Cardinal Kasper: Homosexual unions are ‘analogous’ to Christian marriage

[Radagast]

Sorry but that claim falls apart quickly. The phrase ἄρσενος κοίτην also appears in Leviticus 20:11, Leviticus 20:12, Leviticus 20:15

Well, no, it doesn't. That's easy enough to check.

No one knows what the word in 1 Corinthians means because there isn't enough linguistic information to assign any meaning at all.

The word ἀρσενοκοίτης also occurs in Patristic writings, and there's a long-standing consensus on what the word means:

CSB: males who have sex with males
DR: liers with mankind
ESV: men who practice homosexuality
KJV: abusers of themselves with mankind
NABRE, NRSV: sodomites
NASB, RSVCE: homosexuals
NIV: men who have sex with men
Vulgate: masculorum concubitores

 

[redleghunter]

Well, no, it doesn't. That's easy enough to check.



The word ἀρσενοκοίτης also occurs in Patristic writings, and there's a long-standing consensus on what the word means:

CSB: males who have sex with males
DR: liers with mankind
ESV: men who practice homosexuality
KJV: abusers of themselves with mankind
NABRE, NRSV: sodomites
NASB, RSVCE: homosexuals
NIV: men who have sex with men
Vulgate: masculorum concubitores

Never knew the NABRE used "sodomites." Thanks for the run down.

 

[redleghunter]

Folks this thread is about a Cardinal and his understanding of Catholic doctrine. Let's keep on topic as we are getting off the beaten path.

 

[fat wee robin]

Cardinal Kasper: Homosexual unions are ‘analogous’ to Christian marriage
Matthew Cullinan Hoffman

March 14, 2018 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Cardinal Walter Kasper, whose theology appears to be the chief inspiration for Pope Francis’ doctrine on giving Holy Communion to people living in states of adultery in second marriages, now appears to be claiming that homosexual unions contain “elements” of Christian marriage and are even “analogous” to it in a way that is similar to the relationship between the Catholic Church and non-Catholic Christian communities.

Moreover, the cardinal is attributing his claims to Pope Francis’ apostolic exhortation Amoris Laetitia, despite the fact that the document explicitly contradicts him.

“The pope does not leave room for doubt over the fact that civil marriages, de facto unions, new marriages following a divorce (Amoris Laetitia 291) and unions between homosexual persons (Amoris Laetitia 250s.) do not correspond to the Christian conception of marriage,” writes Kasper in a recently-released book on Amoris Laetitia.

“He says, however, that some of these partners can realize in a partial and analogous way some elements in Christian marriage (Amoris Laetitia292),” continues Kasper.

Kasper compares such relationships with the relationship between the Catholic Church and non-Catholic Christian groups, whom Vatican II sayscontain “elements of sanctification and truth” of the Church.

“Just as outside the Catholic Church there are elements of the true Church, in the above-mentioned unions there can be elements present of Christian marriage, although they do not completely fulfill, or do not yet completely fulfill, the ideal,” adds Kasper.

The statements appear in Kasper’s new booklet, "The Message of Amoris Laetitia: A Fraternal Discussion," which was recently publishedsimultaneously in German and Italian.

In the same work, Kasper also insinuates that Amoris Laetitia opens the way to permit the use of contraception, a practice that is universally condemned in the Scriptures, Church Fathers, and the Papal Magisterium, most recently by Popes Paul VI and John Paul II.

Kasper notes that in Amoris Laetitia, the Pope only “encourages the use of the method of observing the cycles of natural fertility,” and “does not say anything about other methods of family planning and avoids all casuistic definitions.” In the context with the book’s passages on communion for those who commit adultery in second “marriages,” which use similar language, Kasper appears to be claiming that the pope is allowing for exceptions to the Church’s condemnation of artificial birth control.

Remainder here: Cardinal Kasper: Homosexual unions are ‘analogous’ to Christian marriage

I think that most, if not all homosexuality is 'the end of the line', that is the person is incapable of being rehabilitated , as 'in the past 'they have absolutely refused to repent and recognise who God is , so there is only endless decay ahead, without repentance .
Those who say they are ok with it , do not understand the conséquences of this stand ,and this cardinal , is part of the problem.
A sign of the times .

 

[archer75]

The headlines makes it appear that he said this. Then the article says:

"...now appears to be claiming that homosexual unions contain “elements” of Christian marriage and are even “analogous”"

Dishonest.

 

[Christo.doulos]

For anyone who claims to be a Bible-believing Christian, the Holy Bible, which alone is the Word of Almighty God to the human race, must be the Highest Authority on all matters. It matters nothing of what the highest human "authority" might say, if it directly contradicts the Holy Bible's Teachings. The notion of some, that Church "tradition" is of equal value to the Word of God, is deception as from the devil.

It Bible is very clear, that ALL homosexuality is a sin before the Holy God of the Holy Bible, Who condemns it in His Word. No amount of twisting and arguments can disprove this fact. There are some trying to distort what the Bible says, by false argument with the use of certain words in the original languages, which they have misused, and taken out of the context.

The account of Sodom in the Book of Genesis chapter 19, deals with the destruction of this city by God, for their practice of homosexuality. If this practice were not sinful and right before the Lord, then there is no doubt that He would not have intervened directly to punish these people for their life-style. This account in itself is beyond any dispute, what the Lord God of the Holy Bible says about homosexuality, and should be sufficient for anyone to accept this truth.

We find in the Book of Leviticus, which is the giving of the Law of God to human beings, that God very clearly says that homosexuality is a sin and abomination against Him.

"You shall not lie with a man, as with a woman: it is abomination" (18:22)
"If a man also lies with a man, as he lies with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them" (20:13)

The Bible very clearly spells out the act of homosexuality, that of a man having sexual relations with another man, and a woman with a woman; both being sinful and therefore wrong before God

Jesus Christ, while speaking on adultery, uses language that clearly shows that God created "man and woman" as two distinct beings, who were to marry each other and have sexual relations with each other, as man and woman

"And he answered and said unto them, Have you not read, that he who made them at the beginning made them male and female, And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they two shall be one flesh? Therefore they are no more two, but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let not man put asunder" (Matthew 19:4-6)

The Apostle Paul, who was commissioned by the Lord Jesus Christ in his ministry, is also very clear on the subject of homosexuality in his Letter to the Church at Rome:

"For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is shameful, and receiving in themselves that recompense of their error which was fitting" (chapter 1:26-27)

The word "natural" here is from the Greek adjective, "φυσικός", which has the base meaning, "produced by nature, inborn". This means that God has made sure, that every human being that is ever born into this world, has an "inbuilt" desire for the opposite sex, which proves beyond any doubt, that no human can ever be "born a homosexual", as this is against the plain teaching of the Holy Bible, and therefore demonic.

"Don't you realize that those who do wrong will not inherit the Kingdom of God? Don't fool yourselves. Those who indulge in sexual sin, or who worship idols, or commit adultery, or are male prostitutes, or practice homosexuality" (1 Corinthians 6:9) also 1 Timothy 1:10

"practice homosexuality", is from the Greek, "ἀρσενοκοίτης", which is masculine,and literally means, "a male, a bed", which rightly speaks of "male homosexuality", which, as can be seen from Romans, includes both men and women. It is evident from this language used by Paul, that he had Leviticus 18:22 in mind.

 

[FireDragon76]

Personally I don't have any problem with gay relationships. But obviously the Catholic Church does. That doesn't mean that they can't recognize good elements in such a relationship.

That attitude seems to be fairly among common Catholics in developed nations, who increasingly focus on personalist ethics. So Cardinal Kasper's opinion is noteworthy only in its outspokenness.

 

[Christo.doulos]

Things aren't necessarily black and white. I'm reminded of C S Lewis' brief comment about homosexual relationships in boarding school, in his biography "Surprised by Joy." He certainly believed it was wrong in principle, but he also thought that those relationships provided an element of humanity in an environment that he considered pretty bleak.

Personally I don't have any problem with gay relationships. But obviously the Catholic Church does. That doesn't mean that they can't recognize good elements in such a relationship.

So the teachings of the Holy Bible, which are very clear that homosexuality is a sin and wrong, do not really matter?

 

[Zoii]

"You shall not lie with a man, as with a woman: it is abomination" (18:22)
"If a man also lies with a man, as he lies with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them" (20:13)

I just dont feel as you do. I certainly would never suggest my gay friends should be punished by death as your suggesting in those verses. I think that sort of view promotes gay bashing. We dont believe adulterers should be stoned so why push the whole "they shall be put to death " angle. This sort of talk alienates a lot of my generation.

 

[hedrick]

So the teachings of the Holy Bible, which are very clear that homosexuality is a sin and wrong, do not really matter?

That wasn't my point. We aren't discussing my views on homosexuality, but a Catholic Cardinal's. He presumably thinks it's wrong. I said that one could consider it wrong, but still see that some good could come out of it.

“The pope does not leave room for doubt over the fact that civil marriages, de facto unions, new marriages following a divorce (Amoris Laetitia 291) and unions between homosexual persons (Amoris Laetitia 250s.) do not correspond to the Christian conception of marriage,” writes Kasper in a recently-released book on Amoris Laetitia.

“He says, however, that some of these partners can realize in a partial and analogous way some elements in Christian marriage (Amoris Laetitia 292),” continues Kasper. Cardinal Kasper: Homosexual unions are ‘analogous’ to Christian marriage

I should note that his use of Amoris Laetitia 292 seems to be somewhat out of context. That section does indeed say that there are analogies with Christian marriage in some other relationships. However it doesn't say specifically which one. 251 suggests that they weren't thinking of homosexual marriages: "In discussing the dignity and mission of the family, the Synod Fathers observed that, “as for proposals to place unions between homosexual persons on the same level as marriage, there are absolutely no grounds for considering homosexual unions to be in any way similar or even remotely analogous to God’s plan for marriage and family”

Of course that doesn't make him wrong that analogies exist, but it does make his claim for support from Amoris Laetitia questionable.

 

[Christo.doulos]

That wasn't my point. We aren't discussing my views on homosexuality, but a Catholic Cardinal's. He presumably thinks it's wrong. I said that one could consider it wrong, but still see that some good could come out of it.

you quoted Lewis, and you say of your own view, "Personally I don't have any problem with gay relationships". Can you justify what Lewis says or your personal view from the Holy Bible?

 

[hedrick]

you quoted Lewis, and you say of your own view, "Personally I don't have any problem with gay relationships". Can you justify what Lewis says or your personal view from the Holy Bible?

This forum's rules don't permit discussing my own view.

 

[Christo.doulos]

I just dont feel as you do. I certainly would never suggest my gay friends should be punished by death as your suggesting in those verses. I think that sort of view promotes gay bashing. We dont believe adulterers should be stoned so why push the whole "they shall be put to death " angle. This sort of talk alienates a lot of my generation.

It is not with me that you agree or not, that really matters at all, but what the Word of God, the Holy Bible says. Regardless of whether anyone accepts and believes what the Bible says, is not an issue, as it will never change from its very clear condemnation of homosexuality, and that no homosexual, or other sinner, will ever enter heaven. This is God's final Word on it, not mine.

 

[Christo.doulos]

This forum's rules don't permit discussing my own view.

You have already done so when you wrote, "Personally I don't have any problem with gay relationships". This is your view, and it contradicts the Bible.

 

[Christo.doulos]

This forum's rules don't permit discussing my own view.

I don't understand what you mean? Why should anyone be denied the right to openly discuss any issue here, and give their views?

 

[hedrick]

I don't understand what you mean? Why should anyone be denied the right to openly discuss any issue here, and give their views?

Site rules specifically prohibit defending the acceptability of homosexuality except in a couple of forums for groups that officially accept it. See the SOP for this forum: Statement of Purpose - Current News & Events Statement of Purpose.

 

[Christo.doulos]

Site rules specifically prohibit defending the acceptability of homosexuality except in a couple of forums for groups that officially accept it. See the SOP for this forum: Statement of Purpose - Current News & Events Statement of Purpose.

I see what you mean. But I cannot understand as a Presbyterian you should not accept that the Bible does clearly denounce homosexuality as a sin? Do you accept the Bible as the Only and Final Authority on such issues?

 

[hedrick]

I see what you mean. But I cannot understand as a Presbyterian you should not accept that the Bible does clearly denounce homosexuality as a sin? Do you accept the Bible as the Only and Final Authority on such issues?

Sorry, you're asking me to violate the site rules. For my response, see liberal approaches to homosexuality and transgender

 

[Christo.doulos]

Sorry, you're asking me to violate the site rules. For my response, see liberal approaches to homosexuality and transgender

I have just read your arguments, and can see that you have imposed your own reasoning on what the Bible does, and does not say. This approach is a very dangerous one, and sadly adopted by many who claim to know and follow the Lord Jesus Christ.

 

[Zoii]

I have just read your arguments, and can see that you have imposed your own reasoning on what the Bible does, and does not say. This approach is a very dangerous one, and sadly adopted by many who claim to know and follow the Lord Jesus Christ.

Do you think its fair to attempt to draw people into a discussion thats forbidden here. Surely you can understand enough of arguments to date that not everyone holds to your position. That should be enough