|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 1493 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: New Pope Thread | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Jack Member Posts: 3514 From: Immigrant in the land of Deutsch Joined: Member Rating: 8.3 |
Do you believe that people are responsible for their own sexual orientations? I find the phraseology of the question odd but, yes, I think so. People are certainly responsible for their actions, however I don't think something someone did sixty years ago before they were even an adult and hasn't done since is relevant to a current assessment of them as a person.
"Judge not lest ye be judged." The Bible stipulates that one is judged by the measure he judges others. Why do I care what the bible says? For that matter, why would the Pope? In Catholic doctrine, the bible is just one source of god's word to be taken along side the traditions of the Catholic church and the proclamations of the Pope - now since the Catholic church accepts that Priests have the authority to take confession and give pennance; clearly that requires that a Priest has the authority to pass judgement. Even, if we did take the biblical statement as relevant, the interpretation is highly questionable. One could argue that the Pope is making a statement on the issue of the morality of homosexuality, not passing judgement on any particular homosexual.
No, either you believe its reasonable to judge someone for something they had no control over, or you don't. He does, so its not unreasonable - in fact it's perfectly Biblical - to judge him by the same standard. Except, as I'm sure you'd find if you enquired, the Pope does not consider homosexuality to be something you have no control over. Nor, I believe, does the Catholic church consider homosexuality to be an unforgivable sin - I don't believe they'd consider a homosexual act commited sixty years ago, and which you have confessed, to be relevant.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Specter Inactive Member |
Crahfrog writes:
If you can remember the Middle Ages, the cathlolic church persecuted the protestant churches and disobedient followers through the Inquisition and other forms of persectution. Ever stopped to think about Benedict's name? For instance we know that he thinks that if you're not Catholic, you're going straight to hell.Benedict = the final enforcer Obviously there is a plot here. Let's ask the Jesuit priests who so willingly serve their pope... Will someone please answer? We could be headed for another Middle Ages!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1493 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
I find the phraseology of the question odd but, yes, I think so. People are certainly responsible for their actions, But that's not what I asked. Are people responsible for their own sexual orientation, or are they not? Not actions. Orientation.
Except, as I'm sure you'd find if you enquired, the Pope does not consider homosexuality to be something you have no control over. No, he recognizes the non-voluntary nature of sexual orientation. He thinks it's a sin anyway. Not just having gay sex, but being gay is both an abomination and something people have no control over/
One could argue that the Pope is making a statement on the issue of the morality of homosexuality, not passing judgement on any particular homosexual. One could argue that, but one would be wrong. This Pope has, indeed, passed judgement on all homosexuals, by referring to their very nature - not just their actions - as sinful. While at the same time recognizing that they have no choice in the matter of their nature. Well, that's fine. We'll judge him by the same standard.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Jack Member Posts: 3514 From: Immigrant in the land of Deutsch Joined: Member Rating: 8.3 |
But that's not what I asked. Are people responsible for their own sexual orientation, or are they not? Not actions. Orientation. I'm not sure how that can be a meaningful question? How can you be held responsible for something you don't do?
No, he recognizes the non-voluntary nature of sexual orientation. He thinks it's a sin anyway. Not just having gay sex, but being gay is both an abomination and something people have no control over. Do you have a reference for that? I'm not overly familiar with Catholic doctrine, I'll freely admit, but it doesn't match up with what I've heard elsewhere.
Well, that's fine. We'll judge him by the same standard. 1. I haven't said anything about whether he had a choice or not comes into it; I've argued that it's irrelevant what someone did sixty years ago, especially when it was before they were even an adult. So I am again puzzled as to the relevance of what you're saying. 2. How is that a good argument anyway? It smacks of "but he did it first, miss" to me. If you don't think it's just to judge someone over something they have no control over, you should not judge him over it - it makes no difference what he thinks on the matter. "Do unto others and you would have them do unto you" and all that.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1493 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
How can you be held responsible for something you don't do? Ask the Catholics. According to them you can be held responsible, and bear the consequences, of your nature, not just your actions. For instance, the doctrine of Original Sin. Here's a column on that very topic:
Page not found | Commonweal Magazine quote: I haven't said anything about whether he had a choice or not comes into it; I've argued that it's irrelevant what someone did sixty years ago, especially when it was before they were even an adult. I don't think it's irrelevant. Time doesn't erase transgressions. An old moral evil is still evil. Great. He was too young to know better. According to him, not knowing any better is no excuse.
How is that a good argument anyway? It smacks of "but he did it first, miss" to me. If you don't think it's just to judge someone over something they have no control over, you should not judge him over it - it makes no difference what he thinks on the matter. I don't think it's just, and that's what allows me to judge him. For being unjust.
"Do unto others and you would have them do unto you" and all that. That's exactly what I'm doing to him. What he has done unto others.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Chiroptera Inactive Member |
Cardinal Ratzinger was also the prefect for the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith; that's right, Pope Benedict XVI was the head of the Inquisition!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 420 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
That's exactly what I'm doing to him. What he has done unto others. Which simply shows a misunderstanding of what the saying means. No where does it say "do to others as they have done to you", but rather "do to others as You Would Like Them to do to you. But Benedict XVI still has said nothing related to homosexuality so any comments on his position are premature and pure speculation. Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1493 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
No where does it say "do to others as they have done to you", but rather "do to others as You Would Like Them to do to you. I know. I know that's what it says, and that's what I'm doing to him - What He Would Like Me to Do. I mean, he's certainly never done anything to me, right?
But Benedict XVI still has said nothing related to homosexuality so any comments on his position are premature and pure speculation. As Pope? No, I suppose not. Certainly he's spoken on the subject before now, though. This message has been edited by crashfrog, 04-21-2005 10:39 AM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 420 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
You still misstate and misunderstand the saying. It is, once again; "To do unto others as YOU would have them do unto you". It has nothing to do with what they would like to do to you.
If you're going to discuss such issues, try to get the basic premise right. Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
paisano Member (Idle past 6449 days) Posts: 459 From: USA Joined: |
I'm really starting to wonder about the relevance of this thread. This is, after all, the EvC forum. I've tried to address the views of the new Pope on that topic, which, as far as I can tell,are similar to if not identical to his predecessor's.
As to the other topics being discussed, I am somewhat puzzled as to why an American non-Catholic would be concerned about the new Pope's views on those issues. After all, ther is no coercion to become a Catholic. It also appears some posters are displaying a pattern of being misinformed as to actual Catholic doctrine. For instance, ignorance or coercion may indeed in some cases be mitigating factors, decreasing the level of culpability of a sinful act, contrary to a previous assertion. I don't expect non-Catholics to be in agreement with, or pleased with, all or even any aspects of Catholic moral teaching. This would be naively unrealistic. It would, however, be helpful if they were fully informed as to whether what it is they are criticizing is in fact the case.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Chiroptera Inactive Member |
quote: The Roman Catholic Church is a large institution that has an effect on non-Catholics. The Pope is an important figure, with influence among non-Catholics. The Pope and the RCC routinely try to influence the policies of secular institutions. It isn't unreasonable for non-Catholics to be so interested in the views and policies of the new Pope.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Specter Inactive Member |
Thanks for the information on the Pope. I just have one more thing to say to you: What makes you think I'm paranoid! I can't wait for the scriptures to be fulfilled so I can cry out with even more vigor, "Jesus is Coming Again!"
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
macaroniandcheese  Suspended Member (Idle past 3954 days) Posts: 4258 Joined: |
could be? we are. the whole world has been on a steady shift towards conservatism since the beginning of the industrial era. people got really freaked out (as best i can tell) after the liberalism (i use this in the old, european sense) took over and wanted to be ruled again.
This message has been edited by brennakimi, 04-21-2005 12:29 PM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
paisano Member (Idle past 6449 days) Posts: 459 From: USA Joined: |
Your points are valid, as far as they go. What puzzles me is how some non-Catholics in the Western world are dismayed that the new Pope isn't going to change Church policy on certain issues to their liking. It fails to take into account:
1) that the Church, being a large and worldwide institution may see these pet Western issues as quite low on the priority list, 2) that the Church is not even going to consider modifying its stance on issues it considers matters of infallible dogma, 3) that the Church , when changing its stance on matters that are not infallible dogma and thus in principle, subject to change, is still historically very slow and gradual. For instance the vernacular Mass was suggested at the time of the Council of Trent in the mid 1500s, and determined to not be in conflict with Catholic dogma at that time, but of course, was not actually implemented until the Second Vatican Council in the mid 1960s.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1493 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
As to the other topics being discussed, I am somewhat puzzled as to why an American non-Catholic would be concerned about the new Pope's views on those issues. Well, I was somewhat puzzled as to why a German cardinal would be concerned about who Americans would vote for in the US Presidential election. But sure enough, Cardinal Ratzinger felt the need to inform American catholics that a vote for Kerry would send you right to hell.
After all, ther is no coercion to become a Catholic. Oh, not yet, anyway. Never mind that there's an enormous, and currently quite influential, movement in the US to make sure that you, no matter what you believe, live according to the Bible and recognize the Christian God as sovereign every single morning in school. There's currently no coercion to be Christian (unless you want to seek public office), but there's an enormous movement to make sure you live Christian. I don't really see the difference. As such, the views of this new Pope, regarded by even Protestants as a spiritual leader, are very relevant to people, like me, whose views on religion are very much a hated minority.
For instance, ignorance or coercion may indeed in some cases be mitigating factors, decreasing the level of culpability of a sinful act, contrary to a previous assertion. Maybe you could write the new Pope and tell him so. How's your German?
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024