Pope wades diplomatically into gay marriage debate

Jun 14, 2013 Full story: Seattle Times 132

Pope Francis waded diplomatically into the gay marriage debate Friday, telling the Archbishop of Canterbury he wants to work together to promote family values "based on marriage."

Full Story

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#109 Jun 27, 2013
That's an overstatement almost to the point of being blatantly untrue, "prof".

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#111 Jun 28, 2013
tha Professor wrote:
If his friggin' "Holiness" would base those values on GAY marriage and relax celibacy, half of his priests could marry the other half, and teenage boys everywhere would be grateful...
That's funny.

Married clergy, even similar to the Eastern Orthodox, would be a very good return to sanity. Even better would be adding in a requirement for real jobs.

They'd get FAR more applicants, and far saner clerics each with a much smaller workload.
dan

Omaha, NE

#112 Jun 28, 2013
snyper wrote:
<quoted text>
Set the perspective in that link along side this one:
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/news/gay-marriage...
The Vatican is an old hand at maintaining for plausible deniability for itself. In ancient times, Christendom used tribes against one another, Christian Franks to massacre the Christian Visigoths, for example. Just keep your eyes peeled. They're very old hands at this, and have hated America's secularism and pluralism since it's founding.
The RCC sees us as a very real threat to their agenda, and have made common cause with groups that they've excommunicated and anathematized in the past. They exist through politics called by other names, and have centuries of experience under their silly robes.
Dolan's saying what the priest in the article said.

Both are disappointed by the ruling.

Dolan went into detail as to why the disappointment.

The priest in the article you liked actually enumerated a "threat to their agenda" if anyone did, raising the spectre of possible government intrusion into Church practice as a result of the decision.

Assuredly, the Gay rights folks see the RCC as "a threat to their agenda". Your post here speaks clearly enough to that, with some old-fashioned Catholic bashing thrown in for good measure ("hates America's pluralism").
dan

Omaha, NE

#113 Jun 28, 2013
snyper wrote:
<quoted text>
That's funny.
Married clergy, even similar to the Eastern Orthodox, would be a very good return to sanity. Even better would be adding in a requirement for real jobs.
They'd get FAR more applicants, and far saner clerics each with a much smaller workload.
Marriage and "real jobs" as a buffer against insanity.

That's a new one.
Liz

Barrie, Canada

#114 Jun 28, 2013
Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
Liz-
"For some stupid reason", you're deliberately misinforming Zachary.
The Church sure seems to think that a "gay guy" can follow a chaste life; so much so that they actually teach it in their Catechism:
'2359 Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection.'
http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive...
See what I mean, Zachary? No respect for the priests on this board from gay/lesbians and/or their supporters. Not even enough to find out what they actually teach before spouting off as if to "advise" you.
Dan I may not have made myself clear and I am sorry about that.
The bottom line here is that the Roman Catholic Church DO NOT want their priest do be GAY.

So gays are welcome into the Catholic Church but NOT in the priesthood.

Since: Dec 08

Toronto, ON, Canada

#115 Jun 28, 2013
Strawberry Zachary wrote:
I'm just going to go ahead and become a gay priest, and we'll be all set.
Sock puppet allert!
dan

Omaha, NE

#116 Jun 28, 2013
Liz wrote:
<quoted text>
Dan I may not have made myself clear and I am sorry about that.
The bottom line here is that the Roman Catholic Church DO NOT want their priest do be GAY.
So gays are welcome into the Catholic Church but NOT in the priesthood.
......not because they cannot be chaste.

Homosexuals are not desired in the priesthood as the Church believes that A.)their sexual orientation estranges them from the proper sense of paternity (the intrinsic nature of priestly being), and B.) priesthood must consist of men who have renounced the love of women, not those for whom it has never been a major temptation. Otherwise, celibacy itself would lose its meaning as a renunciation.

“Science not Conservatism”

Since: Jan 12

Progress, not Denial

#117 Jun 28, 2013
persnickety wrote:
<quoted text>No, you are wrong and a narrow minded bigot.
Sorry, but several years of news headlines say I'm right, and you're a liar...:)

“Science not Conservatism”

Since: Jan 12

Progress, not Denial

#118 Jun 28, 2013
dan wrote:
<quoted text>
......not because they cannot be chaste.
Homosexuals are not desired in the priesthood as the Church believes that A.)their sexual orientation estranges them from the proper sense of paternity (the intrinsic nature of priestly being), and B.) priesthood must consist of men who have renounced the love of women, not those for whom it has never been a major temptation. Otherwise, celibacy itself would lose its meaning as a renunciation.
Of course, the Church INVENTED those notions since none of them are Biblical to any degree whatsoever. Only the Roman Church even believes in celibacy.
dan

Omaha, NE

#119 Jun 28, 2013
tha Professor wrote:
<quoted text>
Of course, the Church INVENTED those notions since none of them are Biblical to any degree whatsoever. Only the Roman Church even believes in celibacy.
.....and they can adhere to their own beliefs, despite your opinion of them.
Strawberry Zachary

United States

#120 Jun 28, 2013
JohnInToronto wrote:
<quoted text>
Sock puppet allert!
What is a sock puppet? What your socks turn into after you pull on that little 2" golf tee in your pants then use them to clean the mess?

We are all now dumber for having read your post. Thank you for not contributing at all.
Brian

Attleboro, MA

#122 Jun 28, 2013
The pope is an azzhole (in a dress) and shouldn't have any more say in gay marriage as I do in church affairs.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#123 Jun 28, 2013
dan wrote:
<quoted text>
Dolan's saying what the priest in the article said.
Both are disappointed by the ruling.
Dolan went into detail as to why the disappointment.
The priest in the article you liked actually enumerated a "threat to their agenda" if anyone did, raising the spectre of possible government intrusion into Church practice as a result of the decision.
Assuredly, the Gay rights folks see the RCC as "a threat to their agenda". Your post here speaks clearly enough to that, with some old-fashioned Catholic bashing thrown in for good measure ("hates America's pluralism").
I received an elite education and was groomed to be a Jesuit. I'm not ignorantly "bashing". I really DO know what and whereof I speak.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#124 Jun 28, 2013
dan wrote:
<quoted text>
Marriage and "real jobs" as a buffer against insanity.
That's a new one.
You're not acquainted with functional occupational therapies?

Day to day things are grounding. Marriage, family, work keep priorities grounded, too.

Beware the person whose work is "religion".

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#125 Jun 28, 2013
tha Professor wrote:
<quoted text>
Of course, the Church INVENTED those notions since none of them are Biblical to any degree whatsoever. Only the Roman Church even believes in celibacy.
Not quite. In Orthodoxy, priests can be married ... ONCE. Monks never. Bishops are selected from among monastics, or widowed priests.
Dan

Omaha, NE

#126 Jun 28, 2013
snyper wrote:
<quoted text>
I received an elite education and was groomed to be a Jesuit. I'm not ignorantly "bashing". I really DO know what and whereof I speak.
I was Jesuit educated as well, and I wouldn't posit that an affirmation of Church teaching represents an indictment of pluralism with a straight face.
Dan

Omaha, NE

#127 Jun 28, 2013
snyper wrote:
<quoted text>
You're not acquainted with functional occupational therapies?
Day to day things are grounding. Marriage, family, work keep priorities grounded, too.
Beware the person whose work is "religion".
Therapy is for those already afflicted.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#128 Jun 28, 2013
Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
I was Jesuit educated as well, and I wouldn't posit that an affirmation of Church teaching represents an indictment of pluralism with a straight face.
Tell that to Hawaiians and Californians.

Cut the Straw Man Fallacies, shortpants. The RCC is Dominionist at it's very core; except Ecclesiologically it is referred to as "Church Militant" and "Church Triumphant".

If the RCC was for, or unconcerned by, American pluralism, it wouldn't have fought for PropH8 the way it did, joining forces with Mormons and evangelicals.

The meetings and written and e-communications are matters of Federal Court public records now; and IRS records as well regarding activities in other States.

Macchiavelli, the Borgia popes, Torquemada, the du Plessis, etc. were RCC. The list is very long.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#129 Jun 28, 2013
Dan wrote:
<quoted text>
Therapy is for those already afflicted.
In other circumstances, it's called diet, exercise and balanced living. lol
Dan

Omaha, NE

#130 Jun 28, 2013
snyper wrote:
<quoted text>
Tell that to Hawaiians and Californians.
Cut the Straw Man Fallacies, shortpants. The RCC is Dominionist at it's very core; except Ecclesiologically it is referred to as "Church Militant" and "Church Triumphant".
If the RCC was for, or unconcerned by, American pluralism, it wouldn't have fought for PropH8 the way it did, joining forces with Mormons and evangelicals.
The meetings and written and e-communications are matters of Federal Court public records now; and IRS records as well regarding activities in other States.
Macchiavelli, the Borgia popes, Torquemada, the du Plessis, etc. were RCC. The list is very long.
LOL.

You just affirmed my earlier post.

They oppose SSM, which is contra to their teaching, and you broad brush it into some overarching assault on pluralism.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Pope Benedict XVI Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 36 min guest 548,471
United House of Prayer for All People: Bishop's... (Apr '08) 1 hr Married in 8,512
Pope Francis leaves the beatification ceremony ... 8 hr Belle Sexton 11
Selfies with Pope Francis cardboard cutouts pop... Sat ELIAS IBARRA 6
Catholic bishops take first step toward accepta... Oct 16 Mychihuahuawillbite 2
Pope Francis shows strong, unique leadership fo... Oct 15 Gremlin 2
Gradualism and Holiness Oct 15 RevKen 1

Pope Benedict XVI People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE