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

ebia · May 25, 2015

zippy2006 said:
Until then my point stands: sinners and dissenters are two different things. Conflating them isn't helpful.

I'm not disputing the two categories. I'm disputing who falls into which.

Two sides to the cafeteria, and all that.

zippy2006 · May 25, 2015

ebia said:
I'm not disputing the two categories. I'm disputing who falls into which.

Two sides to the cafeteria, and all that.

But then we're back to my first post, which you still haven't answered. Again, you said:

ebia said:
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.

Again, no, not everyone sins in defiance of the Church persistently, willingly, and knowingly.

To be clear, consider two employees. Jack the janitor struggles with homosexual tendencies which at times lead him to sin, after which he goes to confession with the intention to amend his life. Gary the school teacher is in a same-sex marriage.

You're trying to say that if we fire Gary we should fire Jack. But you're conflating dissent with sin. Jack is a sinner, he isn't a dissenter. Gary is both. It is perfectly obvious why Gary is fired and Jack isn't.

Rhamiel · May 25, 2015

ebia said:
I'm not disputing the two categories. I'm disputing who falls into which.

Two sides to the cafeteria, and all that.

not to get this off topic
but what cafeteria is open on the opposite side?
I do not really see open dissent on the other side, more just sin and hypocrisy
and we see that on both sides, part of the human condition

Rhamiel · May 25, 2015

zippy2006 said:
But then we're back to my first post, which you still haven't answered. Again, you said:

Again, no, not everyone sins in defiance of the Church persistently, willingly, and knowingly.

To be clear, consider two employees. Jack the janitor struggles with homosexual tendencies which at times lead him to sin, after which he goes to confession with the intention to amend his life. Gary the school teacher is in a same-sex marriage.

You're trying to say that if we fire Gary we should fire Jack. But you're conflating dissent with sin. Jack is a sinner, he isn't a dissenter. Gary is both. It is perfectly obvious why Gary is fired and Jack isn't.

also, in your scenario Jack is also not persistent

also, not everyone commits mortal sins
it seems like some people want to think that everyone is in a state of mortal sin, sounds like a type of scrupulosity?

zippy2006 · May 25, 2015

Rhamiel said:
also, not everyone commits mortal sins
it seems like some people want to think that everyone is in a state of mortal sin, sounds like a type of scrupulosity?

Right:

zippy2006 said:
Beyond that, your statement is just false. Venial sin isn't defiance of the Church, and not everyone is sinning mortally.

ebia · May 25, 2015

Rhamiel said:
not to get this off topic
but what cafeteria is open on the opposite side?
I do not really see open dissent on the other side, more just sin and hypocrisy
and we see that on both sides, part of the human condition

Open dissent can be expressed in more than one way. It can be expressed as "well, the church is wrong", it can be expressed as simply ignoring, or it can be expressed by inventing loopholes to jump through.

ebia · May 25, 2015

Rhamiel said:
also, in your scenario Jack is also not persistent

also, not everyone commits mortal sins
it seems like some people want to think that everyone is in a state of mortal sin, sounds like a type of scrupulosity?

Scrupuloristy would be over attention to the small stuff, not self-justifying the big stuff.

Rhamiel · May 25, 2015

ebia said:
Open dissent can be expressed in more than one way. It can be expressed as "well, the church is wrong", it can be expressed as simply ignoring, or it can be expressed by inventing loopholes to jump through.

lets not water down words so that they have almost no meaning

marriage is a public deceleration
so to pretend that public decelerations are equal to private struggles with sins....

well, I do not even know what to say to that

ebia said:
Scrupuloristy would be over attention to the small stuff, not self-justifying the big stuff.

well it seems to be this view that all sins are equal, like EVERYTHING is just as bad as everything else
like this is what Scrupulosity looks like when it burns itself out
EVERYTHING is so super serious
and then you just get tired of caring
and then nothing is serious anymore

or this could just be Protestant rejection of the distinction between Mortal and Venial sins

ebia · May 25, 2015

Rhamiel said:
lets not water down words so that they have almost no meaning

marriage is a public deceleration
so to pretend that public decelerations are equal to private struggles with sins....

Not the only options.
Note also that they are public declarations, but their public declarative purpose is not to say "the church is wrong", or anything of that sort, but to declare the couple's intention toward each other. To focus on the declarative aspect is a red-herring.

well it seems to be this view that all sins are equal, like EVERYTHING is just as bad as everything else

Half the time the claim is that this is about some sins as being worse than others, and half the time the claims is that it is explicitly not.

or this could just be Protestant rejection of the distinction between Mortal and Venial sins

So these sanctions should be applied to all mortal sins equally?

Rhamiel · May 25, 2015

oh no, it is both

not all sins are equal
not all mortal sins are equal
and the public rejection of the teachings of the Church means that they should not get a PAYCHECK from the Church
atleast not teachers, who have a job of shaping the minds of young people

ebia · May 25, 2015

Rhamiel said:
oh no, it is both

You can't have A and !A both true at the same time.

Well, if you do then B is true for any value of B.

Rhamiel · May 25, 2015

all sin is bad
all mortal sins break the relationship between us and God
but does that mean all mortal sins are equal?
well we can look at Legal Codes from traditional Christian countries, we can look at Church prescribed penances for different sins, we can look at psychological problems that sin cause in the sinner and those effected by the sinner
in all of these, it is clear that not all mortal sins are equal in there temporal effects though they do all have the same spiritual effect of breaking our relationship with God

so not all mortal sins have the same temporal effects, thus we can say they are not equal in that regard, even though they are equal in that they cut the sinner off from grace

ebia · May 25, 2015

Rhamiel said:
all sin is bad
all mortal sins break the relationship between us and God
but does that mean all mortal sins are equal?
well we can look at Legal Codes from traditional Christian countries, we can look at Church prescribed penances for different sins, we can look at psychological problems that sin cause in the sinner and those effected by the sinner
in all of these, it is clear that not all mortal sins are equal in there temporal effects though they do all have the same spiritual effect of breaking our relationship with God

so not all mortal sins have the same temporal effects, thus we can say they are not equal in that regard, even though they are equal in that they cut the sinner off from grace

Thatt wasn't the question. They question is "are these two sins being singled out because of severity?" To which the answer has been both yes and no. Those to options cannot both be true.

Rhamiel · May 25, 2015

ebia said:
Thatt wasn't the question. They question is "are these two sins being singled out because of severity?" To which the answer has been both yes and no. Those to options cannot both be true.

they are being singled out because of the severity of the sin
because of the public nature in which the authority of the Church is being rejected (marriage is a public institution)
and because teachers are involved in shaping the minds of young people

it is all of these things coming together
it could be argued that you could fire someone just based on one or two of these issues
but this example has all 3

ebia · May 25, 2015

zippy2006 said:
To be clear, consider two employees. Jack the janitor struggles with homosexual tendencies which at times lead him to sin, after which he goes to confession with the intention to amend his life. Gary the school teacher is in a same-sex marriage.

You're trying to say that if we fire Gary we should fire Jack.

No I am not. Not at all. I'm am saying that you need to be consistent across different sins.

ebia · May 25, 2015

Rhamiel said:
they are being singled out because of the severity of the sin
because of the public nature in which the authority of the Church is being rejected (marriage is a public institution)
and because teachers are involved in shaping the minds of young people

it is all of these things coming together
it could be argued that you could fire someone just based on one or two of these issues
but this example has all 3

Other above disagree.

But running with the above.
We can leave the third unstated - we are talking about school teachers.
Then it needs to be consistent across sins of similar severity.
I dispute the rightness of the second point - all it does is promote keeping sins hidden.
But if we run with it, be consistent. Treat all public significant sins in the same way.

stray bullet · May 26, 2015

ebia said:
Not the only options.
Note also that they are public declarations, but their public declarative purpose is not to say "the church is wrong", or anything of that sort, but to declare the couple's intention toward each other. To focus on the declarative aspect is a red-herring.

The Church believes otherwise. Marriage is public form.

Adulterous marriage is public form, a person is defying the Church and all she teaches in favor of their partner. The Church teaches that life is about saying yes and also no.

stray bullet · May 26, 2015

ebia said:
Other above disagree.

But running with the above.
We can leave the third unstated - we are talking about school teachers.
Then it needs to be consistent across sins of similar severity.
I dispute the rightness of the second point - all it does is promote keeping sins hidden.
But if we run with it, be consistent. Treat all public significant sins in the same way.

YOU are the one making this about severity, blatantly disregarding Catholic theology.
This has nothing to do with the Church not hiring people because of the severity of the sin. The severity can only be known by the person and God.

This is about an absolute objective evil being made public.

ebia · May 26, 2015

When you guys have worked out whether it is or isn't about severity you get back to me.

stray bullet · May 26, 2015

ebia said:
When you guys have worked out whether it is or isn't about severity you get back to me.

You are the one that brought it up, not me.

Nice to see you as you are, ebia.

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

Senior Contributor

Dragonsworn

Member of the Round Table

Member of the Round Table

Dragonsworn

Senior Contributor

Senior Contributor

Member of the Round Table

Senior Contributor

Member of the Round Table

Senior Contributor

Member of the Round Table

Senior Contributor

Member of the Round Table

Senior Contributor

Senior Contributor

God Made Me A Skeptic

God Made Me A Skeptic

Senior Contributor

God Made Me A Skeptic

Similar threads