The Push is on!
Check out this cleverly crafted piece in USA Today.
When religion loses its credibility
Galileo was persecuted for revealing what we now know to be the truth regarding Earth's place in our solar system. Today, the issue is homosexuality, and the persecution is not of one man but of millions. Will Christian leaders once again be on the wrong side of history?
By Oliver "Buzz" Thomas
What if Christian leaders are wrong about homosexuality? I suppose, much as a newspaper maintains its credibility by setting the record straight, church leaders would need to do the same:
Correction: Despite what you might have read, heard or been taught throughout your churchgoing life, homosexuality is, in fact, determined at birth and is not to be condemned by God's followers.
Based on a few recent headlines, we won't be seeing that admission anytime soon.
Last week, U.S. Roman Catholic bishops took the position that homosexual attractions are "disordered" and that gays should live closeted lives of chastity. At the same time, North Carolina's Baptist State Convention was preparing to investigate churches that are too gay-friendly. Even the more liberal Presbyterian Church (USA) had been planning to put a minister on trial for conducting a marriage ceremony for two women before the charges were dismissed on a technicality. All this brings me back to the question: What if we're wrong?
Religion's only real commodity, after all, is its moral authority. Lose that, and we lose our credibility. Lose credibility, and we might as well close up shop. Read the rest HERE.
Here's a similar screed by ELLEN GOODMAN
The closet of self-hatred
Nevertheless, this week Catholic bishops meeting in Baltimore offered guidelines for ministering to gays that might have been -- indeed were -- from the distant past. The tone, said one bishop, was meant to be "positive, pastoral, and welcoming" to gay Catholics. But the message was that "homosexual inclinations" are "disordered," that gays should live in chastity, and that they are banned from marrying or adopting. In short, gays are welcome with open arms into the church as long as they declare themselves sinners and reject -- repel? -- their own sexuality.
Christianity has traditionally taught that all sex outside of marriage is wrong, immoral. Now we're going to make exceptions, because it's politically correct? What other group is "born that way" and can't control their behavior? Is it the fornicators, masturbators, pedophiles those that are attracted to barn yard pets?
posted by Pat Campbell @ 4:38 PM
2 comments
2 Comments:
How do I respond to this nonsense? Easy.
It's called "Natural Law."
There is an order imbedded in nature - Intelligent design.
We "Humans" are created with intelligence.
Therefore, there is a responsibility placed upon each of us to act and respond intelligently, that is, with reason in any given situation.
Natural law also teaches that there are certain things that man is inclined to naturally and first and foremost man is inclined to act according to reason. - T. Aquinas
Reason tells us that sexual relations between two people of the same gender is unintelligible because such activity is not ordered to the procreation of offspring.
If its not ordered, its what? answer: Disordered.
You don't need religion to tell you that.
Put your head up your --- and you'll get the same result.
I've heard it said that the sexual act isn't for love, it's for marriage. What that really means is that there are many ways to express love apart from physical sexual activity, but there is no other natural way to have children. And marriage is the proper context for the procreation of offspring because the family is the normal ordinary place for true love to flourish.
The conjugal act has a two-fold purpose: It is both unitive and procreative and physical sexual activity between two people of the same gender is neither unitive (because there is not a total giving and receiving because there is not a complimentarity between two people of the same gender, in the same way that exists between a male and a female) or procreative (it's fruitless, and you can tell a tree by its fruit (the tree here being physical sexual activity between two people of the same gender)).
Like most bad newspaper articles and arguments by people with radical left-wing agendas this one has a false premise.
And I would start by not accepting the writer's false premise.
He said two things I disagree with: (1) That the Church's only real commodity is its moral authority.
What about the Sacraments - the divine life of grace that flows from the sacramental life of the Church that allows us to live life in the Spirit and to share in the intimate Communion of the Blessed Trinity. "I came that you might have life and have it more abundantly." - Jesus Christ. Morality may be a piece of the pie, but to limit religion to morality manifests a depraved and narrow experience and understanding of religion and the spiritual life.
"Close up shop." - The Church has been around for a long time and has weathered the storms of the most terrifying persecutions, not to mention the opposition of numerous totalitarian regimes, and the most "intelligent" and "modern" ideologies.
"Close up shop." - That's funny!
It's like a high school kid suggesting to a 98 year old man, who struggled through the Depression and fought in wars, that he doesn't know what hard work is.
The second part of the premise, that I strongly disagree with is this: (2) the author of this article seems to be suggesting that if a person was born with a homosexual inclination, that the person would have no choice and would not be culpable for his or her actions.
Ha! There is always a choice to act or not to act on those inclinations. It's not sinful to have homosexual inclinations. The Church has never taught that this was sinful. However, Sacred Scripture has continuously taught (not only in the Book of Leviticus as the author would have you believe) and the Church has reaffirmed that to act upon one's homosexual inclinations is not only sinful but intrinsically disordered and depraved.
If God created us and if everything he created is good, how can a gay person be guilty of being anything more than what God created him or her to be?
The author of this text is a labeler and is unfair towards people with homosexual inclinations because he labels them "gay" and makes them something other than a human being made in the image and likeness of God, endowed with dignity and called to holiness.
The Church on the other hand does not label human beings with such inclinations. On the contrary, She recognizes their full human potential to love and to be loved and sincerely offers guidance to allow us all to do just that, namely, to love and to be loved; to live life in Christ, who is Love.
The Church distinguishes between the person and the act or as it is more commonly said: the sin and the sinner, something that the author of this article, isn't inclined to do and if he wants to cast the first stone, I'd recommend putting his glass house on the market and moving into something a little more durable.
Regards,
Rev. Jim from Taxi
I'll try to keep it short and simple.
The Church always has the good of her children in mind.
Homosexual acts are what have always been condemned by the Church (as disordered, not properly reflecting the God given/ natural order of ones sexuality.)...one's inclination is not at question here...because perhaps some people don't have very much control over their inclinations--what attracts them.
The Church doesn't condemn the act in order to place restrictions on persons or in order to limit their happiness. The Church's rules/laws concerning homosexuality like any laws are put in place to ensure one's true happiness,their true fulfillment...laws are insisted upon, in order to enable individuals to fully realize who they are and their high calling, their noble dignity--created in the image and likeness of God...their great human potential.
The Glory of God is man fully alive...truly and most fully himself.
People who act out their homosexual inclinations deny their true selves...because they are denying their human sexuality, their physical/ physiological/ biological make up...an objective reality, an integral part of who they are (Male/ Female). They are denying themselves, not accepting who they are...the very thing that proponents of the gay agenda claim that chastity does...they have cleverly turned the tables on us and are using our objective as their own, under false pretenses.
Just an FYI if you didn't know...there are 3 catagories of homosexuals...transitional--adolescents who are uncertain of their sexual orientation and experiment. Situational--bubba in prison goes after Jack b/c there are no women around. And a deep rooted homosexuality based on family upbringing/ situation...the lack of a male father/ feminine mother figure or other such issues like sexual assult.
It is possible that some people could be more inclined toward homosexual behavior than others...just as the Irish are more/ easier inclined to become alcoholics more so than some other ethnic groups or people....that doesn't mean that they are or nec. will become homosexuals...just that if the situation was encouraging it, they'd be more easily inclined to be influenced by it.---that's my own thought, so let me know what you think?
Joe Da Man
Post a Comment
<< Home