The tolerant Catholic Church

[Xordium]

What I am saying is that a Catholic Priest shouldn't be acting in some way that is contrary to the teachings of the Church. I would also hold the view that any cleric of any faith shouldn't be acting contrary to the teachings of that faith.

The inquisition was not a teaching of the Catholic Church. Funnily enough only a small number of clergy were involved. So involvement certainly wasn't mandatory. There are lots of things that are done by the Church which are not mandatory, bake sales as an example at the other end of the spectrum.

You seem bright enough to understand the difference? You don't have to believe any direct teachings of the faith - but teaching otherwise is incompatible.

So you are saying what I said - you think they should obey Catholic teaching - but free choice on other things that maybe are sometimes encouraged by the elements of the Catholic establishment i.e bake sales hurrah - inquisition not on your nelly. Fair enough. And I am not bright btw - far from it.

However, until recently the Catholic stance on evolution was to teach directly against it - therefore you would have us believe that an educated clergyman at that time should have continued with a line he knew to be wrong. I think we will see the same with this issue. A wise bloke once said "“Why do you transgress the commandment of God because of your tradition?”. Love thy neighbour and all that ....

 

[Xordium]

Maybe what I posted wasn't clear.

The Catholic Church teaches a position on divorce. That position is that it is morally wrong.

Divorce is accepted by society.

Anyway - I am working at the moment so I need to get back to things.

Ok fair enough to me it read differently thanks for clearing that up.

 

[RDM]

Maybe what I posted wasn't clear.

The Catholic Church teaches a position on divorce. That position is that it is morally wrong.

Divorce is accepted by society.

Anyway - I am working at the moment so I need to get back to things.

However it can apply that quite inconsitently. It is not impossible for a divorcee to get married in a Catholic church (in fact the Chruch is quite happy to ignore divorce if the original ceremony was not Catholic).

 

[elmarko]

Spud is funny,

He thinks people's intolerance of homophobia is bigotry.

 

[bam0]

However it can apply that quite inconsitently. It is not impossible for a divorcee to get married in a Catholic church (in fact the Chruch is quite happy to ignore divorce if the original ceremony was not Catholic).

All of which leads us to the fact that the church has its own rules about marriage that are not instituted by the state, so why should we listen to their opinion on gay marriage?
This exact question keeps coming up in this thread and I don't see those supporting the church's position addressing it.

 

[spudbynight]

Ok fair enough to me it read differently thanks for clearing that up.

I can see how you read my comment in the way you did.

 

[spudbynight]

So you are saying what I said - you think they should obey Catholic teaching - but free choice on other things that maybe are sometimes encouraged by the elements of the Catholic establishment i.e bake sales hurrah - inquisition not on your nelly. Fair enough. And I am not bright btw - far from it.

You seem reasonably bright and open to reason.

However, until recently the Catholic stance on evolution was to teach directly against it - therefore you would have us believe that an educated clergyman at that time should have continued with a line he knew to be wrong. I think we will see the same with this issue. A wise bloke once said "“Why do you transgress the commandment of God because of your tradition?”. Love thy neighbour and all that ....

A member of the clergy who teaches something contrary to the teachings of the church is a heretic. I am not using that word with any implied pejorative meaning.

The quote from you wise man - can you show me how it relates to the point in question.

 

[spudbynight]

All of which leads us to the fact that the church has its own rules about marriage that are not instituted by the state, so why should we listen to their opinion on gay marriage?
This exact question keeps coming up in this thread and I don't see those supporting the church's position addressing it.

I believe this exact question has been answered several times already.

 

[Xordium]

A member of the clergy who teaches something contrary to the teachings of the church is a heretic. I am not using that word with any implied pejorative meaning.

The quote from you wise man - can you show me how it relates to the point in question.

So those clergy who taught evolution to be true 10 minutes before the Vatican changed the churches position were heretics! Sorry but that is all going to end up a little bit Monty Python.

My point was we are told that the biblical story of creation was never meant to be an accurate description it was mere allegory passed down and misinterpreted. I am suggesting that the churches stance on same sex marriage is more based upon tradition and the times those books were detailed in.

It is my personal belief if Jesus were question he would respond as follows:

"So Jesus do you believe that people of the same sex should have the ability to get married"
"Why of course yes I do as it is an expression and contract of love, the thing I detailed as being most important, between two of my father's people. It is not a contract to produce offspring."

 

[spudbynight]

So those clergy who taught evolution to be true 10 minutes before the Vatican changed the churches position were heretics! Sorry but that is all going to end up a little bit Monty Python.

Yes - that is what the term means.

My point was we are told that the biblical story of creation was never meant to be an accurate description it was mere allegory passed down and misinterpreted. I am suggesting that the churches stance on same sex marriage is more based upon tradition and the times those books were detailed in.

It is my personal belief if Jesus were question he would respond as follows:

"So Jesus do you believe that people of the same sex should have the ability to get married"
"Why of course yes I do as it is an expression and contract of love, the thing I detailed as being most important, between two of my father's people"

The Church bases its teaching on two sources.

1. The Bible
2. Tradition (as opposed to tradition)

Tradition is the "living word of God" as revealed to man.

Without wanting to offend but your supposition about what Jesus may have said isn't really credible.

I think though we are going off track again - by quite some margin.

 

[Xordium]

The Church bases its teaching on two sources.

1. The Bible
2. Tradition (as opposed to tradition)

Tradition is the "living word of God" as revealed to man.

Without wanting to offend but your supposition about what Jesus may have said isn't really credible.

I think though we are going off track again - by quite some margin.

No we are not going off track at all the wise person I quoted above who said you should not put tradition ahead of gods word was Jesus ... Or is the Catholic Church now allowed to ignore the teachings of God to support its more discriminatory and objectionable stances. So my supposition was based upon what the bible details Jesus to have said about the balance of tradition and the words of god etc.

 

[spudbynight]

No we are not going off track at all the wise person I quoted above who said you should not put tradition ahead of gods word was Jesus ... Or is the Catholic Church now allowed to ignore the teachings of God to support its more discriminatory and objectionable stances. So my supposition was based upon what the bible details Jesus to have said about the balance of tradition and the words of god etc.

In what way are they ignoring the direct teachings of God? Can you give me an example?

 

[Xordium]

Yes - that is what the term means.

So they should have knowingly supported the line 10 minutes before everyone did a roundabout saving face change in stance even though they knew that change was coming. That is what you are arguing for isn't it - bare face lying. Surely God had something to say about knowingly lying?

 

[spudbynight]

So they should have knowingly supported the line 10 minutes before everyone did a roundabout saving face change in stance even though they knew that change was coming. That is what you are arguing for isn't it - bare face lying. Surely God had something to say about knowingly lying?

I am not arguing for bare faced lying. I am simply stating that any cleric who teaches something other than the establish teachings of a faith is teaching something else.

Your point is flawed as you assume that there was some sudden volte-face out of nowhere. What actually happened was a long period of theological discussion.

 

[Xordium]

In what way are they ignoring the direct teachings of God? Can you give me an example?

Well I'll let you give me the example - yes or no answers only please just indulge me:

Did the Son of God - Jesus - say love was the greatest of things (Corinthians I think - not a scholar like Cas at all). yes/no

Is marriage a contract of love between two people (currently just a man and a woman and currently being proposed between people of the same sex). yes/no

Does the bible explicitly say anywhere that a man may not marry a man and a woman may not marry a woman. yes/no

Does Jesus not say (using my above) quote we should not put tradition ahead of the teachings of god? yes/no

 

[Xordium]

I am not arguing for bare faced lying. I am simply stating that any cleric who teaches something other than the establish teachings of a faith is teaching something else.

Your point is flawed as you assume that there was some sudden volte-face out of nowhere. What actually happened was a long period of theological discussion.

Yes and I accepted that but you were saying that clergy should teach the current line of the Catholic church exclusively without caveat. I am merely pointing that giving them such an absolute position to take makes a mockery of the process.

 

[RDM]

I would say that it is quite possible to be a Catholic Priest and still support Gay marriage, just not gay marriage within the Church. There is already plenty of evidence of the Church ignoring the bits of civil marriage it doesn't like so why is this issue any different.

 

[Xordium]

I would say that it is quite possible to be a Catholic Priest and still support Gay marriage, just not gay marriage within the Church. There is already plenty of evidence of the Church ignoring the bits of civil marriage it doesn't like so why is this issue any different.

Strange you saying that in my what Jesus said supposition I could quite imagine him saying in regards to same sex marriages in Catholic churches "Well whose Church is it" etc like he did with tax and the Roman coins etc. I guess what I am saying is that preventing same-sex marriages is curtailing the rights of gay people - to then force such marriages though in a Catholic church is another thing entirely and would then arguably be infringing the rights of the Catholic community.

 

[spudbynight]

Well I'll let you give me the example - yes or no answers only please just indulge me:

Did the Son of God - Jesus - say love was the greatest of things (Corinthians I think - not a scholar like Cas at all). yes/no

Yes

Is marriage a contract of love between two people (currently just a man and a woman and currently being proposed between people of the same sex). yes/no

No

Does the bible explicitly say anywhere that a man may not marry a man and a woman may not marry a woman. yes/no

No

Does Jesus not say (using my above) quote we should not put tradition ahead of the teachings of god? yes/no

Yes

OK - I have answered your questions with yes/no answers as applicable. However the questions are flawed.

 

[Xordium]

However the questions are flawed.

I was only really interested in the last two answers as they are reason enough for the Catholic church to change its stance. The first two would give context I am however interested in how you define marriage. (edit: I fully accept marriage comprises more than love but those things eg financial responsibility etc are not relevant here)