Faithful obliged not to follow Pope’s opinion on gay civil unions

Status
Not open for further replies.

Michie

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Feb 5, 2002
165,517
55,207
Woods
✟4,585,452.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
A Link That you reposted and are on record as agreeing with... so I ask again, are the Pope's Musings on this topic merely his opinions, or are they, as the OP article you posted and affirmed asserts, a "teaching" of the Pope?
I think I’ve made clear that they are opinions. The problem is those opinions go against the teachings of the Church. It is a poor witness. And many think that whatever he says is a teaching. I think everything I posted here was quite clear. Now you can answer my questions.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: Chesster
Upvote 0

Michie

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Feb 5, 2002
165,517
55,207
Woods
✟4,585,452.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
You know, I read a lot of your posts. Quite surprising for a Catholic. So what are you saying concerning the popes musings? I’m curious what you think faithful, practicing Catholics should do when a papal opinion clashes with Scripture and what the Church has always taught.
A refresher.
 
Upvote 0

Michie

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Feb 5, 2002
165,517
55,207
Woods
✟4,585,452.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I see you changed one of your posts to the catechism. I suppose you think that answers the question?? The pope speaking this way still presents a myriad of problems. As many clergy have pointed out. Treating someone with dignity does not mean encouraging someone in their sin.
 
Upvote 0

Chrystal-J

The one who stands firm to the end will be saved.
Supporter
Oct 19, 2004
12,798
5,989
Detroit
✟798,121.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Widowed
Politics
US-Others
Now the Pope maintains that even homosexual persons
(i.e. "those that exhibit homosexual behavior") have the right to a family. Francis places civil unions on par with the institution of marriage as defined above. He, thus, accepts the existence of more than one type of family, which by itself is unacceptable. This would be like saying that the creation story has all been for naught, that Scripture had fallen into error, and that the natural and social order are no longer have absolute, but conventional ends, depending on life’s changing circumstances. These are all the things a pope cannot support, particularly when thinking and acting like a pope

Mother Angelica said that the devil can come at you with a smile. Not all false leaders are obviously bad looking at first, but know them by their fruits. This Pope has turned his back on Truth and Catholic doctrine.
 
  • Prayers
Reactions: Michie
Upvote 0

parousia70

Livin' in yesterday's tomorrow
Supporter
Feb 24, 2002
15,533
4,826
57
Oregon
✟793,718.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Now the Pope maintains that even homosexual persons (i.e. "those that exhibit homosexual behavior")

Since when is exhibiting homosexual behavior a requirement to be a Homosexual person?
are heterosexual persons not heterosexual until they exhibit heterosexual behavior?

This type of ignorance tells me all I need to know about the veracity of the claims of the author, and whether or not I need to heed them.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

parousia70

Livin' in yesterday's tomorrow
Supporter
Feb 24, 2002
15,533
4,826
57
Oregon
✟793,718.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I see you changed one of your posts to the catechism. I suppose you think that answers the question?? The pope speaking this way still presents a myriad of problems. As many clergy have pointed out. Treating someone with dignity does not mean encouraging someone in their sin.

I didn't change any post to the catechism... I posted a excerpt of the CCC, and pointed out that the Popes Musings on the topic UPHOLD that relevant section.

If you disagree with my assessment, then Please show me HOW the Pope's musings here are in opposition with that particular part of the catechism. especially this part:

Certainly, it is the proper function of authority to arbitrate, in the name of the common good, between various particular interests; but it should make accessible to each what is needed to lead a truly human life: food, clothing, health, work, education and culture, suitable information, the right to establish a family, and so on. and so on.


The Pope is affirming that CIVIL GOVERNMENT AUTHORITY has the DUTY to "make accessible to each what is needed to lead a truly human life: food, clothing, health, work, education and culture, suitable information, the right to establish a family, and so on.

He is not saying the Church has any obligation to do so, or to recognize such, but he is affirming CIVIL GOVERNMENTS right, indeed Solemn DUTY, to make such NEEDED things Available TO EACH.

I think you're knickers are in a twist over a molehill....
 
Upvote 0

Michie

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Feb 5, 2002
165,517
55,207
Woods
✟4,585,452.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I didn't change any post to the catechism... I posted a excerpt of the CCC, and pointed out that the Popes Musings on the topic UPHOLD that relevant section.

If you disagree with my assessment, then Please show me HOW the Pope's musings here are in opposition with that particular part of the catechism. especially this part:

Certainly, it is the proper function of authority to arbitrate, in the name of the common good, between various particular interests; but it should make accessible to each what is needed to lead a truly human life: food, clothing, health, work, education and culture, suitable information, the right to establish a family, and so on. and so on.


The Pope is affirming that CIVIL GOVERNMENT AUTHORITY has the DUTY to "make accessible to each what is needed to lead a truly human life: food, clothing, health, work, education and culture, suitable information, the right to establish a family, and so on.

He is not saying the Church has any obligation to do so, or to recognize such, but he is affirming CIVIL GOVERNMENTS right, indeed Solemn DUTY, to make such NEEDED things Available TO EACH.

I think you're knickers are in a twist over a molehill....
I think you are derailing the thread and refusing to answer questions. You have not addressed anything that’s been posted here as far as what the actual issue is.
 
Upvote 0

Michie

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Feb 5, 2002
165,517
55,207
Woods
✟4,585,452.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I didn't change any post to the catechism... I posted a excerpt of the CCC, and pointed out that the Popes Musings on the topic UPHOLD that relevant section.

If you disagree with my assessment, then Please show me HOW the Pope's musings here are in opposition with that particular part of the catechism. especially this part:

Certainly, it is the proper function of authority to arbitrate, in the name of the common good, between various particular interests; but it should make accessible to each what is needed to lead a truly human life: food, clothing, health, work, education and culture, suitable information, the right to establish a family, and so on. and so on.


The Pope is affirming that CIVIL GOVERNMENT AUTHORITY has the DUTY to "make accessible to each what is needed to lead a truly human life: food, clothing, health, work, education and culture, suitable information, the right to establish a family, and so on.

He is not saying the Church has any obligation to do so, or to recognize such, but he is affirming CIVIL GOVERNMENTS right, indeed Solemn DUTY, to make such NEEDED things Available TO EACH.

I think you're knickers are in a twist over a molehill....
Same thing. Still deflecting.
 
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

Michie

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Feb 5, 2002
165,517
55,207
Woods
✟4,585,452.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Now the Pope maintains that even homosexual persons (i.e. "those that exhibit homosexual behavior")

Since when is exhibiting homosexual behavior a requirement to be a Homosexual person?
are heterosexual persons not heterosexual until they exhibit heterosexual behavior?

This type of ignorance tells me all I need to know about the veracity of the claims of the author, and whether or not I need to heed them.
Oh for Pete’s sake. Everyone knows to be homosexual is not a sin but acting on it is. You are completely deflecting on what the issue is in this thread.
 
Upvote 0

parousia70

Livin' in yesterday's tomorrow
Supporter
Feb 24, 2002
15,533
4,826
57
Oregon
✟793,718.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I think you are derailing the thread and refusing to answer questions. You have not addressed anything that’s been posted here as far as what the actual issue is.

Sure I have... the actual issue is EXACTLY what I posted in my post #26

Your surprising, for a Catholic, extreme positions seem to have clouded your understanding of the actual issue, or at least clouded your ability to affirm that it's OK that other Catholics (including most notably the Pope!) see this vastly different from you.

In fact I'm grateful for the fact there are such Catholics and I'm grateful for our Pope.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

parousia70

Livin' in yesterday's tomorrow
Supporter
Feb 24, 2002
15,533
4,826
57
Oregon
✟793,718.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Oh for Pete’s sake. Everyone knows to be homosexual is not a sin but acting on it is. .

Everyone except the author of the Link you are Hocking apparently....

So you have no problem with Homosexual Civil Unions so long as they are asexual?
 
Upvote 0

Michie

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Feb 5, 2002
165,517
55,207
Woods
✟4,585,452.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Everyone except the author of the Link you are Hocking apparently....

So you have no problem with Homosexual Civil Unions so long as they are asexual?
I’m no longer continuing this conversation with you. It’s disingenuous and you cannot resist attacking the poster.
 
  • Like
Reactions: parousia70
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

parousia70

Livin' in yesterday's tomorrow
Supporter
Feb 24, 2002
15,533
4,826
57
Oregon
✟793,718.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I’m no longer continuing this conversation with you. It’s disingenuous and you cannot resist attacking the poster.
Fair enough. You’re certainly welcome to take your ball and leave the sandbox if the kitchen is getting too hot… Just remember you threw the first “attack the poster” punch in your post #11.. But I guess it’s only OK when you do it?

Our readers certainly have enough information from us both to make an informed decision.

it is interesting that you appear to believe homosexuals are somehow not qualified or not worthy to be counted as one of the “each” that CCC #1908 says has the intrinsic human right to “establish a family” within the parameters of civil government.

I am grateful our Pope sees it differently than you.
 
Upvote 0

KarateCowboy

Classical liberal
Supporter
Aug 6, 2004
13,390
2,109
✟140,932.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Private
Fair enough. You’re certainly welcome to take your ball and leave the sandbox if the kitchen is getting too hot… Just remember you threw the first “attack the poster” punch in your post #11.. But I guess it’s only OK when you do it?

Our readers certainly have enough information from us both to make an informed decision.

it is interesting that you appear to believe homosexuals are somehow not qualified or not worthy to be counted as one of the “each” that CCC #1908 says has the intrinsic human right to “establish a family” within the parameters of civil government.

I am grateful our Pope sees it differently than you.
You're taking that out of context. It's referring to natural marriage between a man and a woman.

Psychologists like Lisa Diamond are working to dispel the myth that sexual preference cannot change. The Church should be encouraging research to determine what type of therapy can do so safely and healthily.
 
  • Winner
Reactions: Michie
Upvote 0

parousia70

Livin' in yesterday's tomorrow
Supporter
Feb 24, 2002
15,533
4,826
57
Oregon
✟793,718.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
As far as I’m close concerned, We should take government completely out of the marriage business altogether, and leave it to the province of religious institutions alone.

Leave our civil government Free to establish the type of civil union for “each” that truly lives into the moral values and ethical standards that CCC 1908 enshrines. “Built up in justice and animated by Love”
 
Upvote 0

Michie

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Feb 5, 2002
165,517
55,207
Woods
✟4,585,452.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
From a reader in a comment…

QUAERITUR:

When “going to the periphery” crosses the line is when the exception becomes the rule of law. What about COURAGE ministry, isn’t this a slap in the face of those trying to enact 12 step program to leave homosexual lifestyle?

Yes, it is a slap in the face.

It is a slap in the face of every faithful Catholic priest who has tried to preach about human sexuality with both compassion and truth.

It is a slap in the face of every faithful Catholic struggling with same-sex attraction and striving to live a continent life.

It is a slap in the face of every faithful Catholic politician who has worked to defend or pass laws that uphold the natural law.

It is a slap of every Roman Pontiff who has taught about this difficult topic with charity and clarity.

It is a slap in the face of the human writers of every verse of Sacred Scripture which reveals the mind of the Creator about human sexuality.

It is a slap in the incorporeal faces of the Holy Angels who are horrified when certain acts are committed.

It is a slap in the face of St. Joseph, Pillar of Families.

It is a slap in the face of the Blessed Virgin, Mother Most Chaste.

It is a slap in the face of the Lord who said, “Go and sin no more!”

It is a slap in the face of the Trinity, which models the relationships of God’s created images.

Yes, it is a slap in the face.

What we are witnessing in the consternation and open resistance of many Catholics to the recent world-conforming statements is the sensus fidei fidelium, “the faithful’s sense of the Faith”.

Sensus fidelium is the deeply rooted resonance of the faithful with the Truth as taught by the Church and which reverberates in us as images of God.

Sensus fidelium is not the whim of a majority.

The sine qua non of sensus fidei fidelium is that one has to be faithful to have it.

And “faithful” means faithful to the Tradition as interpreted by the authentic Magisterium.

Yes, it is a slap in the face.

ASK FATHER: Recent comments about same-sex unions... a "slap in the face" of those trying to leave homosexual lifestyle?
 
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

Michie

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Feb 5, 2002
165,517
55,207
Woods
✟4,585,452.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
The initiative comes in response to Pope Francis’ remarks, given in a new documentary, in which he gave his clearest support yet for civil union laws for same-sex couples.

20201024191020_d4201641edab9f621fcb45d0e653b3c7f04285638c143ba297cde5e5eb5d02a5.jpeg

Catholics and clergy gather in St. Peter's Square to pray on October 24, 2020. (photo: Edward Pentin / NCRegister)

VATICAN CITY — A group of lay faithful and priests gathered in St. Peter’s Square this afternoon to ask Pope Francis to clarify his reported remarks on same-sex civil unions as media and politicians around the world interpret them as a significant change in Church teaching.

The group, led by Austrian layman Alexander Tschugguel who came to prominence last year after throwing the Pachamama statues into the Tiber during the Amazon Synod, gathered in the shadow of St. Peter’s basilica at about 5pm where they stood and knelt in silent prayer.

In front of them, next to the perimeter fence of the square, the participants held up a large banner that read: “Holy Father, we ask for clarity on same-sex civil unions” which Vatican authorities allowed to be displayed for 10 minutes before asking for it to be taken down.

It is rare that a large banner of this kind has been allowed to be displayed so close to the square and given such prominence.

Continued below.
Catholics Pray for Clarity in St. Peter’s Square After Pope Francis’ Civil Unions Remarks
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.