[Orion]

http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2014/10/13...?hpt=hp_t3

Quote:

Using strikingly open language, a new Vatican report says the church should welcome and appreciate gays, and offers a solution for divorced and remarried Catholics who want to receive Communion.

Quote:

Homosexuals have gifts and qualities to offer to the Christian community. Are we capable of welcoming these people, guaranteeing to them a fraternal space in our communities? Often they wish to encounter a church that offers them a welcoming home. Are our communities capable of providing that, accepting and valuing their sexual orientation, without compromising Catholic doctrine on the family and matrimony?

[Renzy]

All this is going to do is push an already declining church membership even lower. Liberals aren't going to join up anyway, no matter how accommodating the Church tries to be, and it's just going to alienate more and more conservatives from attending as the Church continues to capitulate to the Left.

[TheWastelander]

If they accept the gays they might as well just stop calling themselves Christians altogether.

Both the Old and New Testaments harshly warn against homosexuality. It is more than just a regular sexual sin.

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?se...ersion=KJV

Quote:

Romans 1:26 - 32

26 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:

27 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 unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.

28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;

29 Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers,

30 Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,

31 Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:

32 Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.

[Renzy]

From that same article with regards to Cohabitation:

Quote:

The synod discussions emphasized the “positive reality” of civil weddings and cohabitation which, while not the ideal of Christian marriage, nonetheless contain “constructive elements.”

Many couples who choose to live together, according to the synod, do so for economic reasons.

“Simple cohabitation is often a choice inspired by a general attitude, which is opposed to institutions and definitive undertakings, but also while waiting for a secure existence (a steady job and income).”

“In other countries common-law marriages are very numerous…because getting married is a luxury, so that material poverty encourages people to live in common-law marriages.”

Going along with this is simply going to reinforce the already downward trend we have in this country with regards to marriage.

And people aren't just cohabiting until money situations improve so they can get married. They're doing so because there's less and less of a stigma to cohabitate period , just as there's less and less of a stigma associated with out-of-wedlock births, single-motherhood, women having children with multiple fathers, and all the other social ills the Church was traditionally providing a bulwark against.

Quote:

In these cases, the synod says, “The church is called on to be the house of the Fathers, with doors always wide open…where there is a place for everyone, with all their problems.”

Making fewer and fewer demands on your adherents in an effort to be everything to everyone isn't a recipe for success.

[ginger root]

Doctrine is not going to change - it was expected that some clergy were going to propose more liberal stances. There is almost no chance though that official teachings will be amended even if the ideas to spread to and are adopted by leaders of specific congregations.

[IvanDrago]

I haven't gone to church (catholic) in 15 years or so until a week ago for a family members birthday. The changes to the inside of that building shocked me. Back in the day, you had the standard bloody Jesus crucifix above the alter and pictures of bloody jesus stations of the cross on the interior walls. Now, the large crucifix was gone and in it's place was a huge golden display case with a life sized Mary statue at the peak of the case near the ceiling, off to one side at her feet was a statue of Joseph, on the other side at her feet was a statue of whatever saint the church was named after. Then right at Mary's feet was a little 10" tall crucifix. There was a second 5 foot tall Mary statue sitting in front of the alter that pretty much blocked the view of the priest while he was up there talking. I counted no less than 10 statues of Mary in the room.

The priest was extremely effeminate and theatrical during the whole thing. Waving his arms around while chanting and blowing on the cracker and wine really loud during the consecration. A lot of the phrases in the prayers and responses have been changed since the 90's. Most notably were the responses when you were supposed to show respect to god or jesus. One that I remember off hand is the old "It is right to give him thanks and praise" response, the response now is "Because it is just". It was fucking surreal.

We arrived early and the place was packed with people droning the rosary. They said the rosary again after the mass.



That whole first commandment thing and worshiping graven images must have been bullshit I guess.

[The Beast1]

(10-13-2014 04:29 PM)TheWastelander Wrote:  

If they accept the gays they might as well just stop calling themselves Christians altogether.

Both the Old and New Testaments harshly warn against homosexuality. It is more than just a regular sexual sin.

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?se...ersion=KJV

Quote:

Romans 1:26 - 32

26 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:

27 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 unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.

28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;

29 Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers,

30 Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,

31 Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:

32 Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.

History doesn't repeat itself but it certainly does rhyme. Don't those behaviors written about in the bible look familiar with what we see today?

This is something the church needs to reconcile fast and it doesn't mean giving the gays a carte blanche ok to continue their promiscuity.

The church would do a lot of good by letting gays have what they want, while telling them to be monogamous. That way, you win the compassion of the masses while drawing the line at ,"no more multiple partners." Gay marriage has less to do with being one on one romantically with the same sex and more with free reign to enjoy your carnal desires.

While heterosexual relationships are certainly rife with problems and a separate problem that needs attention beyond from gay relationships.

Remember Jesus' golden rule: "Love others as I have loved you". Apply that trick to these current social ills we have today. Easy solution.

[TheWastelander]

(10-13-2014 05:45 PM)frenchie Wrote:  

(10-13-2014 04:29 PM)TheWastelander Wrote:  

If they accept the gays they might as well just stop calling themselves Christians altogether.

Both the Old and New Testaments harshly warn against homosexuality. It is more than just a regular sexual sin.

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?se...ersion=KJV

Quote:

Romans 1:26 - 32

26 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:

27 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 unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.

28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;

29 Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers,

30 Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,

31 Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:

32 Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.

History doesn't repeat itself but it certainly does rhyme. Don't those behaviors written about in the bible look familiar with what we see today?

This is something the church needs to reconcile fast and it doesn't mean giving the gays a carte blanche ok to continue their promiscuity.

The church would do a lot of good by letting gays have what they want, while telling them to be monogamous. That way, you win the compassion of the masses while drawing the line at ,"no more multiple partners."

While heterosexual relationships are certainly rife with problems and a separate problem that needs attention beyond from gay relationships.

Remember Jesus' golden rule: "Love others as I have loved you". Apply that trick to these current social ills we have today. Easy solution.

I was actually reminded of those verses when I was reading the thread about the closeted gay guy who killed his wife.

Anyway, I'd like to point out what you quoted was Jesus talking to his disciples. He told them to love one another.

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?se...ersion=KJV

Quote:

John 13:33-35

33 Little children, yet a little while I am with you. Ye shall seek me: and as I said unto the Jews, Whither I go, ye cannot come; so now I say to you.

34 A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another.

35 By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another.

There's this popular idea that Jesus wanted Christians to 'love everyone', but it isn't biblical and makes no sense. There are some people who are willfully wicked enemies of God that we should not love. For instance, under the hippie false doctrine of 'love everyone' that would include mass murdering scum, making the doctrine immoral right from the get-go.

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?se...ersion=KJV

Quote:

Psalm 139:18-22

18 If I should count them, they are more in number than the sand: when I awake, I am still with thee.

19 Surely thou wilt slay the wicked, O God: depart from me therefore, ye bloody men.

20 For they speak against thee wickedly, and thine enemies take thy name in vain.

21 Do not I hate them, O Lord, that hate thee? and am not I grieved with those that rise up against thee?

22 I hate them with perfect hatred: I count them mine enemies.

If churches want attendance rates to go up they need to preach the Bible as it is written. God loves believers and nonbelievers alike, but he doesn't love everyone.

Homosexuality is especially despised by the God of the Bible and liberal Catholic theologians who want to appeal to them are playing with fire.

[RexImperator]

I was brought up with a fairly strict, conservative, Catholic upbringing and I'll just say that unfortunately, there's no doubt it's one of the things that really messed me up with regards to relating to women properly. Somehow I was the one who took stuff seriously that everyone else knew not to.

Isn't it fairly well know now that the Vatican has been heavily infiltrated by gays?

This is one of the reasons priests should be able to marry.

[The Beast1]

(10-13-2014 06:09 PM)TheWastelander Wrote:  

(10-13-2014 05:45 PM)frenchie Wrote:  

(10-13-2014 04:29 PM)TheWastelander Wrote:  

If they accept the gays they might as well just stop calling themselves Christians altogether.

Both the Old and New Testaments harshly warn against homosexuality. It is more than just a regular sexual sin.

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?se...ersion=KJV

Quote:

Romans 1:26 - 32

26 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:

27 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 unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.

28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;

29 Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers,

30 Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,

31 Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:

32 Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.

History doesn't repeat itself but it certainly does rhyme. Don't those behaviors written about in the bible look familiar with what we see today?

This is something the church needs to reconcile fast and it doesn't mean giving the gays a carte blanche ok to continue their promiscuity.

The church would do a lot of good by letting gays have what they want, while telling them to be monogamous. That way, you win the compassion of the masses while drawing the line at ,"no more multiple partners."

While heterosexual relationships are certainly rife with problems and a separate problem that needs attention beyond from gay relationships.

Remember Jesus' golden rule: "Love others as I have loved you". Apply that trick to these current social ills we have today. Easy solution.

I was actually reminded of those verses when I was reading the thread about the closeted gay guy who killed his wife.

Anyway, I'd like to point out what you quoted was Jesus talking to his disciples. He told them to love one another.

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?se...ersion=KJV

Quote:

John 13:33-35

33 Little children, yet a little while I am with you. Ye shall seek me: and as I said unto the Jews, Whither I go, ye cannot come; so now I say to you.

34 A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another.

35 By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another.

There's this popular idea that Jesus wanted Christians to 'love everyone', but it isn't biblical and makes no sense. There are some people who are willfully wicked enemies of God that we should not love. For instance, under the hippie false doctrine of 'love everyone' that would include mass murdering scum, making the doctrine immoral right from the get-go.

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?se...ersion=KJV

Quote:

Psalm 139:18-22

18 If I should count them, they are more in number than the sand: when I awake, I am still with thee.

19 Surely thou wilt slay the wicked, O God: depart from me therefore, ye bloody men.

20 For they speak against thee wickedly, and thine enemies take thy name in vain.

21 Do not I hate them, O Lord, that hate thee? and am not I grieved with those that rise up against thee?

22 I hate them with perfect hatred: I count them mine enemies.

If churches want attendance rates to go up they need to preach the Bible as it is written. God loves believers and nonbelievers alike, but he doesn't love everyone.

Homosexuality is especially despised by the God of the Bible and liberal Catholic theologians who want to appeal to them are playing with fire.

I'm going to point you to an RoK article on the Golden rule. This is a good explanation of how to properly apply the golden rule.
http://www.returnofkings.com/33060/the-g...rule-works

Remember, it isn't our place to place judgement on other people. Only God is the one who will place judgement. A gay man's judgement will be no less harsh than a straight mans. Both are wicked and broken individuals in the eyes of God.

During Jesus' ministry, he spent time with the sick, tax collectors, and non Jews. The very people that at the time were considered the ones non-deserving of God's gifts. The church should do their best to tell these people what the consequences of their behavior is.

A good Christian helps tend this broken world while using Christianity to heal the wounds caused by the brokenness. No matter what we do there will always be suffering so long as their is scarcity. Nothing can change this.

[Atlantic]

The Bible is very clear on its anti homosexual stance. Its the reason the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed.

The 'love each other' text is being cherry picked.

[TheWastelander]

(10-13-2014 07:41 PM)frenchie Wrote:  

I'm going to point you to an RoK article on the Golden rule. This is a good explanation of how to properly apply the golden rule.
http://www.returnofkings.com/33060/the-g...rule-works

Remember, it isn't our place to place judgement on other people. Only God is the one who will place judgement. A gay man's judgement will be no less harsh than a straight mans. Both are wicked and broken individuals in the eyes of God.

During Jesus' ministry, he spent time with the sick, tax collectors, and non Jews. The very people that at the time were considered the ones non-deserving of God's gifts. The church should do their best to tell these people what the consequences of their behavior is.

A good Christian helps tend this broken world while using Christianity to heal the wounds caused by the brokenness. No matter what we do there will always be suffering so long as their is scarcity. Nothing can change this.

It's our place to judge fellow believers as long as we're not being hypocritical in doing so. Matthew 7: 1-5. And I personally disagree with you about God's judgment being the same for homosexuality and heterosexuality adultery. The Bible goes out of its way to paint homosexuality as more of a serious sin than heterosexual adultery (which is still serious). It's unnatural, entire cities are destroyed because of it, men are given over to reprobate minds, etc.

All sins are bad but some sins are worse than others in the eyes of God.

And if I recall correctly the only people who considered the sick, tax collectors and non-Jews unworthy of God's gifts were the Pharisees. Christ certainly didn't.

I've read that article before, by the way. Good stuff.

[RawGod]

Screw the Christian churches. I thought this place was about being a geo-arbitraged playboy.

[blairnaso]

The Episcopalians tried this, and look what happened to their numbers! Vatican II has killed their membership enough as is. More of the same problem will not solve it. People do not want a modern religion.

[blairnaso]

Quote:

“The speeding up of the procedure” of granting annulments was requested by many, according to the report. Various ways to make annulments “more accessible and flexible” were suggested by the Synod.

Well, at least they have their priorities.

They're also flirting with the idea of common-law marriage, claiming that real marriage done by the church is too expensive. Are they admitting to their own simony?

[Basil Ransom]

In Judaism, there is a sect known as Chabad or Lubavitch that is extremely effective in doing outreach to Jews who don't otherwise attend synagogue. And yet their actual beliefs are ultra-Orthodox - as in, ultra traditional, yet they have all these not so observant people attending their services and events.

I suspect the Pope is trying to make the Catholic Church more like Chabad, in that respect - make liberal Christians feel comfortable attending services, while not actually compromising on Church doctrine one bit. Offer a message of inspiration, not condemnation. He has adopted a stance of humility and restraint, for one. The difficulty that the pope faces moreso than Chabad, is media scrutiny. Maybe the Pope will be successful in setting a different tone. But how will people respond when they discover the Church still doesn't approve of fornication, of contraception, of divorce, and so on? How will the media respond? Will the Pope's focus on a positive message pull in liberal Christians despite retaining conservative doctrines?

I'm not a Catholic, but this Pope could be a radical, or he could be a very savvy conservative operator. A little while back I met some conservative Catholics, just after the "who am I to judge?" comment, and they had nothing but praise for him, and said that he hadn't actually relented on any real Church doctrine; humility is not a sin after all.

[TheWastelander]

(10-13-2014 08:26 PM)Basil Ransom Wrote:  

In Judaism, there is a sect known as Chabad or Lubavitch that is extremely effective in doing outreach to Jews who don't otherwise attend synagogue. And yet their actual beliefs are ultra-Orthodox - as in, ultra traditional, yet they have all these not so observant people attending their services and events.

I suspect the Pope is trying to make the Catholic Church more like Chabad, in that respect - make liberal Christians feel comfortable attending services, while not actually compromising on Church doctrine one bit. Offer a message of inspiration, not condemnation. He has adopted a stance of humility and restraint, for one. The difficulty that the pope faces moreso than Chabad, is media scrutiny. Maybe the Pope will be successful in setting a different tone. But how will people respond when they discover the Church still doesn't approve of fornication, of contraception, of divorce, and so on? How will the media respond? Will the Pope's focus on a positive message pull in liberal Christians despite retaining conservative doctrines?

I'm not a Catholic, but this Pope could be a radical, or he could be a very savvy conservative operator. A little while back I met some conservative Catholics, just after the "who am I to judge?" comment, and they had nothing but praise for him, and said that he hadn't actually relented on any real Church doctrine; humility is not a sin after all.

That is a good point. The media has their own agenda in covering things like this.

[Hades]

The Church has made evangelical outreach to sinners it's modus operandi since it started. Tax collectors, adulterers, murderers, thieves, whores, scum of the earth, all are welcome to repent.

No worries, small minority of hardline Catholics of the RVF, the Pope has not changed official doctrine one bit, except to express pity and community inclusion for the damned.

[Basil Ransom]

Hades, I think I can speak on behalf of all the RVF, that we are grossly concerned with the future supply of slutty Catholic school girls. Any decline in Catholic engagement OR conservatism of doctrine threatens this vital source of strumpets.

"The Church has made evangelical outreach to sinners it's modus operandi since it started. Tax collectors, adulterers, murderers, thieves, whores, scum of the earth, all are welcome to repent."

That may be true technically, but did whores and adulterors feel comfortable and welcome in the Church's pews? That is the crux of the matter.

[Ziltoid]

(10-13-2014 04:53 PM)ginger root Wrote:  

Doctrine is not going to change - it was expected that some clergy were going to propose more liberal stances. There is almost no chance though that official teachings will be amended even if the ideas to spread to and are adopted by leaders of specific congregations.

Why not? Is it still doctrine to deny the Earth revolves around the Sun and burn people at the stake for saying it? Do they still deny evolution? Do dead unbaptized babies still go to limbo? Are Catholics still supposed to abstain from meat on Fridays? Do women still have to cover their heads in church?

It's hardly unprecedented for them to rearrange or outright discard parts of God's supposedly infallible policies if they feel it will widen their constituency or bring in a little more $$$, I don't see what makes this instance any different.
Remains to be seen if fags and liberals would actually sign up and start kicking in tithes, though. Doubt it.

[nek]

I'm not religious by any means but this move seems to lessen the legitimacy of the church in my eyes. If you're adapting moral standards simply to be relevant, then it shows that a) you don't have a back bone, b) no one should take what they say seriously since they themselves don't and c) it's really just about money and attendance. No different than the guy hustling gold watches.

[Ingocnito]

Well here's the current map of states allowing gay marriage. It's all a numbers game now.

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/world/58510...x.html.csp

[Hades]

(10-13-2014 09:17 PM)Basil Ransom Wrote:  

Hades, I think I can speak on behalf of all the RVF, that we are grossly concerned with the future supply of slutty Catholic school girls. Any decline in Catholic engagement OR conservatism of doctrine threatens this vital source of strumpets.

"The Church has made evangelical outreach to sinners it's modus operandi since it started. Tax collectors, adulterers, murderers, thieves, whores, scum of the earth, all are welcome to repent."

That may be true technically, but did whores and adulterors feel comfortable and welcome in the Church's pews? That is the crux of the matter.

You raise a good point, that the conservative stance makes for a lot of "rebellious" whores.

I'm also kind of disgusted with their new stance on the whole business but haven't done much in organized religion ever. It would be great if all churches were more like this (it's anglican but the sentiment remains).

[blacknwhitespade]

I don't have a problem with homosexuals, but the way the church (especially Protestant churches) have pandered to women/ex-carouselers while shafting men is disgusting. The creep of feminism into religion is much more concerning to me than gays getting married.

[Jukes]

I am unsure but I am sure I remember certain pagan holidays was use to lure people in the past. Even churches have can' t beat, join them mentality.