Pope says no to blessing same-sex unions

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Until the church teaches that sex is not just for pro-creation, there is not going to be acceptance of gay marriage.

It teaches that sex is ordered toward procreation. It’s more nuanced than you give it credit for. Infertile couples aren’t doing anything wrong.

"Ordered Toward" is an artful way of picking and choosing which people can have sex, and in what ways. You won't be seeing encyclicals on blowjobs.

???

A blow job is not ordered toward procreation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Two things. There are already priests in the DMV performing same-sex ceremonies on the down-low. This is not a too well kept secret.
Also, with President Biden being the most visible example of a faithful highly devout Catholic who holds progressive beliefs, I think the Church is changing from the bottom up. The Church’s old male hierarchy has to parrot the catechism, but I think most Catholics simply ignore them at this point.
It’s disappointing though because we saw Pope Francis as an agent of progressive radically needed change in the Church but he’s mostly proved to be as sadly conservative as his predecessors Benedict and John Paul II.

The ceremonies aren’t valid, but if they want to wave their hands in front a couple, that’s up to them. If you don’t accept the authority of the magisterium and the Pope, you’re a Protestant. Just own it.

No, this is not good enough. The CDF takes the time to write these statements for good reason: to justify their decisions. In doing so, they open up their reasoning to debate. If they expected us to accept authority blindly and without debate, there would be no point to it all.

We know the Church has made mistakes before, and they are making them again. The Church is not infallible (er, unless it declares itself to be infallible, which it seldom does.) The entire doctrine goes back to Gaudium et Spes, and if you read it as you would a scholarly paper, it does not hold up in this particular issue.

This is well-established doctrine. It’s not some novel issue that is still being debated.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Until the church teaches that sex is not just for pro-creation, there is not going to be acceptance of gay marriage.

It teaches that sex is ordered toward procreation. It’s more nuanced than you give it credit for. Infertile couples aren’t doing anything wrong.

"Ordered Toward" is an artful way of picking and choosing which people can have sex, and in what ways. You won't be seeing encyclicals on blowjobs.

???

A blow job is not ordered toward procreation.

Well that depends... it might be if it’s foreplay. In any event...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
The “natural order” involves might over right, oppression and murder in multiple species, including Homo Sapiens, so if I were you I’d find another argument

- biologist

If Natural Law is not a legitimate source of church doctrine, then you have invalidated today's pronouncement, because its central claim is that homosexual sex is "not ordered to the Creator’s plan." This is a natural law argument, and you just refuted natural law.

[Anonymous]

I’m not a practicing Catholic but I might just start going again simply to agitate them and embolden those in the pews that have been silenced by the all male hierarchy. Would be fun!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Two things. There are already priests in the DMV performing same-sex ceremonies on the down-low. This is not a too well kept secret.
Also, with President Biden being the most visible example of a faithful highly devout Catholic who holds progressive beliefs, I think the Church is changing from the bottom up. The Church’s old male hierarchy has to parrot the catechism, but I think most Catholics simply ignore them at this point.
It’s disappointing though because we saw Pope Francis as an agent of progressive radically needed change in the Church but he’s mostly proved to be as sadly conservative as his predecessors Benedict and John Paul II.

The ceremonies aren’t valid, but if they want to wave their hands in front a couple, that’s up to them. If you don’t accept the authority of the magisterium and the Pope, you’re a Protestant. Just own it.

No, this is not good enough. The CDF takes the time to write these statements for good reason: to justify their decisions. In doing so, they open up their reasoning to debate. If they expected us to accept authority blindly and without debate, there would be no point to it all.

We know the Church has made mistakes before, and they are making them again. The Church is not infallible (er, unless it declares itself to be infallible, which it seldom does.) The entire doctrine goes back to Gaudium et Spes, and if you read it as you would a scholarly paper, it does not hold up in this particular issue.

This is well-established doctrine. It’s not some novel issue that is still being debated.

Yes, the Church has never been wrong for a long time.

[Anonymous]

No marriage for gay people!

But if you’re a pedophile you can totally become a priest and we will protect you!

[Anonymous]

We need to find a middle ground between the Pope and W.A.P.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We need to find a middle ground between the Pope and W.A.P.

W.A.P.?

[Anonymous]

Who cares what the church of old-men-molesting-children cares about civilians’ sex lives, really?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
The “natural order” involves might over right, oppression and murder in multiple species, including Homo Sapiens, so if I were you I’d find another argument

- biologist

If Natural Law is not a legitimate source of church doctrine, then you have invalidated today's pronouncement, because its central claim is that homosexual sex is "not ordered to the Creator’s plan." This is a natural law argument, and you just refuted natural law.

Natural Law is not the same as biological nature. You’re confusing concepts and did not engage with the PP’s point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
The “natural order” involves might over right, oppression and murder in multiple species, including Homo Sapiens, so if I were you I’d find another argument

- biologist

+1. I get that it’s just a slogan but saying “it’s natural” or “born this way!” doesn’t get you anywhere. Psychopaths are also born that way. And the slogan doesn’t even make any sense for all LGBTIAQ+.... issues. Transgender people are... born with the wrong genitalia apparently so they can’t shout “born this way!” If you disagree with the Catholic Church, that’s 100% fine but its theology may be more consistent than your personal philosophy.

No responses to this...? Yup, that’s what I thought - mostly everyone is just screaming pedophiles! and homophobes! and can’t be bothered to learn any theology.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Who cares what the church of old-men-molesting-children cares about civilians’ sex lives, really?

Agreed. The pope can shove it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We need to find a middle ground between the Pope and W.A.P.

W.A.P.?

A Cardi B song that does not mean Wet And Pruny.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m not a practicing Catholic but I might just start going again simply to agitate them and embolden those in the pews that have been silenced by the all male hierarchy. Would be fun!

Please come! You might be surprised whose mind changes.