Germany's Catholic Church Just Took An Amazing Step For LGBT And Remarried Catholics

ebia

Senior Contributor
Jul 6, 2004
41,711
2,142
A very long way away. Sometimes even further.
✟54,775.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Politics
AU-Greens
well it's nice to know that i'm in such elevated company, but unless we do something about it and stop hiring those who couldn't care a fig, nothing will change.
The rule as it stands doesn't target "those who couldn't care a fig". It doesn't target the cause. It targets a couple of highly selective symptoms.
 
Upvote 0

fat wee robin

Newbie
Jan 12, 2015
2,494
842
✟47,420.00
Country
France
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Are you really comparing gays with Nazis? You do realize that gays were victims of the Holocaust, don't you? That's primarily who the real Nazis went after- Jews, gypsies, and gays. Discriminating against gays is far more in line with the philosophy of the historical Nazis in Germany during World War 2 than non-discrimination policies are, if you really want to bring Nazis into this.
Then you have not aquainted yourself with the truth about the origins of the Nazi party, which can be found in the book the "The Pink Swastika" . The climate before Hitler came to power was very liberal towards 'gays ,but became an embarassement to the Third Reich when it came to power ,so getting rid of the 'femmes' to camps was a good way to 'hide' the 'butch' in plain site(in the SS .
 
Upvote 0

ebia

Senior Contributor
Jul 6, 2004
41,711
2,142
A very long way away. Sometimes even further.
✟54,775.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Politics
AU-Greens
No it absolutely does not.
Oh, but it does. On one point or another each and every person engages in sin in defiance of the church persistently, willing, and knowingly.
 
Upvote 0

stray bullet

God Made Me A Skeptic
Nov 16, 2002
14,875
906
✟20,457.00
Marital Status
Private
ebia are you going to continue to misquote me and not acknowledge what I said?

Homosexuality and adultery are always and everywhere immoral. When one is in such a relationship, the sin is persistent, willing, and knowingly done in view of the public and that's a major issue. It's absolutely bad and there is no gray room.

There is no argument for mistake. There is no argument for weak will at a particular moment.
 
Upvote 0

ebia

Senior Contributor
Jul 6, 2004
41,711
2,142
A very long way away. Sometimes even further.
✟54,775.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Politics
AU-Greens
ebia are you going to continue to misquote me and not acknowledge what I said?
Can you please point out where you think I have misquoted you.
Homosexuality and adultery are always and everywhere immoral. When one is in such a relationship, the sin is persistent, willing, and knowingly done in view of the public and that's a major issue. It's absolutely bad and there is no gray room.
And there are plant of other sining done persistently, willingly and knowingly, in full view of the public.

'gray room' is no more than a way of excusing or normalising them.

FWIW, hitting public sins harder than private ones only sends one message - that what matters is pretending to be virtuous, that outward appearance, not inward disposition matter.
 
Upvote 0

stray bullet

God Made Me A Skeptic
Nov 16, 2002
14,875
906
✟20,457.00
Marital Status
Private
Can you please point out where you think I have misquoted you.

I have explained my position thoroughly and you continue to take snippets of it instead of grasping it.

And there are plant of other sining done persistently, willingly and knowingly, in full view of the public.

'gray room' is no more than a way of excusing or normalising them.

FWIW, hitting public sins harder than private ones only sends one message - that what matters is pretending to be virtuous, that outward appearance, not inward disposition matter.

This is about the fact that homosexuals and adulterers in these instances are:
Engaging in an absolute evil
- meaning it's completely apparent that it is wrong, no opinions or judgments needed
Willingly and knowingly disagreeing with the Church
- they know what the Church believes. They know what they are doing is wrong and yet they continue
They defy the Church
- and their position encourages others to do the same, compromising faith and mission

Hitting "private sins" is inappropriate for the Catholic Church to do as a ministerial employer until it becomes public form.

This isn't about being harder on anyone. It's about coming up with really bad excuses to employ people that absolutely should not be there because of the sin being WITHOUT QUESTION EVIL IN EVERY CASE, it is done with knowledge and consent, it's public and it's persistent.

That says nothing about the gravity of the sin and you can't seem to get that. This isn't about which sins are worse. Not being allowed into a position is not about one particular personal or moral action being better or worse. This is about the nature of the sin and the way in which it persists.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pdudgeon
Upvote 0

ebia

Senior Contributor
Jul 6, 2004
41,711
2,142
A very long way away. Sometimes even further.
✟54,775.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Politics
AU-Greens
I have explained my position thoroughly and you continue to take snippets of it instead of grasping it.
That's not misquoting.

That's addressing you point by point.

This is about the fact that homosexuals and adulterers in these instances are:
Engaging in an absolute evil
- meaning it's completely apparent that it is wrong, no opinions or judgments needed
1. so are many other sins.
2. the more dangerous sins are the ones people argue are "a matter of judgement"

Willingly and knowingly disagreeing with the Church
- they know what the Church believes. They know what they are doing is wrong and yet they continue
equally with just about any other sin.
They defy the Church
as above
- and their position encourages others to do the same, compromising faith and mission
as above.

Hitting "private sins" is inappropriate for the Catholic Church to do as a ministerial employer until it becomes public form.
doesn't address the point

This isn't about being harder on anyone.
So you claim, but all the indicators are that it is.

It's about coming up with really bad excuses to employ people that absolutely should not be there because of the sin being WITHOUT QUESTION EVIL IN EVERY CASE
all sins are evil in every case or they aren't sins.

The fact that some (lying, murder, gossip, homosexual sex) have words in modern english and some (spending more than you need on a fancy new coat while someone else starves to death) don't is a word game.

it is done with knowledge and consent, it's public and it's persistent.
All of which can be said of plenty of other sins.

That says nothing about the gravity of the sin and you can't seem to get that.
Even if that were not the intention (which I dispute) it is the message that it sends.
That and "morality doesn't matter, only scandal".

This isn't about which sins are worse. Not being allowed into a position is not about one particular personal or moral action being better or worse. This is about the nature of the sin and the way in which it persists.
You keep claiming that, but you aren't able to demonstrate its any different to other sins. If there were a raft of different things from different aspects of morality that would hold water, but when it boils down to two or three that are all sexual that's unsustainable.
 
  • Like
Reactions: graceandpeace
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

ebia

Senior Contributor
Jul 6, 2004
41,711
2,142
A very long way away. Sometimes even further.
✟54,775.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Politics
AU-Greens
If we address that set of goalposts will they move again?
this issue is not so much the sin
but the rejection of the morality of the Church

they do not believe in the morality of the Church
so they should find someplace else to work

people who run dog fights should not work for PETA
Opposing animal cruelty is the central tenet of PETA to the exclusion of pretty much everything else.

Unless The RCC is now centrally and only about who you are married to, it's not a like comparison.
 
Upvote 0

Rhamiel

Member of the Round Table
Nov 11, 2006
41,182
9,432
ohio
✟241,111.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
If we address that set of goalposts will they move again?
hmmm, you seem to think that there is only one reason behind this?

reality is multifaceted

Opposing animal cruelty is the central tenet of PETA to the exclusion of pretty much everything else.

Unless The RCC is now centrally and only about who you are married to, it's not a like comparison.

well no analogy is perfect, I used something that was more straight forward to make it clear

the central purpose of the Catholic Church is to bring people to Jesus
sin harms our relationship with God, so being pro-sin does go against our main purpose
 
  • Like
Reactions: pdudgeon
Upvote 0

ebia

Senior Contributor
Jul 6, 2004
41,711
2,142
A very long way away. Sometimes even further.
✟54,775.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Politics
AU-Greens
hmmm, you seem to think that there is only one reason behind this? reality is multifaceted
It looks more like an answer searching for a reason.

  • The important thing is x
  • but x doesn't explain singling out these two - evidence...
  • But the important thing is y
  • but y doesn't explain singling out these two - another lot of evidence
  • repeat ad infinitum
the central purpose of the Catholic Church is to bring people to Jesus
sin harms our relationship with God, so being pro-sin does go against our main purpose
No one is suggesting being pro sin.

Simply being realistic and consistent across the whole gamut of virtue.
 
Upvote 0

stray bullet

God Made Me A Skeptic
Nov 16, 2002
14,875
906
✟20,457.00
Marital Status
Private
That's not misquoting.

Shortened and out of context. You continue to miss the main point.

You are engaging in full on GT tactics at this point ebia.

1. so are many other sins.
2. the more dangerous sins are the ones people argue are "a matter of judgement"

This has nothing to do with deciding which sins are worse. The Church should consider people regardless of the gravity of sins. [...]You keep claiming that, but you aren't able to demonstrate its any different to other sins. If there were a raft of different things from different aspects of morality that would hold water, but when it boils down to two or three that are all sexual that's unsustainable.[/quote]

I do not understand why this is such a difficult thing for you to understand unless you are just playing games at this point. I'll give you to the benefit of the doubt.

There are sins/actions which are always evil in every case without question. My guess is that you do not believe that, which is why I think you may have a hard time understanding Catholic moral theology.

Having an abortion is always wrong.
Having sex with a member of the same sex is always wrong.
Having sex with a person other than your spouse is always wrong.

These sins are not 'worse' than other sins - but they are objective. Whether or not I am greedy or a liar is subject to opinion or judgment.

You seem to have this obsession that what this is about is punishing people for sins. It has nothing to do with that.

If I am in a homosexual or adulterous relationship or helping with an abortion, what I am doing is unquestionably wrong. When I make it public I am defying the Church.

You speak in generalities - if you can think of other concrete examples that would meet the same criteria as these, go for it. Otherwise stop going on and on already. I don't like OBOB to be like GT.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pdudgeon
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

zippy2006

Dragonsworn
Nov 9, 2013
6,772
3,375
✟241,875.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Oh, but it does. On one point or another each and every person engages in sin in defiance of the church persistently, willing, and knowingly.

After which they have a choice: they can reconcile themselves to the Church in the sacrament of reconciliation or not. The folks being discussed in this thread have decided not to do so, and this is public knowledge.

Beyond that, your statement is just false. Venial sin isn't defiance of the Church, and not everyone is sinning mortally.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pdudgeon
Upvote 0

ebia

Senior Contributor
Jul 6, 2004
41,711
2,142
A very long way away. Sometimes even further.
✟54,775.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Politics
AU-Greens
It looks more like an answer searching for a reason.

No one is suggesting being pro sin.

Simply being realistic and consistent across the whole gamut of virtue.
After which they have a choice: they can reconcile themselves to the Church in the sacrament of reconciliation or not. The folks being discussed in this thread have decided not to do so, and this is public knowledge.

Beyond that, your statement is just false. Venial sin isn't defiance of the Church, and not everyone is sinning mortally.
so, in contradiction of a previous poster, you maintain that it is about the severity of the sin?
 
Upvote 0

ebia

Senior Contributor
Jul 6, 2004
41,711
2,142
A very long way away. Sometimes even further.
✟54,775.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Politics
AU-Greens
I said what I said. If you want to link to other posts or make an argument, feel free.
I come back to something I said earlier - this conversation looks a lot like a conclusion looking for a reason.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

zippy2006

Dragonsworn
Nov 9, 2013
6,772
3,375
✟241,875.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
I come back to something I said earlier - this conversation looks a lot like a conclusion looking for a reason.

I agree--you haven't given me any reasons at all. You just jump to conclusions about the "severity of sin" despite what I actually said. Feel free to provide some reasons if you desire a dialogue. Until then my point stands: sinners and dissenters are two different things. Conflating them isn't helpful.
 
Upvote 0