Hello everybody

[rah]

Who is the RCC Church, Asher?



Clearly neither. I would stay exactly where I am, in the Catholic church. Just because other people choose to go off and split from it doesn't make them the Catholic church.

OK BEN, assume YOUR catholic church. Don't sidestep the question.

[Ben Kenobi]

OK BEN, assume YOUR catholic church. Don't sidestep the question.

Who's sidestepped? My Catholic church would be the one that stuck with what the Church actually teaches, that homosexuality is wrong. If other folks want to split off and call themselves 'Catholic', then so be it. I'll stay where I am.

[Ben Kenobi]

If the Pope speaks ex cathedra and said that Paul was talking about those without gene XYZ, but those with gene XYZ could engage in homosexual activity without sin.... you would stay in the Catholic church?

Couple things here.

1, I don't believe the pope ever would do such a thing. That's part of Papal infalliability - that the pope can speak out, but that whenever he speaks ex cathedra, it would be in accordance with what the church teaches.

2, Saying that people with a specific gene can sin, presumes that people have no free will - that they cannot stop themselves from sinning, or overcome their inclinations. This is a very substantial breach from what the Church teaches on redemption. All have sinned, and all can overcome sin by turning to Christ.

Even if the pope were to try - something would happen to prevent him from doing so.

3, Christians have a primary duty to God. While I am required to support the Church, I cannot support the church if she is in the wrong. I would stay, but I would make it very clear that the teaching was in fact false, and that the pope no longer spoke with the authority granted to him from St. Peter. That would lead to schism in all likelihood, where another candidate would be put up, and that candidate would now be pope.

What is far more likely to happen, is just the opposite. The Pope would speak ex-cathedra on the issue, proclaiming homosexuality to be sinful, and a great number of the body would break away and form their own church. That is how it has happened in history, aside from the Babylonian captivity, which had different issues (primarily the independence of the Church from the state), as in France. The captivity wasn't triggered by a doctrinal schism, as was the Great Schism and some of the other smaller ones both before and after.

Technically, I would be permitted to switch over to the Orthodoxy, since they are considered to be part of the same church. I'd have to take that seriously under consideration, as the evidence of the pope speaking out against Christ, would be evidence in my mind that the Orthodox were the True Church of Christ, and that I was wrong.

[dannubis]

No Ben, the question was if the pope himself would proclaim that homosexuality was ok, where would you be ?

But don't bother, we all know the answer to that question.

[Ben Kenobi]

Marriage is a right, in the same sense that people have a right to work.

If this were so, then divorce would be impermissible because it would mean depriving someone of their right to be married.

[Ben Kenobi]

No Ben, the question was if the pope himself would proclaim that homosexuality was ok, where would you be ?

But don't bother, we all know the answer to that question.

And what, pray tell, would be the answer? I'm not really certain what I would do in such a circumstance. There would be three options for me, and I'm not sure which I would choose.

[dannubis]

ERGO, (and this is logical ben), you are using the RCC to provide legitimation for your hate for homosexuals.

Thanks for playing !

[rah]

So your answer is, that you would stop being part of any religion that proclaimed it's support of Gay marriage.

Is that a correct assumption.

xpost to 1116

What do you think you'd do?

[Ben Kenobi]

So your answer is, that you would stop being part of any religion that proclaimed it's support of Gay marriage.

The three options for me would be to stay in the Church with the Pope that proclaimed gay marriage to be ok, to run with the Orthodox or to run with the SSPX.

Choice one would be the same thing that St. Athanasius had to deal with the Church hierarchy, and eventually he was proclaimed to be in the right. I am not certain I would leave, but if I stayed, I would fight for the Church and what Christ taught.

I cannot be held responsible for the sins of others, I can only be held responsible for my own.

I'd have to pray on it and ask God what he wanted me to do.

[gribbler]

If this were so, then divorce would be impermissible because it would mean depriving someone of their right to be married.

"If people had a right to work, firing someone would be illegal because it would deprive them of their right to work"

[Ben Kenobi]

you are using the RCC to provide legitimation for your hate for homosexuals.

I am convinced that scripture teaches that homosexuality is a sin. I am also convinced that the Catholic church is Christ's church that he founded himself.

I am Catholic - because I have faith in the Church to stick with Christ and his teachings, moreso than anyone else.

My conviction that homosexuality is wrong, comes from Romans and Corinthians that state this very clearly. If I didn't have faith in the Catholic church, I wouldn't be with them. But it was not the Catholic church that taught me that homosexuality was wrong.

[rah]

Choice one would be the same thing that St. Athanasius had to deal with the Church hierarchy, and eventually he was proclaimed to be in the right. I am not certain I would leave, but if I stayed, I would fight for the Church and what Christ taught.

I'm not familiar with St. Athanasius. Does this mean that you would stay with the church but say they're wrong and not only believe what you do but fight the church's position?

[dannubis]

Ben, you ARE using the RCC to justify your hate for homosexuals. Admit it!

[rah]

Actually I think he's using his interpretation of scripture to justify it.

[Ben Kenobi]

I'm not familiar with St. Athanasius. Does this mean that you would stay with the church but say they're wrong and not only believe what you do but fight the church's position?

My patron Saint is St. Athanasius of the West - St. Hilary of Poitiers.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07349b.htm

Belonging to a noble and very probably pagan family, he was instructed in all the branches of profane learning, but, having also taken up the study of Holy Scripture and finding there the truth which he sought so ardently, he renounced idolatry and was baptized.

Here the Bishop of Poitiers courageously presented himself to defend orthodoxy, but the council, composed for the most part of Arians, refused to hear him, and being shortly afterwards denounced to the Emperor Constantius, the protector of Arianism, he was at his command transported to the distant coasts of Phrygia.

Phrygia is in Asia Minor, formerly Galatia. He was exiled by the Emperor, and was eventually exiled back, returning to his see after 20 some years away. When he was sent home, he chose to travel around the mediterranean, and walked home.

St. Athanasius, is even more familiar.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02035a.htm

Does this mean that you would stay with the church but say they're wrong and not only believe what you do but fight the church's position?

If I prayed and found that my studies of Orthodoxy continued to confirm the conclusion that I hold now, and I felt that God was calling me to stay. If Orthodoxy were right, then the point would be moot, and it would mean that I've spent all my time with the Catholic church in error. So I'd have to resolve that first, then decide whether to stay with the Catholic church or go with the SSPX.

[dannubis]

Actually I think he's using his interpretation of scripture to justify it.

Which is different from what I said, how?

[Aeson]

I'd have to pray on it and ask God what he wanted me to do.

Probably something like:

"Cast out the beam from your own eye"
"Love thy neighbor"
"Judge not lest ye be judged"
"Let he who is perfect cast the first stone"
"Whatever you have done to the least of these, you have done it unto me"

Which of course you would interpret to mean to go out and discriminate against homosexuals...

[Ben Kenobi]

Which of course you would interpret to mean to go out and discriminate against homosexuals...

I think you're skipping over the part, "come out so we can have sex with him!"

[rah]

Which is different from what I said, how?

One is using his own interpretation and the other is blindly following someone else's interpretation.

[Ben Kenobi]

One is using his own interpretation and the other is blindly following someone else's interpretation.

Yeah, that's like saying I invented it. No, all I said is that the Roman Catholic church didn't teach me it. I learned that while I was a protestant. There's plenty of evidence for it, both in scripture and in the writings of the Church fathers.

[Aeson]

I think you're skipping over the part, "come out so we can have sex with him!"

Oh, that's right. You're not Christian, I forgot. My apologies. The law of Moses isn't yet fulfilled in your eyes so you're stuck in Old Testament mentality. (Not to mention you're misreading that part as well.)

[dannubis]

@ Rah

Not really. I am pretty sure he uses the RCC to hide the fact that he always will be against gays, no matter what.

I will even go so far in stating that he is not even interested in following the other teachings that come with the package unless he stands to gain from it personally...

[Ben Kenobi]

Oh, that's right. You're not Christian, I forgot. My apologies. The law of Moses isn't yet fulfilled in your eyes so you're stuck in Old Testament mentality.

See my sig.

(Not to mention you're misreading that part as well.)

How so?

[Ben Kenobi]

I will even go so far in stating that he is not even interested in following the other teachings that come with the package unless he stands to gain from it personally.

Well, then. What other teachings are part of the package that I don't follow?

[Aeson]

How so?

It's obviously a story about treating guests well, not about sexual propriety.

But it is very interesting how you equate the statements from "God":

"Cast out the beam from your own eye"
"Love thy neighbor"
"Judge not lest ye be judged"
"Let he who is perfect cast the first stone"
"Whatever you have done to the least of these, you have done it unto me"
"come out so we can have sex with him!" :hmm:

[Ben Kenobi]

It's obviously a story about treating guests well, not about sexual propriety.

So the proper code of etiquette is to appease your guests by sending your daughters out to service them?

[Aeson]

So the proper code of etiquette is to appease your guests by sending your daughters out to service them?

It's a pretty messed up code of etiquette... but luckily I'm not the one stuck in Old Testament mentality. Let's just hope you never have any daughters...

[Ben Kenobi]

It's a pretty messed up code of etiquette... but luckily I'm not the one stuck in Old Testament mentality. Let's just hope you never have any daughters...

Why did he send his daughters out, and why did he believe that doing so was actually better than what they wanted to do?

[Aeson]

Why did he send his daughters out, and why did he believe that doing so was actually better than what they wanted to do?

Because the men were his guests. The daughters were just his daughters, which were viewed as little more than cattle (and often interchangeable with them) back then. (One of the many reasons why living your life according to Old Testament ideals is just ****ing backwards and stupid.)

[Ben Kenobi]

Because the men were his guests. The daughters were just his daughters, which were viewed as little more than cattle (and often interchangeable with them) back then

So if Lot had not taken them it, what the men wanted to do with the other man, was ok? Is that what you're saying?