Posted on 07/12/2015 10:36:21 AM PDT by NYer
What?
You are a trifle too subtle. The Roman Christians referenced in the article were opposed to sodomy and to abortion (as well as other vices), as the quote from the Didache illustrates. You object to this?
You're not defending abortion and sodomy, are you?
Evil is never right, years ago or today.
Contrary to the popular view—both among proponents and opponents—gay marriage is not a new issue. It cannot be couched (by proponents) as a seamless advance on the civil rights movement, nor should it be understood (by opponents) as something that’s evil merely because it appears to them to be morally unprecedented.
Popular view? Is he kidding? Where did he get that understanding from?
I apologize if I misunderstood you. Apparently, from your citation of Romans 1:26-28 we are in agreement. Curious how that was never ever mentioned in CCD or a single sermon that I can recall in the past 50+ years.
No I am not defending it, I’m chastising the author for his dismissive title.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3308614/posts?page=4#4
Here are 36 links to where Pope Francis has been addressing homosexual marriage and related moral issues just in the past few months.
Haven't seen these in the mainstream media?
Wonder why?
As for "the Catholic Church" --- meaning anybody in the Church? --- addressing these: do you know how to use Google? A FReeper (I can't remember who) made a link list of some 40 or 50 Bishops' statements deploring the USSC Homosexul Marriage decision.
Who is your bishop?
You've got a number of people perplexed here. What are you talking about? Are you offended that the Church opposes vices both old and news?
Or... if that's not it--- what are you implying without quite saying it? Is there an assumption that if a vice is well-known in history it acquires some sort of respectability?
This is a very interesting piece. The author makes the connection between “heterosexual” debauchery, sterility, and homosexuality that you have.
I was aware of some of the classical sources he cited - Juvenal, Tacitus, Suetonius - but not all. It’s possible that all the sources deal with a very small number of men engaging in wedding rituals related to homosexual behavior, while the much more common phenomenon was casual buggery of a male slave, because a man’s gotta go when a man’s gotta go.
It’s also not clear whether there was any legal aspect to these “marriages”: property ownership, inheritance, etc.
How is the title dismissive? It’s a reference to Ecclesiastes.
“Gay marriage was done”?
No, I think you are incorrect.
Great article. Thanks for posting.
It is articles like this that make me celebrate my ex-Catholicism and turning directly to the Word of God.
is it happy hour perhaps, wherever you’re posting from...otherwise, your statement as it regards this article makes no sense...
“It’s also not clear whether there was any legal aspect to these “marriages”: property ownership, inheritance, etc.”
Yes, I was wondering about that too. Although they do mention “dowrys” but I suppose that could mean almost anything.
Dio Cassius, Epitome 62:28
Content is what matters, not titles. Of late, far too many freepers are responding to titles rather than content.
Popular view? Is he kidding?
This article is dated 2012 (perhaps you missed that). Already then, the GLBT movement had realized their best hope to bypass the electoral process would be to identify their cause as a "civil right". Consider the following:
The debate over same-sex marriage has not been settled in this country. Instead, the militant homosexual lobby has simply declared that the debate is over and is trying to shut down conversation. The manner in which they are bullying their opposition into silence is by pushing the idea of homosexual marriage as a "civil right." This is manifestly false, but has unfortunately been repeated so much that ignorant Americans are starting to accept it as a given. Read More
I apologize if I misunderstood you. Apparently, from your citation of Romans 1:26-28 we are in agreement. Curious how that was never ever mentioned in CCD or a single sermon that I can recall in the past 50+ years.
Glad that has been resolved; no apology necessary. There is a reason why you never heard this addressed from the pulpit over the past 50+ years. Another parishioner pointed this out today; I had forgotten it.
Throughout our nation’s history—both before and after the American Revolution—our nation’s pastors freely spoke out on the political and moral issues of the day. It was their duty and their right under the Constitution to preach against immorality and corruption in the political and the moral realm.(Until Lyndon B. Johnson)
Congress Refuses To Free Churches From Lyndon Johnson Gag Order
If you are still uncertain as to how far the GLBT community will go, well, one of them has just taken the next step:
A homosexual man has filed a $70 million lawsuit against Bible publishers Zondervan and Thomas Nelson, alleging that their version of the Bible that refers to homosexuality as a sin violates his constitutional rights and has caused him emotional distress.
Gay Man Files $70M Suit Against Bible Publishers Over ‘Homosexual’ Verses
Rush Limbaugh, love him or hate him, has zeroed in on this issue.
It doesn't matter what you think. If it disagrees with us, you're finished. They make it plain in all of these very public efforts they make of destroying people. The new totalitarian is terrifying because it means that for a fair number of people in what's supposed to be a democracy, winning simply isn't enough. They are not really trying to capture something as pedestrian as political equality nor are they satisfied that if they get it. They're not really seeking a win in the courts or a legal solution. Those are all just merit badges to be collected along the way to a more important goal and that is you will agree and you will love them and you will believe them and you will support them and you will recant your dissent. And we're going to keep pounding you until you do, and that is what is happening. Must Read: The New Totalitarians
I hope the above helps to clarify the evolution on current events contrasted with history. The Catholic Church, otoh, has never wavered in its dissent of gay marriage, nor can it since it is founded in Holy Scripture. Contrast that with how some of the non-Catholic denominations have begun to cave in their teaching and practice.
Yes, the “dowry” would probably mean gifts between the men, not the contractual payments between families associated with a legal marriage. A real marriage was a legal transfer of property (including the bride) between men.
What does homosexuality and pedestery during the Roman empire have to do with Catholicism?????
You are a non-practicing Catholic...there is no such thing as an ex-Catholic......like being an ex negro, or an ex woman....
Primarily for the benefit of others let me clarify what I said and why.
The title is important, it is part of the content and this one is dismissive. That was the context of the original biblical message that we are not seeing something that has not been done before. Wrong. I’ll explain that momentarily since it is the content that confirms the dismissive nature of the article.
The content is essentially the same pointing out history some of the of homosexuality as if it should not shock us. Other than the behavior of a few insane and power crazed individuals, no matter how accepted the practice of homosexuality may have been, no society we know of sanctioned it as marriage. We have and that is a new depth under the sun.
The same can be said of abortion where past civilizations performed it as a ritual to please their gods. Here we do it to please an individual on an industrial scale that rivals mass murder committed by any regime at any time in history. That is also new under the sun.
The depth of our descent to evil is far greater than anything that has happened in the past. To point out that some Roman emperor married his charioteer is hardly a demonstration of the scale to which we have descended.
I had not noticed the date of the original article but so what? It was posted as relevant today, or was it not?
Let’s be clear: I oppose the homosexual perversion of marriage and the murder of innocents and I reject any notion to somehow soften the blow claiming it happened before. This is something new - very new. We have reached a new low under the sun.
It also led to seeing marriage as nothing but an arena for sexual pleasure, which in turn allowed for an equivalency of heterosexual and homosexual marriage.
That is a bold but unsubstantiated claim. It still does provide a legal establishment of same sex marriage, just a pretend state for individuals to claim.
The Theodosian Code, drawn up by Christian emperors in the fifth century, A.D. made same-sex marriage illegal (referring, as precedent, to edicts published under fourth-century emperors Constantius II and Constans).
Making it illegal does not establish that it was previously legal. Our own failed DOMA is a good example of that.
We can see, then, that Christians face nothing new in regard to the push for gay marriage. In fact, it is something quite old, and represents a return to the pagan views of sexuality that dominated the Roman Empire into which Christianity was born.
A "return to the pagan views of sexuality" is quite different than forced acceptance in order to earn a living, keep your home or work in government. We are seeing evil on a scale never before seen.
I am an ex-Catholic. While I cannot change my skin color or gender, I sure can change my beliefs, or do you deny the existence of Free Will?
No, we currently sit behind our keyboards reading the news and trying to figure out together what it means to us. We generally have enough to eat, a warm bed, indoor plumbing, etc. Nero, by contrast, was staking Christians, lighting them on fire, and using them as lighting solutions for his garden parties! In Sodom the local male community used to pass the time male bondinG in the evenings by gang raping male travelers who happened upon their locale!
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.