Let he who is without sin... cast the first stone." And guess what, no one did...
Click to expand...

:lamo

Is that how you rationalize it?

Because no one is throwing stones don't mean they don't know sin or what is sinful...

I mean seriously...
 
Hari Seldon said:
More inquisition like, got it. Thanks.
Click to expand...

No, not more inquisition like...Damn, the Unthinking Left and their attachment to bureaucracies...I swear...:roll:
 
American said:
Those who hate the RCC will continue to bash the RCC no matter what they do, because they need a boogieman.
Click to expand...

dalai-lama-devil-horns.jpg

OOOGEY WOOOGEY BOOOGEY!!!!


Here, they can use this one...
 
Rorate Coeli has a few thoughts about this document:

From Sandro Magister's Italian-only blog:


POST SCRIPTUM – In the afternoon of Monday, October 12, "L'Osservatore Romano" gave a first dim account of the pitched battle that burst into the open in the morning in the Synod Hall after the reading of the “Relatio post disceptationem” written by Cardinal-Rapporteur Peter Erdo, with the collaboration - at times with prevarication [prevaricante - "with malicious abuse of one's position"], as Erdo himself made known in the morning press conference - of Special Secretary Bruno Forte.

Under the gunfire of aroung 41 interventions, Cardinals Pell [Secretary for the Economy], Ouellet [Prefect for Bishops], Filoni [Prefect for Propaganda Fide], Dolan [of New York], Vingt-Trois [of Paris], Burke [Prefect of Apostolic Signatura], Rylko [President of Laity], Müller [Prefect of Doctrine of the Faith], Scola [of Milan], Caffarra [of Bologna] among others spoke up, all against an opening to second marriages as proposed by Cardinal Kasper, who also intervened.

But among the protests also reported by “L’Osservatore Romano” there were also those regarding the paragraphs (written by Forte) on homosexuality, regarding which "a formulation was demanded that took people into account but that does not contradict in any way Catholic doctrine on marriage and family."

And also "was proposed a stronger message on the tragedy of abortion, as well as on assisted reproduction."

But "above all what was asked was a great prophetic encouragement towards all those families that, even at the cost of enormous sacrifices, lay witness every day to the Christian truth on marriage. In sum - it was revealed - a positive affirmation of marital love would be appropriate, as also that of the social value of families."
Click to expand...

What appears clear from the sarcastic dismissal of rapporteur Erdo himself, the strong word used by Magister ("precaricante", that is, a malicious abuse of one's position), and the immediate furious response from the Synod Fathers (15 just during the morning and just on this matter, according to several reports, including many from the most vibrant region in the Church, Africa), is that Abp. Bruno Forte, known as an extreme liberal in theological matters, abused his position and the trust of Cardinal Erdo and included something that had not really been discussed in that way at the Synod but that was his own pet personal view on homosexuality and homosexual couples, and made it look as if it had been a Synodal view. That is why Erdo was so adamant to make clear that he, Erdo, was not responsible for this outrage, and why the response from the Synod Fathers was furious and explosive. Forte acted like a Bugnini for "Gayness", making things up to achieve his own end.
Click to expand...

RORATE CÆLI: Magister: Pitched Battle on a Mad Monday at the Synod Our conclusion: Bruno Forte made up homosexuality paragraphs by himself
 
Dragonfly said:
Vatican proposes 'stunning' shift on gays, lesbians – CNN Belief Blog - CNN.com Blogs

Hell....it might be freezing over.
Click to expand...

No such luck for the pro-gay crowd.

Vatican backtracks on gay comments

"It's not what we're saying at all."

In response to such reactions, the Vatican backtracked a bit Tuesday. In a statement, it said the report on gays and lesbians was a "working document," not the final word from Rome.

The Vatican also said that it wanted to welcome gays and lesbians in the church, but not create "the impression of a positive evaluation" of same-sex relationships, or, for that matter, of unmarried couples who live together.

Vatican backtracks on gay comments - CNN.com
 
ChezC3 said:
Is that how you rationalize it?

Because no one is throwing stones don't mean they don't know sin or what is sinful...

I mean seriously...
Click to expand...

It's easy to sit back and snipe other people's ideas... from a comfortable chair... without taking the risk of sharing your own.

I mean, everyone is imperfect, all have sinned at some time or another, and more than likely will again one day in the future. Because of human frailty... we are not pure or perfect like Jesus.

That is not to say, we should not strive to be like Jesus as much as possible The imitation of Christ. But even he did not condemn those who sinned, if they repent. Then there are those who cannot repent, can't stop committing the sin but in other parts of their life they contribute to do good things in the world. They may be very good people but they have a 'flaw', if we can be so coarse and call it that. Will you send them to your hell, ChezC3?
 
Logicman said:
No such luck for the pro-gay crowd.

Vatican backtracks on gay comments

"It's not what we're saying at all."

In response to such reactions, the Vatican backtracked a bit Tuesday. In a statement, it said the report on gays and lesbians was a "working document," not the final word from Rome.

The Vatican also said that it wanted to welcome gays and lesbians in the church, but not create "the impression of a positive evaluation" of same-sex relationships, or, for that matter, of unmarried couples who live together.

Vatican backtracks on gay comments - CNN.com
Click to expand...

This does not sound like 'back-tracking' to me at all. This is what I understood it to mean when I read it. The problem is media sensationalism is used to inflame people's opinions, like headlines that imply something which is not a fact, but intended to shape public opinion for their deceitful agenda.
 
ChezC3 said:
Yes, but their homosexuality is not the gift or quality. To take this out of context is to sum up a homosexual by their homsexuality. Are they not more? That's what it is getting at.

A question which will be answered with a resounding "No."

What is so revolutionary? That they asked these questions? So says the blog quoting a well known, liked, and doctrinally duplicitous Jesuit named James Martin...

More subterfuge...:yawn:

Nothing to see here...
Click to expand...

This part is what I question:

there are examples of good gay relationships “in which mutual aid to the point of sacrifice constitutes a precious support in the life of partners.
Click to expand...

He is upholding good gay relationshps (which obviously constitutes homosexual activities). It's not about whether they can have even much better relationships - it's about homosexuality.

His statement is AMBIGUOUS.

He is compromising what's in the Scriptures.
 
Last edited:
The church of Rome is the most corrupt organization that has ever been on the face of this planet. They have extorted money for millennia from the poorest among us. They harbour child molesters.

And they think sitting on a magic chair gives them the authority to speak for God.

I don't trust them, I don't believe them. They only wish to grow their numbers.
 
tosca1 said:
This part is what I question:



He is upholding good gay relationshps (which obviously constitutes homosexual activities). It's not about whether they can have even much better relationships - it's about homosexuality.

His statement is AMBIGUOUS.

He is compromising what's in the Scriptures.
Click to expand...
You are talking about Christiandom aren't you??? so what is so surprising about that, Just how much of the scriptures are provable, and haven't been altered in the past couple of hundred years?
 
doniston said:
Just how much of the scriptures are provable, and haven't been altered in the past couple of hundred years?
Click to expand...

I already gave you the article that explains about translations and the Scriptures in an another thread.
If you simply ignore factual explanations, and just keep repeating the same ignorant question.....then what more can I say? :shrug:

One can only lead the horse to the water.....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom