Jump to content
An Old School Catholic Message Board

My Response To The Recent Gay Marriage Decision In The Supreme Court


dUSt

Recommended Posts

I didn't say I lack compassion for the willfully ignorant; I said I have less compassion. For those who are genuinely ignorant, my patience, love and compassion is seemingly endless. For the willfully ignorant, I definitely feel the strain on my "nice" resources.

 

so glad you explained that. i didn't get it. i think some of my brain cells leaked out during my bike ride today. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

franciscanheart

Ahhhhhhhhhhh!!! I am enlightened!

It's official: You're definitely difficult to like.


Different strokes and OMGRACIOUS: What was that show? In the 80s maybe? Anyone? Something strokes... [off to IMDB it.]
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey, we are the same. 

I have less "compassion" for certain traits as well. :) 

But my infinite love surpasses that of the deepest depths of the ocean.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

franciscanheart

Hey, we are the same. 
I have less "compassion" for certain traits as well. :)
But my infinite love surpasses that of the deepest depths of the ocean.

Let me rephrase: We are difficult to like.

My Halloween costume has me stocking up on brillo pads already. This could be the most expensive costume to date...
Link to comment
Share on other sites

franciscanheart

someone very well known here once said something to this effect: you are impossible to like online. everyone hates you until they meet you.


truer words have rarely been spoken. (and even those who hate me in person end up becoming some of my best friends.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Aww man. If I cared about people judging me while admitting to not knowing me at all Id probably feel sad.

 

But Im not :)

 

You shouldnt care what they think either Franny.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

MissScripture

It's official: You're definitely difficult to like.


Different strokes and OMGRACIOUS: What was that show? In the 80s maybe? Anyone? Something strokes... [off to IMDB it.]

Diff'rent Strokes! I loved that show!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

franciscanheart

Diff'rent Strokes! I loved that show!

Yeeessssssssss! I'm in the middle of a Cosby Show marathon but that'll totally be next.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again, the inclination toward those acts is disordered; the people are not.
 
It's cool. :) I just try to keep the spread of ignorance (and/or linguistic abuse/confusion) to a minimum whenever possible. :like:

 

You had stated, "Homosexuality is not a disorder."

 

"Homosexuality" refers to homosexual tendencies or inclinations, or the homosexual condition.

 

I'll expand the quote from the CDF letter to make this clearer:

 

 

 

 At the same time the Congregation took note of the distinction commonly drawn between the homosexual condition or tendency and individual homosexual actions. These were described as deprived of their essential and indispensable finality, as being "intrinsically disordered", and able in no case to be approved of (cf. n. 8, $4).

In the discussion which followed the publication of the Declaration, however, an overly benign interpretation was given to the homosexual condition itself, some going so far as to call it neutral, or even good. Although the particular inclination of the homosexual person is not a sin, it is a more or less strong tendency ordered toward an intrinsic moral evil; and thus the inclination itself must be seen as an objective disorder.

 

 

The homosexual condition or tendency (or homosexuality) is itself objectively disordered, though not sinful if not willed.

 

Homosexuality is a condition or inclination, not a person.  That should be clear.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

MissScripture

Yeeessssssssss! I'm in the middle of a Cosby Show marathon but that'll totally be next.

The more I talk to you, the more I realize how awesome you really are!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of my favorite definitions for love comes from Pope John Paul II's theology of the body: "The communion of persons means existing in relationship of mutual gift."  And in the words of Cardinal Christopher Schonborn, we ought to "respect long-term, committed relationships between people of the same gender."   :hardhead:

 

If you read Blessed John Paul II's words in context, it is quite clear that he is speaking of a married man and woman, and that according to the theology of the body, homosexual acts are wrong, as are all acts of sodomy and other sexual acts not open to life.

 

That all homosexual activity is gravely disordered and sinful is clearly stated in the Catechism, and has always been the constant teaching of the Church.

 

The Church's opposition to legal same-sex "marriage" and "civil unions" is made very clear and explicit in the CDF document: "Considerations Regarding Proposals to Give Legal Recognition to Unions Between Homosexual Persons."

 

The Church teaches that respect for homosexual persons cannot lead in any way to approval of homosexual behaviour or to legal recognition of homosexual unions. The common good requires that laws recognize, promote and protect marriage as the basis of the family, the primary unit of society. Legal recognition of homosexual unions or placing them on the same level as marriage would mean not only the approval of deviant behaviour, with the consequence of making it a model in present-day society, but would also obscure basic values which belong to the common inheritance of humanity. The Church cannot fail to defend these values, for the good of men and women and for the good of society itself.

 

Sadly, Cardinal Schonborn's opinions are contrary to the moral teachings handed down by the universal Church, and do not constitute orthodox Church teaching on the matter.

 

(This post also originally contained a link to a dissident "Catholic" group condemned by the Church, though the mods took care of that.)

 

Father, I can only pray that you are joking, and are not trying to teach, contrary to the Church, that homosexual relationships are morally acceptable.  If this is a joke, it is not funny, and can cause confusion and scandal, especially as it is coming from an ordained priest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the mallet on the head smiley means "this guy (shoborn sp?) is a doofus).

 

eta: actually I changed my mind. I think Cappie might be ripping the cardinal's words out of context to make a point. "long-term committed same sex relationships" do not necessarily entail a sexual component, and perhaps Father laments the oversexualization of human relationships and is emphasizing the need for deep and meaningful (and holy!) human relationships between people of the same gender.

 

Edited by Ice_nine
Link to comment
Share on other sites

PhuturePriest

someone very well known here once said something to this effect: you are impossible to like online. everyone hates you until they meet you.


truer words have rarely been spoken. (and even those who hate me in person end up becoming some of my best friends.)

 

But I'm simply so amazing that I won over all of your hearts anyway. :love:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...