Posted on 10/06/2014 4:48:11 PM PDT by marshmallow
THEIR choice.
It's also Pope Francis' choice for allowing this couple to address the Synod.
The testimony continued: “Take homosexuality as an example. Friends of ours were planning their Christmas family gathering when their gay son said he wanted to bring his partner home too. They fully believed in the Church’s teachings and they knew their grandchildren would see them welcome the son and his partner into the family.
Looks like neither this couple nor Pope Francis fully believes in "the Church's teachings".
The synod is looking like it will go the way of the ECUSA
...nothing the modern Church does surprises me at all...
Yes, I know what it means to evangelize. To bring the good news of salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ.
“Evangelisation” is not a word, IMO. And I still don’t know what the h*** it has to do with homosexual so-called “marriage”.
If they welcomed their drug addicted son and his dealer into the family in front of young children no one would be celebrating their reaction. This is only an issue because celebrating sexual destruction is what the world wants.
Fake Christians.
When will they ask why there are no Grand kids ?LOL
After all, one can show love for a sinner without showing approval for the sin. And we all know this, actually, because we do it every day. Every person we know is a sinner. We can and do show friendliness toward sinners without endorsing their catalog of sins.
Sharing the Gospel of Jesus Christ.
All true but who would write an article about something that happens all the time?
Maybe it doesn’t happen all the time, everywhere, in all cases. Maybe some people think they can evangelize alcoholics by mocking them, or evangelize gluttons by ridiculing them, or evangelize gays by slamming the door in their face. You know: sadoevangelism.
YES, indeedy, all that you say is true.
If the quotes are accurate in this article than I would disagree that there is not enough information here. Of course if it’s incorrect than perhaps a “welcome” is not being offered for bringing a “partner into the family”.
The description here is not of welcoming their son and another person but their son and his “partner”. That distinction makes this not like welcoming any other person. I think children would note this very closely.
DARN TI!
Geron, you stole my Joke!
I was going to post that!
Here is Evangelion in a Nutshell: Warning Funny but some language https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9rq2_CSO65Y
Welcoming home a homo son is loving the sinner.
Welcoming home a homo son with his lover, is loving the sin.
Doing so in front of one’s grandchildren is an additional sin.
It’s that simple.
“He is our son” is absolutely not the justification for the scenario I painted. The justification, which is indeed a mandate is the Church’s teaching that the homosexual must be treated with dignity. If one movement was made betraying their sinful relationship, the family would have to ask them to leave. As long as there is a “don’t flaunt, don’t mention” rule which is obeyed, their presence alone could be acceptable. Tough situation.
By bestowing recognition (and implicit approval) on a sinful relationship? How could that possibly be construed as "sharing the Gospel"?
Accessory to Another’s Sin
I. By counsel II. By command III. By consent IV. By provocation V. By praise or flattery VI. By concealment VII. By partaking VIII. By silence IX. By defense of the ill done
What part of this is not perfectly clear:
“they knew their grandchildren would see them welcome the son and his partner into the family.”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.